Apple Television: Did Steve Jobs Crack The Code?

Steve Jobs

Steve Jobs

“I’d like to create an integrated television set that is completely easy to use,” Steve Jobs told his biographer, Walter Isaacson. “It would be seamlessly synced with all of your devices and with iCloud.”

Everyone assumes that Apple is working on iTV or whatever it will be called. It’s in his biography, pundits speak about it — the only question is when will it debut?

I will be hugely surprised if Apple markets a television set, my guess is that it will bring a new device to the marketplace that will offer a Jobsian way to consume video content, play games and interact in the social space. Calling it a TV will probably be pejorative or, at the very least, a misnomer.

That said, I am fascinated by the quote from Steve Jobs’ biography. “It will have the simplest user interface you could imagine. I finally cracked it,” mostly because it makes no sense. There is nothing in the world of technology simpler than turning on a television set. Flipping channels and adjusting volume are literally child’s play. It is a behavior exhibited by everyone over the age of three who has ever seen a television. “Simple as turning on the TV,” is the holy grail of modern consumer electronics design. Did Steve come up with a way to make it simpler? Doubtful.

But the interface, simple or not, is not the problem. That’s not the code that needs to be cracked. Where we need Steve Jobs’ magic is on the other side of the system – where content transitions from scarce (on TV) to ubiquitous (online). Find a codex that solves for supply and demand: Then, and only then, will the code be truly cracked.

Supply and demand is an immutable law of our human experience. If something is scarce, it is valuable. If something is ubiquitous, it is less valuable. I challenge you to identify any ecosystem anywhere in our observable universe where this is not always true. If you find an example, please email me immediately; you will be the first person in history to accomplish this feat.

If you want to reach the vast majority of television viewers in the United States, pick a Thursday night during November, February or May and buy airtime on ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox between 09:00:00 pm and 09:00:30 pm. It will cost you a few hundred thousand dollars on each of the networks and it will be worth it. Why would you need to spend this money on Thursday evening? Because the vast amount of American TV viewers are awake and watching TV at that time. (That’s why weeknights from 8pm – 11pm is called Primetime.)

And, more importantly, Americans get paid on Friday. So, if you want to sell them something over the weekend or call them to action (Come to my weekend sale, or come test drive my car and get 10% off this Saturday) the last time you get to reach them when they are sober and might have money in their pockets is Thursday evening. They will go out on Friday and Saturday and by primetime Sunday night they will have a hangover and be broke! (Please don’t send me hate mail about my insensitivity to alcoholics or suggest that I am promoting or condoning underage drinking – I’m not.)

This makes primetime Thursday evening between 09:00:00 pm and 09:00:30 pm a very scarce resource indeed. Now, take the same piece of video content, put it online (which instantly removes both the temporal and geographic restrictions). What has to happen to the price of the airtime? Remember — supply and demand.

There is only 30 seconds available between 09:00:00 pm and 09:00:30 pm on Thursday night. It’s scarce. Once the content is online, it can be seen by anyone, anytime, anywhere. Again, what has to happen to the price? (Answer: It must go down.)

This is the code that needs to be cracked. The interface is not the problem at all. If you can’t create scarcity, you can’t charge what you need to charge to create the content – if you can’t create the content, there is no TV ecosystem.

People often confuse TV the art form with TV the platform. The television (and movie) business is about packaging content, measuring the audience and selling that audience to advertisers. If you add in the dual revenue business (like cable networks and some broadcast entities) it is also about creating high-value content that attracts and maintains subscribers. In the case of the premium content providers, it’s only about subscription revenue.

Why would content owners whose content is good enough to be distributed as a scarce resource want to unrestrict the very access that enables their remuneration?

