The problem with that plan: The cable guy already controls your living room. He’s not leaving anytime soon.

So, despite what you may have read yesterday, the new Xbox One isn’t TV’s future, today.

If you squint at it, you can imagine that Xbox One can help Microsoft dislodge the cable guy one day. But, for now, Microsoft is simply trying to take up a little more space. More precisely: Its box won’t let you watch live TV unless you have a pay TV subscription.

This shouldn’t be a surprise, as Microsoft has already signaled for some time that it wants to work with the pay TV guys, not boot them out.

Its previous forays into moving TV to the Xbox, via deals with programmers like ESPN and HBO, have only worked for customers who already had pay TV. And while Microsoft has previously mulled creating its own TV service, it has shelved the idea, and insists that it doesn’t want to build a pay TV competitor.

Related: With the exception of Intel, every big outsider that has approached the TV Industrial Complex has reached the same conclusion. Which is why Google Fiber TV looks just like regular cable TV, and why Apple TV has yet to do much more than play Netflix and iTunes.

And Microsoft will be literally tied to cable. In order to get the TV part of Xbox One to work, you’ll end up plugging it into your existing cable box, and performing what the industry calls an “HDMI pass-through.”

[CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story incorrectly reported that Xbox One owners would need an additional piece of hardware to connect their machines with their set-top boxes.]

In essence, Xbox One is acting as a sort of custom remote for your cable box, which will let you change the channel; it is also creating its own programming guide so you can see what’s on TV.

But note that Xbox One won’t give you full control of the set-top box — you won’t have access to the DVR your cable company provides, or any video-on-demand features they offer. If you want to do any of that, you’ll have to switch inputs, and go back to the cable guy’s system.

[UPDATE: As All Things D reader "Taz" notes, Comcast, the country's biggest pay TV company, already provides Xbox 360 users to their video on demand service via an app, and suggests that the company could do the same with the Xbox One. That's true, but so far the two companies don't have an agreement in place.]

And beyond the technical arrangements, Microsoft is being as explicit as it can about the goodwill it has toward the cable guys. While the company’s marketing says its box can do everything, Microsoft’s official communications and fine print make it clear that it can’t do squat — TV-wise — without the TV Industrial Complex.

Here, for instance, is a response I got from a Microsoft PR rep when I asked about the Xbox One’s program guide, and whether they needed permission from the cable guys to build it:

“Information that appears in the OneGuide has been created and licensed by Xbox, and works in conjunction with video services that consumers subscribe to from cable and satellite companies. We value our partnerships with MVPDs (pay TV operators), and our vision is for Xbox One to work in tandem with MVPDs’ services and offer a unique and interactive experience on top of your favorite entertainment.”

Got that? “In conjunction” … “in tandem” … “on top of.” Pretty clear.

What is interesting is that, as far as I can tell, Microsoft hasn’t gotten the explicit blessing from all of the pay TV services to launch the Xbox One. It seems to have told some, but not all, of the TV guys about it in advance, but in any case doesn’t think it needs their permission.

In an interview with my colleague Eric Johnson on Tuesday, Microsoft entertainment boss Yusuf Mehdi said Microsoft would be reaching out to the TV guys to get additional features, like DVR recording and playback. And if Microsoft continues with that kind of tight partnership, then the cable guys won’t be leaving your house for a long time.

That said, if Xbox One really does become the primary way you watch video programming — not just live TV but video, period — then it’s possible to imagine a scenario where Microsoft, with an improved bargaining position, starts trying to push the cable guys closer to the door.

Don’t count on it happening any time soon, though. Those dudes are hard to move.

But Web video competitors like Amazon, HBO and Hulu all say they’re seeing significant growth. So is anyone cutting into Netflix’s lead?

Not really, said Sandvine, the broadband service company that tracks Internet usage.

A Sandvine report out this morning pegs Netflix’s share of prime-time “downstream” traffic delivered over “fixed networks” — that is, wires and pipes — at 32.3 percent. That’s just a hair down from the 33 percent estimate it provided last November.

Meanwhile, Sandvine said Amazon and HBO have seen their share of traffic hold steady, as well. Sandvine said Amazon dropped from 1.75 percent to 1.31 percent, and that HBO dropped from 0.5 percent to 0.34 percent. But that’s not a lot of movement either way.

The one service that did leap a bit is Hulu, which is up from 1.1 percent to 2.41 percent.*

Bear in mind that these numbers do include data transmitted from a home network, via Wi-Fi, to iPads, iPhones, Android tablets, etc. And that Sandvine said this kind of “home roaming” accounts for a whopping 20 percent of traffic now, up from 9 percent a year ago.

But Sandvine also tracks streaming traffic to mobile devices over wireless networks. And here it said that Netflix has made a move from 2.2 percent of downstream traffic to 4 percent in the last 12 months. YouTube, though, is still dominant: If you’re on the go, and you’re watching a moving image, there’s a very good chance you’re seeing something hosted by the world’s biggest video site.

So what does any of that mean? Short answer: Netflix is streaming more video than ever — it added at least two million American users between measurements, and likely many more — but so are its competitors. So its lead is staying more or less the same. Sandvine said the average Internet household uses about 18 gigabytes of broadband a month — up from 10GB a year ago.

Still here? If so, you’ve probably read Ashlee Vance’s excellent Bloomberg Businessweek piece on the engineering that lets Netflix move all those bits into your house. If not, you should definitely read it now.

* Sandvine researcher Dan Deeth notes that the numbers his company provided last fall were collected in the first two weeks of September, which means that Hulu wouldn’t have had access to a batch of new TV shows from its broadcaster partner/owners. The numbers in today’s report were collected in the first two weeks of March, which means Hulu would benefit from new programming that ran during February sweeps; Netflix would have also benefited from any surge in “House of Cards” viewers.

We can at least agree on this, though: HBO and Netflix are both very interested in figuring out the best way to deliver TV-quality video over the Internet, and both have around 30 million subscribers in the U.S.

Which gives this personnel move a little bit of zing: Rob Caruso, an HBO engineer who had been working on the cable channel’s HBO Go service, has taken a job at Netflix.

No word on what Caruso’s new title or job description will be; his LinkedIn profile describes his HBO post as “Vice President, Digital Products.”

HBO confirmed Caruso’s move but didn’t offer any other comment; no comment from Netflix.

Earlier this year, HBO began re-orging its technical team, and longtime strategy and development exec Hans Deutmeyer headed out. In a memo announcing the changes, new tech head Otto Berkes also announced that Caruso would be moving around:

“Rob’s new charter is to build software engineering capabilities to optimize digital asset creation, management, and security, and to create technologies that unlock the full potential of software in the digital content area. Rob and his team will collaborate closely with Digital Products to ensure that our digital content technologies and our consumer-facing products inform each other to enable unique and innovative content-driven user experiences. This new role and group will be critical to achieving end-to-end software technology excellence.”

Last month, in his own memo laying out his vision for video’s future, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings said his company was spending $350 million a year improving its core service and app, not counting content spending.

Kreiz, formerly the CEO of TV production studio Endemol, joined Maker as an investor and its chairman last year.

