The increase in pay TV programming costs is unsustainable, argues a research note from financial analysts at Bernstein Research issued yesterday. Bernstein researchers focused on DirecTV but they also noted that rising programming costs have been a concern for many video service providers.
Bernstein researchers plotted DirecTV’s programming costs per subscriber over a five year period and found that the growth rate recently has been as high as 13% on a quarterly basis.
“At 10% per year, the $40 wholesale cost of goods sold today would more than double, to about $80, in another seven years” – and that’s unsustainable, considering that the retail average revenue per user in the pay TV market is $80 a month, the Bernstein analysts wrote.
The steep rise in DirecTV’s per-subscriber programming costs is not purely the result of greed on the part of content providers, the Bernstein research suggests. A slower rate of customer acquisition also has contributed to the problem – and if video prices rise to cover costs, customer acquisition and retention will become even more difficult, the researchers said.
A broader trend
Although Bernstein singled out DirecTV, the researchers see the same phenomenon impacting other pay TV providers – and Telecompetitor also has documented this trend.
For example, programming costs were the key reason that Frontier stopped marketing the FiOS video services it acquired when it purchased lines from Verizon. And a recent financial analysis of the small telco market from the Telergee Alliance found that Tier 3 carriers, on average, are seeing a decline in margins on video services – a phenomenon that Telergee researchers attribute to increasing programming costs.
Some industry observers argue that sports programming is particularly costly – and as a result some video service providers have experimented with lower-cost programming packages that do not include certain sports channels.
Because of increasing programming costs, Bernstein researchers expect cable companies to allow video margins to compress and to “eventually shift their pricing from video to broadband (where they have greater leverage).”
The situation is more difficult for satellite video providers such as DirecTV and Dish Network, however, the Bernstein researchers note. The reason is that those companies do not have their own broadband facilities – although they do have deals with satellite broadband providers to sell satellite broadband services.
Bernstein believes Dish and DirecTV may attempt to merge so that the merged entity will be in a better position to build out Dish’s spectrum holdings – an idea that would make sense for the companies, but might not garner regulatory approval.
Impact on broadband?
The potentially most disturbing news in the Bernstein Research note, it seems to me, is the notion that pay TV providers will attempt to shore up shrinking video margins by improving margins on the broadband side. It’s not clear from the research note whether that could be achieved through cost savings or would require a price increase. But if broadband prices do go up to help cover video programming costs, it wouldn’t bode well for broadband subscriber growth.
4 comments
Telephone Boy says:
Oct 2, 2012
In the 1980's, Dire Straits proclaimed "I want my MTV". Today, it's "I want ESPN". When ESPN signs the big NFL deal and Fox Sports XX (SW, MW, NW, NE etc.) sign up the Big 10 or the SEC to billion dollar deals, its not just sports fans who pay. It is all subs who are forced into Disney and Fox content package deals. The cable biz is reaching a tipping point. When OTT middleware gets ready for primetime, those that don't want the NFL on ESPN can still watch "Castle" on their ABC affilliate. At that point, an NFL game on ESPN will cost $14.95 per game and all the ABC you can watch (or stand) will cost $3.95 per month WITH forced viewing of commercials, $8.95 per month to skip the ads.
John Q. Public says:
Oct 2, 2012
A former, loyal cable industry executive, I cut the cable cord over two years ago because most video programming wasn't worth diddly. I wouldn't by Dish for the same reason. Don't miss cable a bit, and switched to local over-the-air HDTV broadcast (free) when needed or desired, cheaper DSL, cheaper and/or free OTT video, free Skype, and mobile 4G to avoid all the anticipated yearly cable rate creep – but mostly because of further deterioration of television programming. I'm cable free and happy.
But why is the television programming industry in trouble? Because the programmers create garbage for dense audiences. Men are characterized as effeminate idiots, women as male-replacement control freaks, kids with life support dependent on the next Harry Potter episode.
In an era when SAT verbal skill scores are the lowest in 40-years (so much for government spending on education), the haughty Hollywood programmers continue to demand more money for their mindless Lindsey Lohan reality TV and sanitized DreamWorks content. Combine their increasingly expensive and empty-minded output with a current US unemployment rate of 24% for 25 – 55 year old adults, and you've got a recipe for disaster – a television industry trying to hang-on within our degraded, third-world country.
Now, throw in the archaic road blocks of television licensing and distribution – and you've slit the throat of a living, once vibrant American culture.
Larry says:
Oct 3, 2012
Greed plays a bigger role than the researchers admit to. Any industry will continue to raise pricing, so long as the marketplace accepts it. Until end consumers stop paying their cable bill and cut the cord, these programmer's greed will go unabated.
Brenan Mardsen says:
Feb 4, 2013
Maybe Cable TV is due for a natural death as the rise of satellite TV and soon to boom internet TV from Sony and Apple will drive cable subscribers into those two aforementioned folds. I myself prefer internet over cable TV due to costing.