When people think about Facebook and Google whether it be in the context of their consumer products or their advertising, the two are often cast as competitive enemies. Of course, the truth is a lot murkier.
When I think about the cable companies enabling access to content via apps on tablets/smartphones or “channels” via OTT (over-the-top) devices, I can’t help but see the move as something like this …
“TV Everywhere,” defined as “services that enable cable and network customers to watch TV content on any internet-connected device by authenticating their subscriptions,” is the ability to watch things like HBO or ESPN on your smartphone, tablet, or OTT device (gaming console, Chromecast, etc.).
It’s great in that it allows you to take your content to the screen of your choice. What’s easier than seamlessly going from the HBO Go app on your tablet to Chromecasting to your TV at the touch of a button?
A look at the year over year change in video views by access type (Data from Adobe via eMarketer) shows that TV Everywhere consumption is surging in popularity:
Separate data from The Diffusion Group makes the above trend all the more intriguing. While 2.9% of pay TV subscribers “definitely will cancel” their service in the next six months, a figure that is up year over year from 2.2% in 2013, the percentage of folks who are “moderately likely” or “somewhat likely” to cancel their subscriptions has actually declined year over year from 13.1% to 11.9% (a decline of 14.4% year over year).
Mash up with the surge in TV Everywhere consumption with the decline in considering cutting the cord and you might say that by enabling subscribers greater access to TV content, you’re staving off cutting the cord.
This is great for cable and satellite companies, right?
Maybe. But consider this. HBO Go has somewhere between 5-10MM installs on Google Play. WatchESPN has 10-50MM installs. Comcast XFinity has about half that. Dish Anywhere is the same. Do consumers actually want the firehose of content their Pay TV provides them? Or do they want the premium sports or movie/drama content provided by specific channels?
I’m guessing it’s the latter. If so, I can only imagine the day when the ESPNs and HBOs allow a la carte subscriptions. The cord-cutting trickle might just turn into a flood …
A report from Knotice on email open rates across phones, tablets, and desktop/laptops for 2013 was released that finds that as of the second half of 2013, about 52% of emails were being opened via traditional platforms—desktops and laptops—with the remainder being opened on phones (31%) and tablets (17%).
While I think many of us open work emails on our smartphones only to reply to them later when we’ve got a full-fledged typing apparatus at hand, apparently this behavior isn’t common relative to total email opens. Knotice specifically addressed this “myth.” Per their report only 2.5% of emails are being cross-opened or shared between devices. Check it out (highlighting mine):
Mind that the above is for retail (the only category they broke out for this data). I wonder:
How would the cross-device open rates change for work emails?
What is the engagement when emails are cross-opened between devices?
I’d theorize that while cross-device emails are uncommon, the engagement on those emails is likely huge—for retail it’d be the need to spend some time clicking through, shopping, etc., or for work, sending off a reply that is more than a couple sentences long.