Now, you could argue that scarcity can be created with a cloud-based video distribution system over the public Internet. That’s stating the obvious. Netflix is just such a system. So are Hulu Plus, Roku, Vudu, etc. Why haven’t these systems destroyed the cable and satellite business? They are too expensive, too limited and too hard to use. Can that code be cracked? Sure, this is probably the part Steve Jobs had figured out. But, at some point he would have been faced with the code that can’t be cracked: How do you make something ubiquitous and valuable at the same time? Steve, I’m your biggest fan and I want to be wrong, but I don’t think you cracked it.

Author:

Shelly Palmer

Shelly Palmer is Fox 5 New York's On-air Tech Expert (WNYW-TV) and the host of Fox Television's monthly show Shelly Palmer Digital Living. He also hosts United Stations Radio Network's, Shelly Palmer Digital Living Daily, a daily syndicated radio report that features insightful commentary and a unique insiders take on the biggest stories in technology, media, and entertainment. He is Managing Director of Advanced Media Ventures Group, LLC an industry-leading advisory and business development firm and a member of the Executive Committee of the National Academy of Television Arts & Sciences (the organization that bestows the coveted Emmy® Awards).

  • Anonymous

    While I agree with most of what you say, I have a quibble and questions…

    Quibble – Not sure the modern TV is simply a turn on, channel, volume proposition. Almost everyone I know has multiple remotes and struggles with their DVRs etc. It’s gotten a lot more complex for most people than you imply.

    Question – Yes, there is scarcity that creates those big Thursday night audiences but I’m not sure it’s about the time slot, it’s about the show. If it’s good, it draws a big audience. If it’s good, wouldn’t it draw the same big numbers if on demand, online? They wouldn’t be there all at once but the overall viewer count could be the same and it lives on over a longer period with potential to keep earning long after that one viewing on a Thurs. night.

    Question – Have you seen the new BloombergTV+ app for the iPad? Instead of cable channels, could the future be network (or individual shows) apps – going direct to the audience with better demographic numbers (including location) and targeting ads in a much better fashion therefore being able to charge a premium for the ads? Seems a win for both the show & advertisers.

    Just like the iBook and Newsstand apps in iOS, there could be a TV/entertainment app (as well as a movie app). Some mags are saying they’ve seen a huge increase since the Newsstand appeared in iOS5.

  • Anonymous

    The TV platform sells eyeballs at prime time whether the show is broadcast or recorded. No matter where I watch it if the advertiser wants to reach me they just have to sponsor the time of the commercial minus any particular shows they do not wish to support. So at 9PM Thursday people can watch a live broad cast of a scheduled show or they can watch an archived show and see the exact same commercial. As soon as the networks realize the schedule of the eyeball is more important than the schedule of the program they will jump into VOD with both feet.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=604720196 Michael Streiffert

    I’m not sure how you get your television, but my cable remote has over 30 buttons and it still doesn’t operate many of the television functions like source and brightness.  Switching from cable to Blueray to AppleTV takes multiple remotes.  And that’s without an audio system attached to my television…

  • Anonymous

    My question about BloombergTV+ was triggered by watching Charlie Rose interview Walter Isiacson last not and made me wonder if this was the future of TV channels, apps – No Gruber has a post thinking the same way… Apps Are the New Channels - http://bit.ly/szsmq5
    Gruber’s post expands a little into what it allows the channels to do, more interactivity.
    Steve Jobs’s “cracked it” remark may just be that he realized you can’t disrupt the cabal, you have to let the “real” content producers/owners do it through apps with a nice interface (Newsstand) for the consumer with one remote and airplay

  • kevin

    Shelley,
    You’re taking a view of the TV platform that is limited to advertising as the revenue driver; advertising that is relatively untargeted.  Although I don’t think this was the problem that Steve was trying to crack, what if there were other higher-yielding ways to do advertising or other revenue sources to support more ubiquitous TV/movie viewing? 

  • Pedant

    What needs to be reconciled is that families that all sit around the same TV have up to three devices each, each of which will need to be “synced with the TV”.

    Not going to happen.