Asked to explain the change, Kreiz described it as standard operating procedure for a startup that needed more professional help as it matured; Zappin will become a “special adviser” to Kreiz, and will stay on the company’s board. COO Courtney Holt will continue in his position.

“I’m not the first professional help that’s coming on board,” Kreiz said. “It became more obvious that we had to run Maker in sync with the potential in terms of where it can go.”

Maker is one of YouTube’s biggest content hubs, and boasts more than three billion views a month. The majority of those come from video makers the startup represents via its distribution network, but it is increasingly focused on creating stuff for itself.

Late last year, as Maker was closing a $36 million round led by Time Warner, the company got involved in an ugly spat with Ray William Johnson, one of its former stars, who has since left the channel for a deal with Blip. Johnson and Zappin engaged in a weird public back-and-forth, which eventually prompted Zappin to write a companywide memo acknowledging a former conviction for felony drug possession.

I’m told the spat did worry both Maker and its investors, but not enough to scotch the deal. But Kreiz says Zappin’s move isn’t related to the incident.

Here’s the memo Zappin is sending to Maker employees today:

Hey Everyone,
I have some important and exciting news I want to share with all of you.
First off, I would like to thank everyone for being part of this amazing journey of building Maker Studios. It’s been quite a ride and I feel very proud of what we’ve all accomplished together!
I founded Maker with Lisa and Ben because we were passionate about creating content and making things verses pitching and auditioning. Youtube gave us a platform as content creators to do just that. We were able to reach a world wide audience and actually make a living doing what we loved, being creative.
The vision for Maker was to create a company that would provide resources, knowledge, and monetization opportunities for content creators around the world so they too could make a living doing what they love.
We have now grown from a small production studio with offices above a Campos Tacos in Venice to being a global media company with a Network of more than 50,000 individual partners in less than 2 years. The rapid evolution of this organization has been an incredible thing to witness.
Being the CEO of Maker Studios has been the single most challenging and rewarding experience of my life. I’ve learned more and accomplished more than I could have ever imagined. The amazing people I’ve shared this journey with will always be loved. Despite all odds Lisa, Ben and I have successfully led and navigated a rapidly growing company that has become the market leader in the space, despite having very little or no business background. No one thought it was possible. I know I could not have done it alone.
It is the very unique partnership between the 3 of us that made it work. While challenging and full of complexity there is no doubt that what we have is special and rare. The success is unquestionable. I feel honored to work along side my cofounders Lisa and Ben. I’m happy to be sharing this journey with them and with all of you at Maker Studios.
As we’ve grown, we’ve added many other remarkably talented people who I also feel privileged to work alongside. From Shay, Kassem, Alex, Christina, Matt, Glasgow and Paul in the early days to our current executives Courtney, Chris, Ryan, Karen, Amy and Sam. It’s a privilege to work with all of you. To all my friends and family, thank you for joining me in this unique opportunity and journey. Working along side so many people that you love has been a rewarding and unique experience that I am extremely grateful for. Mike.D. Without you none of this would be possible. Thank you.
So back to the exciting news!
A little over a year ago I had the privilege of meeting Ynon Kreiz. We both shared a great passion for Youtube and the new media space. He was very excited about what were doing at Maker and believed in our vision of what it could become. We connected immediately and developed a friendship over the next few months. About a year ago I asked Ynon to join Maker’s board of directors as the Chairman.
Since then Ynon has been an advisor, mentor, and sounding board for me. We have spoken almost daily for the past year. We could not have navigated the company through the past year without his help and support. Not only has he helped advise me, he has also learned a lot from his relationship with, Lisa, Ben and I. We have all grown close and have a lot of trust and mutual respect.
As we now prepare to move into the next phase of growth for Maker Studios, I felt it was the right time to make a significant transition. As the former CEO and Chairman of Endemol, the worlds largest independent production company, and as the co-founder and CEO of Fox kids, Ynon has the specific media exec experience that we need to take Maker to the next level. After much thought and discussion with Ynon, my co-founders and the board, I am happy to announce that I will be stepping down as the Maker Studios CEO. Ynon, our Executive Chairman will now be taking over my responsibilities and operational oversight of Maker.
While I won’t be responsible for day to day operations, I will remain on the board of directors and will serve in an advisor role to Ynon and the company. I will work very closely with Ynon during this transition phase to make sure everything goes smoothly.
I love this company and all of you. I’ve always been committed to do what I feel is best for the company and that will never change. This transition is what is best for the company right now. I am confident in my decision. I’m very fortunate to have had the experience of being the CEO of Maker Studios. I also feel lucky to now have the opportunity to hand over the keys to Ynon after a proper amount of time to build a solid relationship, trust, and mutual respect. I feel fortunate to have Ynon join the team. I’m very excited about the future of Maker Studios.
Thank you all,

Danny

At least not in the U.S.

Time Warner keeps getting asked about this, and they keep saying the same thing. Even though lots of you say you’d love to buy HBO but don’t want to get a pay-TV subscription, and it’s the future, and it’s inevitable, and Time Warner is stupid for not seeing it your way.

The only wrinkle in the call-and-response came last month, when HBO head Richard Plepler floated the notion of paying for HBO as a broadband-only service — but which would be sold by the broadband guys, who are also the pay-TV guys.

That would be an interesting incremental move, but even that’s not going to happen anytime soon. As soon as Plepler’s comments hit the press, Time Warner officials were walking it back in private.

Today, CEO Jeff Bewkes did the same thing in public, while trying to suggest that Plepler didn’t really mean what he said, anyway. Yes, he told analysts on an earnings call, HBO does sell a broadband-only service in Scandinavia. But the U.S. isn’t Sweden:

HBO’s got 40 million HBO/cinemax subs here. We are vigorously offering HBO Go through all our distributors. If you then go and say, “well should we add it as a broadband-only service?”, which we could do through facilities-based providers, or you could do it through non-facilities based providers, which I think was the discussion Richard was having — we have the rights to do it.

And we would do it if we thought it was in our economic best interest. At this point we don’t think it makes sense. We don’t think the target market is sufficiently large to be attractive at this point. So what we’re doing, and we think this is working pretty well — we’re working with the [pay TV operators] to increase the penetration of HBO Go in a mutually benefical way.

We’re always going to keep evaluating it, depending on the country. And i think that was what Richard was talking about. And I think he’s right to say it that way.

So to sum up: If you think we’re going to do anything to upset the TV Industrial Complex that is now the core of our business, you’re nuts. We need the cable guys to sell our stuff, and we’re not going to bail on that until we have to.

I don’t know what Plepler, a former PR guy who is as savvy as they come, was trying to accomplish by trying to suggest otherwise. Some people I talked to argued that he was trying to send a message to the cable guys about a different discussion, but I can’t really figure that one out, either.

I do know, though, that the cable guys weren’t happy to hear his comments. One top cable executive told me that he was on the phone with Time Warner shortly after Plepler made his comments, to express his great displeasure at the idea.

Which is precisely why it’s not happening anytime soon.

The good news: It’s still a really big publishing company, with 23 percent of the U.S. magazine business. And once it is done firing people, it may make money again.

