Disney's Iger: Content need not be free
PASADENA, Calif.--Disney CEO Robert Iger said he appreciates the fact that his company helped pioneer user-generated video with "America's Funniest Home Videos," but acknowledges he missed a big opportunity.
"Unfortunately, I didn't come up with YouTube," Iger said Wednesday during the opening interview at Fortune's Brainstorm: Tech conference here. Although it has yet to be profitable, he noted that those who created the site did sell it for a "chunk of change."
Fortune's Richard Siklos interviews Disney CEO Robert Iger as the Brainstorm:Tech conference kicks off in Pasadena, Calif., Wednesday.
(Credit: Ina Fried/CNET)But, Iger insisted that free content isn't going to be the only game in town.
"People are willing to pay for quality," he said. "They are willing to pay for choice. They are willing to pay for convenience."
He noted that people still pay $5 an hour to go to the movies, 75 cents an hour to read books and magazines, 50 cents an hour to watch cable, but just 25 cents an hour to use the Internet, in terms of the amount they pay their Internet service provider.
"There's plenty of room for people to spend more money on for things they are doing online," Iger said. "I think it is wrong to assume that because there is a lot on the Internet that is free that it is going to be impossible to monetize" content.
Iger acknowledged that the company still makes far less online than it does from traditional broadcast means.
"We're not monetizing as much as we do in our traditional business," he said. "It's very early in the timeline. I think there is going to be ample opportunity to improve monetization from advertising online."
When moderator Richard Siklos pointed out that he had a fairly optimistic take on things, Iger noted that's part of his job.
"If you are trying to lead anybody, you better be an optimist," he said. "Not too many people follow pessimists."
He said his job as CEO is to make sure everyone at his company has one hand in the present and one hand in the future--essentially aware of where his bread is buttered but also with an eye toward where that next meal is coming from.
As for privacy concerns, he notes that most of the issues come from "older people," saying that when he talks to his daughters they show little concern for those issues.
"I've learned more about my daughters on Facebook than I did when I was raising them," Iger said.
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina. 
Excellent, tomorrow's privacy laws to be determined by what the frothing hollow-wood chasing FB loving, nitwit thinks? His daughters may not care now, but one embarrassing incident and I bet they might. I Hope he learns to to better research, or Disney is completely shot.
ps. you might want to actually edit your blog posts first, you know that thing journalists used to do?
Heres a video about controlling things like this. Ironically, its on a FREE content website.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66PbSzwnLes
Dont let this person.
But as a consumer I loathe their good business sense. They certainly focus on quality, I'll gie them that, but the constant high prices are maddening.
first of all, you don't have to pay for books...there are things called public library which are paid by your tax dollars....use it...
second...you also don't have to pay for TV....all you need is a good TV, pair of rabbit ears, and maybe a converter if you don't have digital TV with decoder...
third...you do not have to pay $5 an hour for movies...you can wait till it hits to cheaper run after a month or two.....you do NOT have to watch all your movies at the release date....
fourth...we do NOT pay for internet for content...we pay internet for the pipe for information to flow...not the information itself....just because you put price on content, it will not make people pay for them....
lastly...""I've learned more about my daughters on Facebook than I did when I was raising them," Iger said."....maybe he should be a better father and talk to his daughters instead of reading about them on Facebook....
First, I go to the library, but if I want to mark up a book or keep it to read in the future, at my leisure, I buy it.
Second, I pay to get certain channels that I can't over the air.
Third, there are movies that I won't be able to see during a cheaper run because the single movie theater that has those showings won't run them. Also, sometimes I want to see something sooner rather than later.
Fourth, when you put a price on content, it won't make people pay, but it will let them choose to pay. It happens every day. Think iTunes, Pandora, ESPN Insider, Netflix online video, pay-per-view movie downloads... Advertising isn't the only way to make $ on the 'net.
Lastly, I don't think anyone would disagree with that last point. ;-)
it could either mean the really few channel that is publically free (3 of them i think?) or pirating signals... if u meant the latter i think u have an issue... stealing from what others pay for isn't exactly free
but then again, i don't know which one u meant :)
One way or anther, Disney is out to profit, and no one should be surprised by the Sonny Bono / Mickey's Law that extended copyrights for as long as 120 years, or by Iger's statements that they intend to monetize wherever they can.
If I pay then I am paying to keep advertising out.
Thats what cable TV was supposed to be for but greed like this fails so I am 99.9% sure I will not pay.
keeps me in touch with the world that im not interested in, lol
hell, i wouldn't know what new movies are on that might be interesting if not for the ads (just hope there was less.. manipulation of content to look better than it is, but thats what advertising is for lol)
http://greenscreencinema.com/article.php?story=2009071115512773
Thanks!
GreenScreenCinema.com
I'll agree to pay more for internet access when EVERY single content creator and blog writer gets a check from the ISP's. The same way that the money that gets paid to cable companies, telephone companies, and satellite television companies is paid out to the studios that produce the TV programs and movies that are broadcast. Until I get a check every month from EVERY ISP on the planet for their users to access my site, Iger can go to hell. This is the business model that Iger wants to see on the 'net and I really don't think it is going to happen. ISP's aren't suddenly going to start paying out to webmasters in droves and until that happens no website is going to make money simply by being in the net. Disney gets paid by every broadcaster whether anyone actually watches their programs or not. The same with Viacom and NBC/Universal et al. This model doesn't exist on the net and it is a pipe dream to think that it will spontaneously appear.
As long as there are free sites on the 'net no one is going to pay to read/view something that they can get from another source for free. It is simple economics, the person who charges the least amount of money for their product gets more people to buy their product. The more unique visitors who view a website the more money that is paid by advertisers to display ads on said site. If a site wants to put up a pay wall and forbid search engines from indexing their sites they are ultimately hurting themselves financially. No one goes to your site you don't make any money and that makes a hell of a lot more sense then paying people every month whether anyone watches your TV programs, visits your sites or doesn't.
Al Gore did come up with the perfect analogy for the 'net when he called it a highway. The Dept. of Transportation doesn't pay every business owner for having a store on a street. Disney doesn't get a paycheck from the DoT for having Disneyland and Disney World accessible by streets. When you consider this as the structure of 'net it makes a hell of lot more sense then trying to transpose the Media giants' business model over it.
- by jonjohn1232003 October 26, 2009 9:42 AM PDT
- test
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(16 Comments)