Things Smackie Thinks You Need to Know...

I don't that Hulu is a studio per say, think they just buy existing content. 

kosmo wrote:
I don't that Hulu is a studio per say, think they just buy existing content. 

OK, but do they have any existing content (perhaps from overseas sources like the BCC) that are unavailable elsewhere to someone with HBO/Showtime/Netflix/AmazonPrime?

And I just realized I didn't actually answer your question.. I know they claim a lot of BBC stuff as exclusive.  But at least one of those series is on the WETA UK.

This brings back an idea that I floated on Smackie's FB wall one night drunkenly and he never responded to (no doubt because he's stealing it): but why doesn't someone make an IMDB-esque website/app that comprehensively lists all programs/movies but then at a touch tells you where its available for immediate viewing. Make databases of all the major cable/fiber/satellite companies OnDemand services and keep an up-to-date listing of all the major web based ones (Netflix, Hulu/Plus, Amazon/Prime, HBOgo, ShowtimeAnytime, Vudu) and cross-reference them.

Ideally, I'd open the app, type in "Popular" and be given a few choices of TV shows and movies with the word popular in the title. I'd click on the old WB Series and it'd tell me where I can watch it instantaneously and in what resolutions. Ideally it'd also have a graphical representation of which are free and which are PPV. If I sign up for an in-app account then it'll remember and ONLY display the services I get, great. (Perhaps every 3rd or 4th entry it'll point out what I want is on another service with a direct link to sign up which the app would get a kickback from.) If the app syncs to my blu-ray/smart TV/TiVo/AppleTV/Roku/Chromecast and I can click on an available provider's listing in that aforementioned results screen, start the program on my TV, even better.

HOW DOES THIS NOT EXIST? It seems fairly simple to make (in the realm of apps) and folks of my ilk would use it all the time. It would have multiple revenue streams from day one. WHY IS NO ONE ELSE ENTHUSED BY THIS CONCEPT?

I do remember that now, but I too was drunk when I read it and forgot to circle back to it.  I was thinking about it this morning however, and also the other day when I was looking for Bad Santa, Elf, and other holiday movies.

TiVo was (at least at one point) very good at this.  If you would search for content, it would tell you which channels you subscribed to and which apps you could watch it on.  But that was limited to one device TiVo.

I think you might be approaching it the wrong way though.  I would ignore all of the devices to start and simply start with the content providers.  Devices are dependent on content providers and your willingness to subscribe.  It doesn't matter that it's on Netflix which works on Roku, Apple TV, Chromecast, Android TV, Amazon Fire Stick, etc.  What matters is that you subscribe to Netflix. 

For example, when you sign into the app, you put in your location.  You are then given a list of content providers to choose from to be included in your search, that way it's catered to your subscriptions.  You could also include a checkbox to search all free content providers.  And if your search turns up no results, then you could click a link that shows which content providers you are not subscribed to that offer it.  After you see that Hulu Plus has a few things you've searched for, you've solved your revenue stream model, by taking a cut of the subscriber fee as a referral. 

You could also share the search data with content providers so they know what folks are interested in, and where they are losing out to rival providers.

I like it.  The only hurdle is going to be getting all content providers to share their libraries.

Julian, wrote:
HOW DOES THIS NOT EXIST? It seems fairly simple to make (in the realm of apps) and folks of my ilk would use it all the time.

Are you a developer?  I am not sure why you think this would be that simple.  It would involve integrating multiple APIs and would definitely not be "fairly simple" to program (though it would be doable).

I agree with all of that Smackie. That's exactly how I saw it playing out although I think you can do a one-screen GUI for search results and still upsell content providers you don't have. Less clicks is essential. Getting content providers on board ASAP with integration in exchange for a piece of PPV sales or some kickback on memberships is priority 1.

I also agree that being able to one-click it to my TV (through some hybrid device) is not a day one feature, but God is it amazing in version 2.0, even if it costs something as a pay version of the app.

killsaly? wrote:
Are you a developer?  I am not sure why you think this would be that simple.  It would involve integrating multiple APIs and would definitely not be "fairly simple" to program (though it would be doable).

I mean… no, I'm not a developer. However, it is not exactly facebook level complexity either.

Perhaps in beta, someone in-house daily or weekly manually updates what is added/deleted to each content provider and then once there's proof of concept through MAUs, we go to the content providers and pitch the thing, with integrated access to their database a requirement.

I just really wish I could get in front of someone who actually has the technical know-how to do this and pitch the idea. I would be willing to take a minority share of ownership in the thing, I just think its a fantastic idea and you can grow it from percentage of sales –> in-app ad revenue –> premium version app price with more features –> an integrated suggestions idea that promotes/upsells PPV or smaller up-and-coming niche providers.

This could be really profitable as every day the integrated "channel guide" in our TVs/DVRs becomes less and less reflective of our options for what's on. TiVo is the closest to actually doing this and as Smacks said, it's still miles away from what we actually need. Someone is going to do something like this soon, guaranteed. I don't have many good ideas but this is solidly one.

I'm just guessing the hold up has been the content providers unwillingness to share the library data.

There's no way you're hiring people to add content - you're using the API's of the content providers to stay up to date.

I like that idea, but I'm likely still going to spend 15+ minutes deciding what to watch..

Theres already a billion websites that do this

http://www.canistream.it/search/movie/la%20cage%20aux%20folles
http://www.canistream.it/search/tv/bosom%20buddies

grateful wrote:
Theres already a billion websites that do this

Ha!  And they have an app!

Thank you for sharing, Grateful.  This will save me a ton of time and reduce frustration.

grateful wrote:
Theres already a billion websites that do this

http://www.canistream.it/search/movie/la%20cage%20aux%20folles
http://www.canistream.it/search/tv/bosom%20buddies

I was not aware of this, thanks.

However, I just tried three different shows that I know are on multiple free providers and it could not locate a free streaming provider for any of them.

EDIT: Try Dexter (is on Netflix, but they don't tell you) or The Wire (HBOGo, AmazonPrime neither come up). Everything I've just tried gives me Vudu/Apple/Amazon pay options but no free streaming options and I know for a certainty they're available.

Movies seem to be more accurate than TV.

vansmack wrote:
Movies seem to be more accurate than TV.

Good to know. Definitely better than nothing.

Julian, wrote:

vansmack wrote:
Movies seem to be more accurate than TV.

Good to know. Definitely better than nothing.

I'm sure some are better than others.  Netflix seems to be persnickety when it comes to sharing their data.

Guidebox (www.guidebox.com)
Luma (itunes app) claims to be netflix friendly

Of course, this is the whole idea behind Roku.

Google Translate to be updated to do Real Time Voice Translation

I've always said that if I could have a Super Power, it would be the ability to communicate in every language…most people think that's stupid, but I think it's huge.

The Director wanted Smackie to see this.

Smackie Approved for the rest of you:

Gia - Only a Girl
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRIzDQEB1mk

I had yet another revelation over a glass of wine last night.

My fiancée submitted some photos to be a model in a boudoir shoot opportunity and her motivation for me was that I would be the beneficiary of the photo book as a wedding gift.  Fine by me, but then I thought, you know what would be awesome….

If, on my wedding day, I was given not just a boudoir book of photos of my new bride at her current age (which, presumably I'm very familiar with) but a book (or books) of boudoir photos of my new bride from when she was 18 years old, and 21 years old, and 25 years old and 30 years old - every 5 years until we eventually tie the knot - now THAT is a gift I would cherish.

So, those of you with daughters, encourage them to do this for their future husband so this becomes a thing and we can change the world.  For the better.