The bad news: It’s a really big publishing company that’s trending the wrong way.

Overall revenue was down 5 percent, to $737 million. Subscription revenue was down 11 percent, and the main reason advertising revenue was up 2 percent was because Time Inc. now has control of Golf.com and Sports Illustrated’s website, which used to be run by Time Warner’s cable networks. And the additional money Time Inc. makes from those sites is basically wiped out by the absence of licensing fees they used to charge the cable guys for those sites. Magazine ad dollars were down.

Time Inc., or whatever the new company will be called, should still be profitable for a while, though. The company lost $9 million this quarter, but that’s because it spent $53 million firing about 6 percent of its workforce.

If you are an optimist, you can imagine a scenario where the new company is able to leverage the cash flow it would normally produce into acquisitions, new lines of digital businesses, or … something to turn the top line around. Stranger things have happened.

DreamWorks Animation is close to a deal to acquire AwesomenessTV, a YouTube network aimed squarely at teens and tweens, according to people familiar with the proposed transaction.

I don’t have a purchase price for Awesomeness, which launched last June and rounded up $3.5 million in funding, most of it from MK Capital. DreamWorks, which announced Q1 earnings earlier today, declined to comment. I haven’t heard back from Awesomeness’s reps.

Conceptually, the deal makes sense. Awesomeness, created by former child star Brian Robbins, was positioned as a next-generation version of Viacom’s Nickelodeon, targeting the kids who make up the core of YouTube’s audience.

YouTube featured Robbins prominently during its “brandcast” presentation for advertisers a year ago. And while many of the video makers who have tried launching “channels” on the site in the last year have struggled, Awesomeness has continued to generate a good buzz.

The channel has nearly 500,000 subscribers. Last month it said it had generated more than 80 million video views, and at the time was planning on a show slated to run on Nickelodeon itself.

DreamWorks, meanwhile, has been spending time talking about its ambitions to create its own cable channel and to expand its online presence. You could see Awesomeness and Robbins fitting nicely into those plans.

If the deal goes through, it will be one of several big media bets on YouTube. Late last year Time Warner put money into YouTube network Maker Studios; Bertelsmann followed with an investment in StyleHaul in March. And Comcast and the Chernin Group are set to announce an investment in Fullscreen, a combination video network and YouTube tools startup.

Here’s an example of what Awesomeness is up to:

But here’s the guy to ask: Bill Carr, who heads up Amazon’s digital music and digital video groups, which now include Amazon Studios, the unit that is going to make original movies and TV shows for the e-commerce giant.

Carr doesn’t talk much, but last week I got the chance to sit down with him at Amazon’s Seattle headquarters. Amazon is as tight-lipped as Apple when it comes to new product discussions — or lots of other stuff you and I would like hear about — so I didn’t even bother asking him about Amazon’s new TV box. (Still: Count on it.)

But if you read between the lines, you should at least be able to get a sense of what Amazon is thinking as it contemplates beefing up its music offerings, and as it goes head to head with Netflix (and everyone else) in digital video. Here’s an edited version of our chat:

Peter Kafka: A couple years ago, Amazon and Google and Apple were all racing to develop music-locker services. But we don’t hear much about them anymore. How is Amazon’s locker working?

Bill Carr: The fundamental things about cloud music storage that works for all consumers is that it backs up everything, it’s in a safe place. I can access it from all of my devices, it’s simple. I don’t have to think about it. People don’t want to manage their music, they want to enjoy their music. Every consumer likes that.

What may have more limited appeal is how many consumers want to pay $25 a year to do that for all of their music.

Are you surprised about the take-up rates for the $25 a year option?

No. I don’t find that surprising.

The locker services seem like part of a larger trend where big platform companies like you, Apple, Google, are trying to get people to move their media into your own clouds, and end up committing to one ecosystem or another.

It may be that other companies think about it that way, because their goal is that you only use their devices. But that’s not our goal. Our goal is to free you up to use whatever device you want. Which is why we support any kind of PC, any kind of Mac, iOS devices, Android.

Our goal is to be ubiquitous on any device people might want to use. It’s a big investment for us to make all those apps avilable. But our goal is not to lock you into any one ecosystem.

Do you think you can keep doing that? It seems like we’re moving back toward a walled-garden world.

I can’t speak to other people, and what decisions they may make that may prohibit us from enabling our app. But we’ll work very hard on behalf of our customers to make sure our app is available on the devices they use.

You first started selling MP3s in 2007, and for a while it seemed like you weren’t making any headway against iTunes, which dominates the business. But now, at least according to NPD, you have 22 percent of the download market. What changed?

We don’t release any details about where we stand. But what I can say is that we have seen customer growth in our service every year. We have year-over-year growth in sales and in customers. And the way we’ve accomplished that is by building more solutions for customers.

Is your locker service helping sell more music? Are Kindle Fires helping you sell more music?

There’s no doubt that with the trend toward connected devices, mobile devices, our customers are realizing that it is super convenient to buy once and play it anywhere, and make it available on any of their devices. That’s working, and driving more sales.

Now it seems like there’s a move away from music sales and toward access — either from subscription services like Spotify, or free Internet radio like Pandora. You guys don’t offer anything like either one of those, but there are reports you are considering them. Should we expect an Amazon version?

We don’t speculate on what we might do in the future. But we’re also listening to our customers about other ways they’d like to enjoy their music. We’ll always look for the next innovation.

But you’re not philosophically opposed to subscription or ad-supported music?

Not at all. As a company, if we constrained ourselves to certain definitions, then we wouldn’t have gone nearly as far for our customers.

What about the idea of bundling music into Amazon Prime, like you do with video? Right now, there’s no connection between Amazon Prime and music.

We’re always thinking about distinctive experiences — how can we provide something for our customers that’s going to solve important problems for them? We’re always thinking about those things.

When it comes to video and Prime, it seems like your approach to your subscription service has changed. From the outside, it looked like, initially, you simply wanted to build up a catalog, and you weren’t very picky. More recently, it looks like you’re focusing on specific titles and catalogs.

The part I would disagree with is that we’ve never been thoughtful, or cared about the content. We have reams of data, based on years of being in both the transaction video business and the DVD/Blu-ray business, to know what our customers want to watch. And we’ve used that information to help bring them the right videos.

I think what has changed is — yeah, obviously, we have been increasing our investment over the last two years that we’ve been in this business. And I think it’s fair to say that increasingly you’ll see more and more content on Amazon that’s exclusive.

Why does exclusivity matter?

I think it’s very important for our customers. In some cases, it’s the only way to get some of the best shows. If we want those shows, in many cases the way that business shakes out is you can either have it exclusively, or not have it. More importantly, we are looking at what our customers like, and we want to have a set of movies and TV shows that are only on Amazon.

Why does that matter?

For the same reason that you can only see “30 Rock” on NBC, or “House of Cards” on Netflix, or “Girls” on HBO. It gives users a reason to tune in and try our service.

Are people watching many videos via Prime? Again, from the outside, it seems like there’s not a lot of use. There was a Sandvine study that showed Amazon very far behind Netflix last fall, and people I talk to who sell you programming don’t think you have a a lot of viewers.

