Newsletter
Google Left Banner
Verizon Gets Its Game On
04 Oct, 2007Verizon is joining some of its competitors by launching a suite of casual games for its FiOS subscriber base. AT&T and DISH Networks have recently announced similar launches. Shawn Strickland, Verizon’s vice president of video solutions, tells Multichannel News that the game titles will include games like chess and sudoku, educational titles, and interactive games developed for DVD platforms. Verizon intends on making some titles free and charging for others through pay-per-play and/or monthly subscription fees. Gaming has always been seen as a potential differentiation strategy.
Defining a lucrative business model for television based gaming has been a little elusive. In the U.S., gaming’s most passionate players tend to be console (and to some extent PC based) players. Passionate participants tend to be the ones willing to spend real dollars. Verizon’s (and others) initiative targets more casual gamers, who represent a decent sized market. Multicchannel News reports that the Casual Games Association, an industry trade group, estimates more than 200 million people worldwide play such games on the Internet today. The question yet to be fully answered with casual gamers is the amount of revenue a service provider can consistently generate from them. There certainly is an argument to be made for not looking at casual gaming as a profit center, rather as a differentiating hook to attract and retain subscribers. Gaming experiments will certainly continue, as triple play competitors continually strive to find the right combination of services/features that keeps paying customers coming (and staying).
About Telecompetitor
Channel
Webinars/Events
Upcoming Events
NTCA Annual Meeting
Feb 8-11, 2009 - Long Beach, CA
Featured Article
Should Telephone Service be Free?
12 Oct, 2008
Comcast announced a new promotion last week that offers 12 months of free basic cable service for new customers who also sign up for an additional service. Customers who don’t want an additional service can get Comcast’s basic service of about 20 -30 channels for $10/month. The promotion is tied to the digital TV transition of February 2009 and entices potential customers to avoid the transition “hassle” by getting “free” cable service. “The simple fact is that basic cable is the easiest path through the digital transition and now consumers can get it for free,” said Derek Harrar, General Manager and Senior Vice President, Video Services for Comcast in a company statement. This move is similar to strategies pursued by other video service providers, who are hoping to leverage the digital TV transition for new subscriber additions.
But is this strategy a leading indicator for the future? Should basic core services like basic cable and basic telephone service be offered for free, used as a “carrot” to entice customers to buy “more important” services like broadband? Maybe a very basic phone service, with no LD, access to landline 911, and maybe outgoing service only (to avoid telemarketers) should be a free component of a bundled offering. Such a wireline service may appeal to a customer who previously cut the cord for wireless only, but also needs broadband. There is a growing portion of the population who find the value of traditional wireline phone service elsewhere – either through wireless or broadband/IP services. But, if they could get the security of landline 911, and an extra dial tone in their home as a free value add for subscribing to broadband (or video from a telco’s perspective), maybe a telco’s bundled offering may look more attractive than a comparable cable offering. I realize this idea is not appealing to the hundreds of ILECs who are a part of the current access/settlement system (in fact, it couldn’t work in the context of today’s regulatory structure), but I wonder whether it’s inevitable. In this possible future scenario, the current settlement system adapts to broadband as the underlying service, as opposed to voice.
This scenario cuts both ways. From a cable company’s perspective, a growing portion of the population is turning to the Internet as a source for their video content, and no longer see value in paying for a broad package of video as a part of a traditional subscription pay-TV service. But, if they could receive basic TV (which includes local broadcast affiliates) as a free value add for buying broadband, maybe the cable bundle is more attractive. In a true IP/broadband world, very basic phone and video service is relatively easy to deliver, and has little impact on bandwidth and network performance. Maybe the digital transition is opening the door to a future where free basic services are a regular component of a bundled offering. Thoughts?

digg this story
google