We don’t disclose the details. But I would say we’ve seen strong triple-digit growth in terms of rate of use. We’re very pleased.

In the investor letter he published last week, Reed Hastings set up Netflix as a direct competitor with HBO. Do you also think Amazon is competing with them?

HBO’s a wonderful company, and has been a great partner to us. Our customers love HBO programming. I can’t speak to Reed’s strategy. But we’re building … I don’t think there is a another service like ours. It’s not like HBO. There’s at least three, four different ways to get movies and TV shows that you want on Amazon.

Hastings said he’s competing with HBO for customers’ time and money, but also now for content. Are you seeing that conflict coming with Amazon?

My ambition is to make sure that we create something that is its own service, that is not like HBO, Netflix or any other service, with its own unique value proposition. A lot of companies have a competitor focus. We have a customer focus.

Like Netflix, you are producing your own original programming. Earlier this month, you put up 14 TV pilots and asked people to vote on them. Why are you getting into originals, and why are you doing it that way?

The primary reason is because we’re committed to the idea of reinvention, and that we think that there’s great value for our customers if we get this right. And the reinvention is, “How do we get a lot more feedback from our customers early in the process? How do we remove gatekeepers from the process, so that great ideas can come from anywhere in the world, and get made into movies and TV shows? And how do we create a collaborative environment, where different creators can work in an open environment, to produce more exciting ideas and exciting stories that customers want to hear?”

So you think there’s video out there that could be made, and should be made, but isn’t, because of the way the existing production process works?

A simple example of that is what we’ve done in books, where we’ve created an open platform for any author to submit their books, through Kindle Direct Publishing. That removes gatekeepers from the process, and opens up all kinds of possibilities for people to become authors. So, why can’t there be great possibilities for people who have great stories to tell, whether it’s a script or screenplay?

It’s a journey for us. We’re flexible on the tactics of how we get there, but firm on the strategy.

If you look at the pilots you put out this month, it seems you’ve used a fairly traditional approach, and are working with lots of established talent. Only one of the 14 pilots — “Those Who Can’t” — came in over the transom. And even in that case, those guys were fairly established. Will that change?

Just the fact that that show came in from an online submission — I would consider that to be remarkable. That possiblity doesn’t exist in the traditional system today. And the idea that we’ve put all 14 pilots out for free, for anyone to watch, with the explicit ask for customers to give us feedback — I think both of those things are remarkable.

Are you surprised by any of the feedback you’re getting on the shows so far?

The point isn’t what I think about it. I didn’t spend a lot of time forming my opinions about it. I have shows that I prefer, but my views don’t represent the views of all of my customers. It really isn’t what I think about the shows, it’s what my customers think.

Do you think the comments you’re getting on the shows will be useful?

I think we’re getting really insightful information on all of the shows. How accurate it is is something we’ll discover over time. Because there has to be a feedback loop, and you have to see what happens in the real world.

This is a multiyear process. If you’re focused on reinvention, it requires you to experiment and collect data. And then try new experiments.

A lot to say: The Netflix CEO has written an 11-page essay that lays out his vision for the future of streaming video.

If you’re looking for news, you won’t find much here — nearly everything in the document, published on Netflix’s investor website, is a repeat of things Hastings has said or written in recent years.

But if you’re at all interested in the way Hastings thinks things are going to play out in the battle for video eyeballs, and why he thinks Netflix will win many millions of them, it’s well worth a read.

I’ve embedded the document below so you can scan it at your leisure. If you’re in a hurry, some bullet points:

• The one new nugget here is a Hastings prediction, held by many other people, that we’re moving to a world where “apps replace channels.” Hastings mentions apps nearly 3 dozen times in his essay, and makes it clear that he sees Netflix first and foremost as an app provider.
• Hastings figures that lots of other video services will figure the same thing out. And he goes out of his way to mention others that are already there or close to it, citing ESPN, HBO and the BBC.
• But those who don’t get it are screwed, he says: “Existing networks, such as ESPN and HBO, that offer amazing apps will get more viewing than in the past, and be more valuable. Existing networks that fail to develop first-class apps will lose viewing and revenue.”
• In the past, Netflix has tacked back and forth on whether it is competing head to head with HBO. Now Hastings is back in “we’re coming for you” mode: “The network that we think likely to be our biggest long-term competitor-for-content is HBO … They have global reach and strengthening technology capacity.”
• But while Netflix now has as many U.S. subscribers as HBO — and while Hastings thinks he can eventually double or triple his current 30 million — he figures it will take him a while to truly compete with HBO. “While we are passing HBO in domestic members in 2013, it will be several years before we are peers with them in terms of Original programming, Emmy awards, and international members. It wouldn’t be surprising to us if HBO does their best work and achieves their highest growth
  over the next decade, spurred on by the Netflix competition and the Internet TV opportunity.”
• But Hastings also reiterates his argument that there’s room for lots of streaming video services, just like there are lots of cable channels today. Translation: Don’t worry, Jeff Bewkes: Just because we’re coming for you doesn’t mean we’ll crush you. Also, please keep selling us Time Warner’s content! Thanks!
• Hastings also continues to offer olive branches to the entrenched cable guys, especially those that also sell broadband: “At times we have worried about the strategic motivations of ISPs that are also MVPDs, but the absence of cord-cutting has mitigated this concern. … Internet video services like Netflix, MLB.tv, iTunes and YouTube are not currently a material strategic problem for companies that are both an ISP and an MVPD.” Translation: Hey Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Verizon! It would be pretty cool if we figured out a way for you guys to bundle us along with your other video services! Let’s (continue to) talk!

Lots more below. Well worth your time.

Netflix Ir Letter

But you can see what Jeff Bezos has in store for his viewers, right now, over at Amazon.com.

And he wants to know what you think.

As promised, Amazon has put up 14 pilot episodes for shows it is considering producing for its first foray into original programming — eight comedies and six kids’ shows. It wants viewers to rate them, and says it will use their input as it figures out which ones to actually order.

Right now you have to navigate over to Amazon’s video section to find the shows, but I imagine that Amazon will make a much bigger deal of them fairly soon. (Perhaps after a breaking news story resolves itself.)

Amazon isn’t promising that viewer voting alone will make or break a show. But their feedback will be “very influential” as Amazon makes it decisions in the next couple months, says Roy Price, who is heading up Amazon’s original video program.

After Price and his group make their calls, the shows will eventually be available only for Amazon Prime members, just like other videos in its on-demand subscription service. But anyone can watch the pilots, and anyone can vote.

In other words: This is sort of a novelty, designed to generate attention for Amazon’s programming, and a counterpoint to the way Netflix has gone about its original marketing, where it has preordered up full seasons of shows like “House of Cards” before ever showing them to the outside world.

And it’s also indicative of the way Amazon would like to go about making programming decisions down the road — some of it will come from old-fashioned gut calls about what might be good, and some of it will take advantage of the data that a Web player can aggregate and create.

So, what about the videos themselves? Take a look for yourself.

I previewed several of them, and found the standout to be “Alpha House,” a Washington comedy starring John Goodman, created by Doonesbury’s Garry Trudeau. It’s the one that seems most TV-like in terms of production value and star power (look for a Bill Murray cameo). And I get the sense that it’s the one Amazon is most excited about, as well.

Other videos don’t seem nearly as polished as the stuff you’d see at a conventional TV “upfront” presentation — most of the animated shows, for starters, are unfinished. But it’s also important to remember that the TV guys have years of experience making their stuff look incredibly compelling — and the overwhelming majority of the shows they promote in the spring are canceled within a year.

That’s very cool, and that’s a reason to cheer on Google as it starts to expand its Fiber project outside of Kansas City — if Google really does prompt other pipe guys to improve their product to compete, you can’t ask for more.

But again, a reminder: When it comes to the TV part of Fiber, Google is acting just like any other pay TV company — you give it a bunch of money, and it gives you a bunch of channels, no matter which ones you actually watch.

That’s the bundle concept that ties together the entire TV Industrial Complex, and while lots of people are always talking about breaking the bundle, no one’s done it yet. And Google doesn’t seem interested in trying to do it here.

Google is annoyingly vague about the TV channels it will have in Austin (and any other details about its offering). But it’s reasonable to assume that it’s going to look a lot* like the ones it offers in Kansas City.

At least some of the programmers it works with in Kansas City have deals that will allow Google to roll over the same offering into new territories, industry executives say. (See, Google? Not that hard.)

And there’s no reason for the channels not to support the move. Google gives the cable programmers what they want, which means deals to take all of their networks, at rates that are as least as high as the ones they negotiated with AT&T and Verizon, the last two big guys to enter the pay TV world.

Note that when Google announced its Kansas City rollout, it didn’t have programming deals with all of the big programmers nailed down. But since then, News Corp., Disney and Time Warner’s Turner channels have all signed on; the only real glaring holes are AMC’s networks, including AMC and IFC, and Time Warner’s HBO premium channel.

*One Austin channel Google is bragging about today that should be available is ESPN’s Longhorn Network, a must-have for University of Texas football fans. (Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated that Longhorn was not available via Google Fiber in Kansas City.)

At first blush this seems like the best-case scenario for Viacom and every other Big Media player: Netflix, et al, pay a lot of money for shows the networks have already aired, and that money is almost pure profit.

And in some cases the story gets even better, as Netflix claims that for shows like AMC’s “Mad Men,” the reruns it carries boost the ratings for the show’s new episodes, as binge watchers/catch-up watchers become new fans.

But Bernstein analyst Todd Juenger is convinced that, at least for kids’ programmers, and Viacom in particular, the Netflix deals are bad ones, because they train Netflix subscribers and their kids to watch the shows on the Internet instead of on TV.

This makes intuitive sense to people like me, who have kids who watch a ton of Viacom shows — and almost never watch them on TV. Viacom has said that this isn’t the case, but today Juenger has a new note making the same argument, with new data.

Here’s what happened to ratings for kids’ programming last year, split up by homes that have Netflix and those without. Note that the only case where a network did better in a non-Netflix household was Time Warner’s Cartoon Network, which didn’t have a syndication deal with Netflix until January 2013:

But ESPN, which isn’t paying a penny for the games, has figured out how to get in on the action, too. Bill Simmons, the sports network’s star columnist/podcaster/broadcaster/editor, will be offering up commentary during the tournament’s first two days, live, via a YouTube link.

Simmons will host the video stream from his house, along with a cast of characters from his Grantland universe, including ESPN analyst Jalen Rose and writer Rembert Browne.

The idea isn’t to compete with the games themselves, but to offer up pre- and post-game commentary at preset times, along with the option of breaking in live if something merits a pop-in.

I don’t know if this will work, but it certainly sounds intriguing. And a lot more promising than most “second screen” efforts, which seem designed to fulfill some business development goal without ever considering what a bona fide human might want to do while they watch TV.

And I’ve seen at least one version of the idea that seemed to work pretty well: For the last few years, the New York Times’ David Carr and A.O. Scott have been livestreaming their own commentary during the Oscars. If you tuned in to the show last month, you got to see stuff like this.

Here’s Simmons’s vision for his experiment, via email:

We want this to feel like a looser, more irreverent studio show. Like a live podcast where people feel like they are hanging out with us while watching basketball. I have no idea if this will work but we like trying new things at Grantland. … the only way we know if something will be successful is by trying. We will talk about things that I assure you none of the traditional shows will be talking about. Office pools, gambling picks, what we are eating, etc. I can also promise you no other studio show has their mother cooking all day Thursday an Italian feast for everyone to eat on Friday’s shows.

At the end of the day this really is just a convoluted way of getting ESPN to pay me to watch basketball with my friends. Oh — and now I can write off part of my man cave on my taxes.”

(Simmons’s rep would like us to stress that he’s joking about the tax dodge. Though it seems reasonable to me.)

ESPN isn’t attaching ads to the streams, but I can imagine that if it works out, they might try that down the road. Meantime, this isn’t an ESPN stream that requires a cable subscription or any other prerequisite — point your browser to Grantland.com/live and you should be good (not quite sure if the YouTube-hosted stream will play on mobile devices, though).

Here’s the tentative schedule for the shows, to be repeated Thursday and Friday:

• 11:30-12:15 am ET
• 1:30-1:45 pm ET
• 6:10-6:50 pm ET

It’s no secret in Silicon Valley that the HBO series “Game of Thrones” is a big favorite among the geek set — including Facebook CEO and co-founder Mark Zuckerberg — what with its dungeons-and-dragons tone and fur-and-leather outfits.

Which is why Time Warner’s premium cable network decided to do one of its three red-carpet premieres for the third season of the hit fantasy show with a splashy event on Wednesday in San Francisco that will be teeming with digerati.

“We all thought it would be fun for the creators and the cast to come here and feel the enormous enthusiasm this community and our partners have for ‘Thrones,’” said HBO CEO Richard Plepler.

Eight cast members of “Thrones” will be attending, as will Plepler, HBO COO Eric Kessler, creators David Benioff and D.B. Weiss and … drumroll … author George R.R. Martin.

The show is an adaptation of “A Song of Ice and Fire,” Martin’s series of popular fantasy novels, the first of which is titled “A Game of Thrones.”

No surprise — there is much swordplay in the epic. And that’s where AllThingsD comes in, since Walt Mossberg and I will be doing an onstage Q&A with Martin, Benioff and Weiss right after the first show of the new season is aired.

It’s on, or, as Martin wrote: “When you play the game of thrones, it’s either you win or you die.” Or enjoy a lovely party after.

We’ll have video of the interviews later, but here are two trailers for the third season, which begins airing March 31:

But other magazine publishers insist things are fine. Or if not fine, then potentially fine.

Now, it’s entirely possible that publishers like Conde Nast and Hearst are whistling furiously and loudly past the graveyard.

But those two do differ from Time Inc. in some significant ways. For instance:

• They don’t have the burden of publishing expensive weekly magazines like Time and Sports Illustrated, whose futures are especially fraught in the digital era.
• They have owners who are spending some of the proceeds from their lucrative investments in cable TV (Hearst owns a chunk of ESPN, Conde parent Advance owns a slug of Discovery) to expand/diversify their core businesses (Hearst bet $1 billion on European publisher Lagardère, Advance has a $500 million M&A fund it is spreading around the Web).
• They have owners that are private, not public.

Want to hear more optimism? Hearst magazine boss David Carey is happy to oblige. Here’s the extended version of our onstage interview at D: Dive Into Media last month, where Carey touches on Hearst’s international ambitions, its forays into TV, and mobile ads. Oh — and also its adventures in tabletland, where Apple is a very big deal, Amazon is, too, and Google has yet to make a mark.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20130312/david-carey-says-hearst-is-no-time-inc/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20130312/blocked-march-madness-heads-farther-behind-the-cable-paywall/ http://allthingsd.com/20130312/blocked-march-madness-heads-farther-behind-the-cable-paywall/#comments Tue, 12 Mar 2013 16:37:08 +0000 Peter Kafka http://allthingsd.com/?p=302719

Aspen Photo / Shutterstock.com

Heads up, cord-cutters: If you want to watch March Madness next year, you’re going to have to pay up.

The last two rounds of next year’s college basketball tournament, including the championship game, are likely to be broadcast on one of Time Warner’s Turner network channels — TBS or TNT — instead of CBS, according to Sports Business Daily and the New York Times.

CBS and Turner share coverage of the tournament, and the switch for the final games was already scheduled for 2016. No one has explained why the two companies are moving the date up by two years, but it fits a pattern we’ve seen for several years: Big-time sports events migrating from free TV to pay TV.

In 2006, Monday Night Football moved from ABC to Disney’s ESPN. If you wanted to watch much of last summer’s Olympics, you needed a pay TV subscription that gave you access to NBC Universal’s cable channels. And as SBJ’s John Ourand notes, the BCS college championships, the NBA conference finals and some baseball playoff games have all moved over to cable, as well.

The free-to-pay move serves the interests of the TV Industrial Complex in several ways: The cable networks, flush with cash from subscriber fees, can afford to pay big bucks for the rights to what is must-see TV for many people. And because it’s must-see TV for many people, it helps raise the overall value of the cable networks (Rupert Murdoch used the same strategy to turn Fox into a legitimate broadcast operation two decades ago).

And moving big-time sports to pay TV helps pay TV, period. Nielsen figures there are five million cord-cutters, or cord-nevers, and that number would presumably be much bigger if you could get sports online without paying for TV.

Which is why I’ve been waiting for Google, or Apple, or Intel, or some other TV outsider to pony up for the rights to a slate of NFL games, or some other sports franchise that millions of people have to watch, no matter where they are. Hasn’t happened yet.

(Note that if Aereo, which distributes broadcast TV over the Web without paying programmers a penny, wins its court case, then expect just about every big broadcast show — not just sports, but everything — to move from broadcast to cable networks owned by the broadcasters. Big if, though.)

Meantime, if you’re serious about college hoops and you’re serious about not paying for TV, you might still have a legal option next year.

Last year, CBS and Turner offered a $4 package that let you watch the games live on Android and iOS devices, and that option has gone away this year. This time around, you can only stream the Turner games if you’re an “authenticated” pay TV subscriber, though you can still stream the CBS games to your PC without registration.

But Turner/CBS are offering app users a free four-hour “preview” this time around. So if you’re willing to do a little planning — and if the option is still available — you could save up your preview time for the championship game, and at least watch that one for free.

That sounds like a lot of work, right? That’s what the pay TV guys are hoping you think …

Aspen Photo / Shutterstock.com

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20130312/blocked-march-madness-heads-farther-behind-the-cable-paywall/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20130311/heres-what-linkedin-can-do-with-pulse/ http://allthingsd.com/20130311/heres-what-linkedin-can-do-with-pulse/#comments Mon, 11 Mar 2013 21:53:46 +0000 Peter Kafka http://allthingsd.com/?p=302471 So what’s LinkedIn going to do with Pulse now that it is buying the news reader?

Maybe Jeff Weiner will keep heading down the path Pulse was headed: Trying to figure out how to create mobile magazines filled with other peoples’ content, and how to sell ads against the eyeballs that stuff collects.

And LinkedIn already has a small but growing advertising business — its “marketing solutions” group, which includes traditional ads, generated 27 percent of its revenue last quarter.

But my hunch is that Weiner thinks LinkedIn can do a lot with Pulse without spending much time on ads at all.  For instance, what would it look like if LinkedIn sold an iPhone app, or bundled an app with its premium subscriptions, that integrated LinkedIn’s database with other people’s content?

Well, it would look a lot like the one created by LinkedIn content boss Dan Roth — back when Roth ran Fortune Magazine’s digital editions.

Here, let Roth show you himself. It gets particularly interesting at the 50-second mark:

Back in 2011, Roth had to work very hard to find the resources at Time Inc. to produce a fairly rudimentary app. (Disclosure: I know Dan. He’s a good dude.) Imagine what he could do at a company with real digital resources.

Now we might find out.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20130311/heres-what-linkedin-can-do-with-pulse/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20130306/why-the-time-inc-spinoff-could-work-spoiler-requires-miracle/ http://allthingsd.com/20130306/why-the-time-inc-spinoff-could-work-spoiler-requires-miracle/#comments Thu, 07 Mar 2013 04:07:31 +0000 Peter Kafka http://allthingsd.com/?p=301202 Good news, remaining Time Inc. employees! You don’t have to go work for a company based in Des Moines.*

As far as the bad news … we’ll get to that. But let’s stay upbeat for a minute, and I’ll try to generate more optimism for you.

Start with some charts, via Google Finance.

Here’s what happened to AOL stock after the company split off from Time Warner, just like you’re set to do:

And here’s what happened to Time Warner Cable shares when that company did the same thing:

And for good measure, let’s mash them together:

So, on the whole, not too terrible. Two companies that Jeff Bewkes didn’t want weighing down his cable and movie business, and they’ve done okay once he cut them loose. AOL shares are up 62 percent since the split.** Time Warner Cable is down 21 percent, but shareholders have gotten another $6.41 per share in dividends, so things are a bit better than they look here.

Let’s continue to stay upbeat, and channel the talking points you’re likely to hear in months leading up to the split:

• Hey, just because this is Plan B for Jeff Bewkes doesn’t mean he doesn’t want this to succeed. Time Warner, after all, will end up owning a chunk of the spun-off company, so it has a vested interest in this thing working.
• And, seriously, this could be good for Time Inc.! After all, in the last few years the thing has just been in stasis/shrinking mode, and no one cared. Now they’ll have to care, and maybe the newco will go do some serious re-orging and perhaps some investing, too. After all, it’s good enough for News Corp.!

And all of that is potentially true. Or at least truthy. Or something.

Alas:

• Jeff Bewkes doesn’t care about Time Inc., and investors don’t either — they’ve wanted him to dump it forever. If they haven’t priced the spinoff into the share price already, they will do so immediately, and then that will be that.
• It’s hard to imagine any scenario where Time Inc. is able to navigate the print-to-digital shift effectively. But it certainly won’t get its best odds as a public company made to answer to the Street’s quarterly demands. And even if, say, a deep-pocketed and semi-benevolent benefactor materialized to buy the thing, Bewkes wouldn’t sell, because of the tax hit that would generate (the spinoff will be tax-free for shareholders).
• For better and worse, the News Corp. spin (which is set to include this website) is going to be steered by Rupert Murdoch, a man with a lot of money invested in the company’s perfomance, and even more ego tied up in it. Time Inc. will be run by … someone, and they’ll get a nice paycheck and some options for their effort, but no one expects them to work a miracle here.
• And that’s what Time Inc,. stripped of Time Warner’s corporate shield, will need to turn around. It has the classic analog/digital channel conflict, where the latter is the only way out, but the former generates all the cash. And that’s hard enough to deal with at the most nimble and most flexible companies. This one, shoved out of the nest and into the market without any kind of cushion, seems set up to fail. I hope I’m wrong.

*Des Moines is nice enough, by the way. But the Meredith/Time Inc. culture clash stories you heard were very true.
** True, AOL has fired a lot of people since it went its own way. But that’s going to happen at Time Inc., no matter what. And, yes, the stock’s rise has a lot to do with a $1 billion patent sale, but let’s stay positive!

(Image courtesy of Shutterstock/mikeledray)

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20130306/why-the-time-inc-spinoff-could-work-spoiler-requires-miracle/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20130306/time-warner-opts-for-magazine-spinoff/ http://allthingsd.com/20130306/time-warner-opts-for-magazine-spinoff/#comments Wed, 06 Mar 2013 23:00:35 +0000 Keach Hagey and Martin Peers http://allthingsd.com/?p=301125 Time Warner Inc., a company partly named after a magazine, is getting out of the magazine business.

The company has decided to spin off its entire Time Inc. magazine group, it said Wednesday, giving up on talks with Meredith Corp. over the proposed merger of most of their titles.

Read the rest of this post on the original site »

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20130306/time-warner-opts-for-magazine-spinoff/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20130301/big-data-soft-sell-netflix-pitches-a-hands-off-approach-to-hollywood/ http://allthingsd.com/20130301/big-data-soft-sell-netflix-pitches-a-hands-off-approach-to-hollywood/#comments Fri, 01 Mar 2013 18:48:11 +0000 Peter Kafka http://allthingsd.com/?p=299728

Here’s a narrative lots of people like right now: In the old days, the movie and TV guys had to guess about what kind of stuff you wanted to see. But Netflix doesn’t need to guess: It knows so much about your viewing habits that it knows exactly what you want, so it picks films and shows accordingly.

And now it’s using all of that Big Data to create stuff you want to see, using its analytics to shape the original videos it is funding.

Take that, William Goldman!

But if you’re a Hollywood creative person, that narrative wouldn’t sound nearly as appealing: You’re already used to getting tons of input and edicts from suits. Now Netflix is promising to up the ante by using computers, too?

Which is why Netflix is not selling that pitch to writers, directors and actors.

Instead, it is promising a hands-off — or mostly hands-off — approach: We’ll give you a bunch of money to go make something, and you go make it. And maybe we’ll offer some suggestions. (Which is the same approach, by the way, that networks like HBO and Showtime used to coax Hollywood talent for their originals for a long time.)

No need to take my word for it, though. You can hear it straight from the folks who are working with Netflix on the new stuff.

At our D: Dive Into Media conference last month, we had Mitch Hurwitz and Will Arnett, creator and star, respectively, of “Arrested Development,” onstage with Ted Sarandos, the Netflix executive who paid them to make a new season of the show. The whole segment is a bunch of fun, but if you want to hear about the input Sarandos did and didn’t have on “Arrested Development,” skip ahead to the 30:30 mark:

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20130301/big-data-soft-sell-netflix-pitches-a-hands-off-approach-to-hollywood/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20130228/another-big-media-youtube-bet-bertelsmann-invests-in-stylehauls-fashion-videos/ http://allthingsd.com/20130228/another-big-media-youtube-bet-bertelsmann-invests-in-stylehauls-fashion-videos/#comments Thu, 28 Feb 2013 15:01:12 +0000 Peter Kafka http://allthingsd.com/?p=299380 Here’s another Big Media company investing in YouTube: StyleHaul, which makes and distributes fashion videos on the world’s biggest video site, has raised a $6.5 million B round led by Bertelsmann’s Digital Media Investments arm.

Earlier investors — including RezVen Partners, who put $4.4 million into the company last year — are back as well. CEO Stephanie Horbaczewski, a former Saks Fifth Avenue executive who founded StyleHaul two years ago, says her videos now reach 50 million viewers a month.

StyleHaul is one of several YouTube-focused video networks that have sprung up in recent years that produce their own content and aggregate many clips by amateurs and semi-professionals, as well.

That’s the technique, for instance, that Machinima has used to generate billions of views for its videogame clips. It’s not a coincidence that Machinima CEO Allen DeBevoise is a StyleHaul investor.

Many of these “multi-channel networks” (terrible name, but it might stick) are now also looking to build businesses outside of YouTube, and StyleHaul is on that path, too.

Horbaczewski says she’ll use the money to build out her direct-sales team, and to build her own destination site; earlier this week, she hired former Yahoo executive Alvin Fong as her COO.

At a minimum, you can see the investment as another sign that lots of big-media players are trying to get their heads around YouTube as well as lay some bets on the site.

Last year, Time Warner led a $36 million round for Maker Studios, another YouTube network, and Google itself invested directly in Machinima. Google currently has an investment teed up, but not closed, in Vevo, YouTube’s dominant music-video channel.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20130228/another-big-media-youtube-bet-bertelsmann-invests-in-stylehauls-fashion-videos/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20130219/taboola-raises-15-million-so-it-can-suggest-more-stories-you-might-click-on/ http://allthingsd.com/20130219/taboola-raises-15-million-so-it-can-suggest-more-stories-you-might-click-on/#comments Tue, 19 Feb 2013 13:00:07 +0000 Peter Kafka http://allthingsd.com/?p=296030 Content recommendation service Taboola tells Web surfers where to go, 1.5 billion times a day. And it thinks that activity could turn into a really big business one day.

Hence the company’s new $15 million round, led by Pitango Venture Capital; earlier investors Evergreen Venture Partners, WGI Group and Marker are back as well.

That gives New York-based and Israeli-run Taboola a total of $40 million raised to date — which isn’t as much as its primary competitor, Outbrain. That New York-based and Israeli-run content-recommendation service (which works with All Things Digital) has raised $64 million so far.

Capitalization aside, both Taboola and Outbrain do essentially the same thing: They direct traffic from one website to another by suggesting stories and videos to surfers, based on what they’re reading, what they’ve read, etc. They get paid by the website they refer traffic to, on a cost-per-click basis, and share some of that revenue with the publisher that provided the eyeball.

Here’s what both of them look like in action, at the bottom of the same Time.com page (Time Warner’s websites need as many money-generating clicks as they can get. Then again, all of us do.). Taboola generates the four thumbnail photos and links at the top of this screenshot; Outbrain gets paid if you click on any of the “From Around the Web” links on the bottom-right:

There is a great deal of chatter in “native ads” right now — ads that don’t really seem like ads, because they’re “content” — and both Taboola and Outbrain fit nicely in that conversation. Because the recommendations they get money for look pretty much exactly like “real” recommendations the publisher makes itself, for its own content.

On the other hand,  you don’t really need a new set of terms to describe what Taboola and Outbrain do. Charging someone a fee to bring an eyeball to their page is something Google mastered a long time ago.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20130219/taboola-raises-15-million-so-it-can-suggest-more-stories-you-might-click-on/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20130216/allrecipes-president-lisa-sharples-stepping-down-a-year-after-sale/ http://allthingsd.com/20130216/allrecipes-president-lisa-sharples-stepping-down-a-year-after-sale/#comments Sun, 17 Feb 2013 00:50:02 +0000 Tricia Duryee http://allthingsd.com/?p=295785 Allrecipes, one of the world’s biggest food websites, is losing its president a year after it was acquired by Meredith Corp., AllThingsD has learned.

Lisa Sharples told employees at Allrecipes’ Seattle headquarters on Thursday that she would be leaving at the end of March to spend more time with her children. No replacement was named, but I’m hearing that a search is under way for a new leader.

A company spokesperson did not respond immediately to emails seeking comment.

It has been a year since Meredith Corp., which is best known for its old-line magazine business, acquired Allrecipes from Reader’s Digest Association for $175 million. The website is now one of Meredith Corp.’s largest online properties, and as such, may be standing out as Meredith looks to combine its company with Time Warner’s publishing assets, including Time Inc.

In 2007, Sharples joined Allrecipes from Classmates.com, where she was VP of marketing. Since joining Allrecipes, the brand has expanded internationally and today is in 23 countries and a dozen languages. Prior to Classmates.com, Sharples co-founded Garden.com, where she was chief marketing and merchandising officer.

A source familiar with the situation says Sharples will be missed, and credited her with keeping the company’s “culture fun, young and not corporate.”

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20130216/allrecipes-president-lisa-sharples-stepping-down-a-year-after-sale/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20130215/hbos-berkes-restructures-digital-team-memo/ http://allthingsd.com/20130215/hbos-berkes-restructures-digital-team-memo/#comments Fri, 15 Feb 2013 18:00:33 +0000 Kara Swisher http://allthingsd.com/?p=295530

About two weeks ago, I heard about a restructuring under HBO SVP of consumer technology Otto Berkes, who also takes over the job of CTO in March from longtime vet Bob Zitter. The former Microsoft exec and Xbox co-founder was named the top tech figure at the premium cable network at the end of last year, after being the primary developer of its popular HBO Go and MAX Go streaming video offerings.

As part of the changes, the memo of the Time Warner unit said, product strategy and development exec Hans Deutmeyer is leaving HBO.

HBO has been very active in the digital space, increasingly offering its shows on a variety of mobile devices. Earlier this week, at our D: Dive Into Media conference, HBO said its subscribers will be able to stream programming from an Apple iPhone or iPad onto their television via AirPlay.

All the various details are below, in a memo HBO sent to its employees at the end of January:

HBO GO has established HBO as a company that understands the value of technology as a tool for delivering great content and experiences to consumers, and HBO.com has become a primary means of driving broad consumer engagement and awareness of our offerings. We are proud of these achievements and also recognize that we have more ahead of us to accomplish. Over the course of the next several years, our mission is to build best-in-class technology execution capabilities. That mission is central to ensuring that HBO has the tools available to support our business through the ongoing technology-based disruption of media and to support new areas of growth. Like other leading Internet-based video service providers, we will design, build, and deploy scalable products with global reach.

Achieving these goals will require focus and a disciplined approach. Roles and responsibilities must be clear and well-defined to ensure efficient distribution of work and smooth collaboration between groups and people. In order to provide the organizational framework needed to achieve our goals, I am restructuring Digital Products around four functional groups (listed alphabetically):

1. Infrastructure Operations & QA,
2. Program Management,
3. Software Engineering,
4. User Experience & Product Design.

Each of these groups will have responsibilities for both HBO GO and HBO.com as appropriate for the functional areas of each group. This will enable more efficient end-to-end integration and coordination of our design, platform architecture, and infrastructure development.

The attached “Digital Products Organizational Pillars” slide illustrates the roles and responsibilities of each of these four functional groups in greater detail. The leaders of these groups will report directly to me and will continue to do so after my transition to the CTO role.

Donna Stalworth will continue to head up the infrastructure operations and QA efforts in Digital Products. She will also add build and release management to her responsibilities.

Rebekah Calabrese will be stepping into the role of VP of Program Management for Digital Products. She and her team will be responsible for cross-group coordination, project management, budget management, technology vendor relationships, and overall status communication for Digital Products. Rebekah will also continue to provide contract support for Digital Products as well as the other technology groups. Her team will consist of the existing Digital Products program and project management staff and her current reports.

Drew Angeloff will lead all of Digital Products’ software engineering activities in New York as well as in Seattle. Centralizing consumer software engineering in one group under one leader will maximize coordination and the flow of information, and will help ensure a consistent and robust software architecture. This is especially important given geographic distance between the New York and Seattle teams. The engineering staff working on device application development and the GO service currently on Rob Caruso’s team will now report to Drew.

Rob Caruso and the workflow team led by Jason Kui will transition to Diane Tryneski’s organization; Rob will report to Diane. Rob’s new charter is to build software engineering capabilities to optimize digital asset creation, management, and security, and to create technologies that unlock the full potential of software in the digital content area. Rob and his team will collaborate closely with Digital Products to ensure that our digital content technologies and our consumer-facing products inform each other to enable unique and innovative content-driven user experiences. This new role and group will be critical to achieving end-to-end software technology excellence.

Dina Juliano will lead the User Experience & Product Design organization. Her team’s responsibilities will include HBO GO, HBO.com, and HBO On Demand. Dina’s team will conceive, design, and realize new digital experiences in partnership with key stakeholders across HBO. She and her team will incorporate consumer and market insights to create a coherent product vision and roadmap that engages our users. Dina’s team will consist of her existing team and the groups formerly in Hans Deutmeyer’s organization.

Hans has decided to leave HBO to pursue opportunities that better align with his future interests. Hans has been a part of the HBO GO story since its genesis and has played a key role in bringing it to the market successfully. Given the new organizational direction, he has decided that this is the right time for him to pursue other opportunities. I want to thank Hans for his contributions and wish him success in his new endeavors.

Please welcome Donna, Rebekah, Drew, Rob, and Dina in their new roles. The changes in their teams and roles are effective immediately.

I am very excited about the new organization and am confident that we have the right the structure, leadership, passion, talent, and creativity needed to deliver best-in-class digital products to our users.

Please let your manager or me know if you have any questions.

Thank you-

— Otto —

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20130215/hbos-berkes-restructures-digital-team-memo/feed/ 0