home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1990
/
1990 Time Magazine Compact Almanac, The (1991)(Time).iso
/
time
/
030689
/
03068900.053
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1990-09-17
|
5KB
|
89 lines
VIDEO, Page 73Pay-per-View Starts PerkingA spate of mega-events spurs a new TV option
The collection of talent was impressive, if not quite a match
for the hyperbolic title: Frank, Liza & Sammy: The Ultimate Event!
Still, when Frank Sinatra, Liza Minnelli and Sammy Davis Jr.
commanded the stage two weeks ago for a 90-minute TV concert, they
were doing more than just a routine network special. The concert
was the latest offering in a busy new realm of video mega-events:
pay-per-view television.
Pay-per-view is hardly the ultimate in TV technology, but it
may be an idea whose time has finally come. Conventional pay-cable
channels, like HBO and Showtime, offer viewers a smorgasbord of
programming for one monthly fee. Pay-per-view instead gives viewers
a chance to select from a menu, paying only for the programs they
want to see. Prices typically range from $4 or $5 for recent movies
to $15 or $20 for concerts and sport events. Pay-per-view is still
a pint-size player in the TV marketplace: only 11 million TV homes
(out of 90.4 million) currently receive PPV shows, according to
Paul Kagan Associates, a media research firm. But revenues are
growing fast (from $88 million in 1987 to $200 million last year),
and the number of PPV homes, Kagan forecasts, will nearly double
by 1992.
The two largest PPV companies, Viewer's Choice (which reaches
5 million homes) and Request Television (more than 4 million), each
offer customers a monthly program slate filled largely with movies.
But the business's new boomlet has been propelled mainly by special
events. Last June's heavyweight title fight between Mike Tyson and
Michael Spinks was sold to nearly 600,000 TV homes on a
pay-per-view basis at an average $35 a crack. Wrestling matches
have proved an even bigger draw. Wrestlemania IV had a reported
900,000 takers last March (the largest audience yet claimed for a
PPV event), and well-hyped ring battles like last week's Chi-Town
Rumble '89 are coming almost monthly. Robbie Knievel, son of
daredevil Evel, will attempt a motorcycle jump over the fountains
at Las Vegas' Caesars Palace for a PPV event in April, and the
supermiddleweight title fight between Sugar Ray Leonard and Thomas
Hearns will be offered over PPV in June.
Pay-per-view has had its share of duds. A Dirty Dancing concert
last November drew fewer than 80,000 subscribers. Viewership for
the Sinatra-Minnelli-Davis concert is still being tabulated, but
will probably fall well short of 100,000. Still, the concert's
packager, Showtime Event Television, is pursuing other big stars
for PPV events, and industry executives are bullish. "We're
building an electronic arena," says Jeffrey Reiss, chairman of
Request Television. "The day will come when Bruce Springsteen will
be playing pay-per-view at the end of his tour. We're betting on
the future."
The future may come sooner than expected because of the 1992
Summer Olympics. Along with the 150-plus hours of over-the-air
coverage it will provide, NBC has announced plans to offer separate
packages of events for PPV. The prospect of large revenues from the
Olympics is likely to spur more cable systems to acquire PPV
technology before then.
The slow spread of that technology has been a major stumbling
block to PPV. A cable system must first have "addressability" --
the ability to direct a program only to the homes that have
requested it. Then it must have an efficient method for taking
orders. The crudest PPV setups use live phone operators, a system
that cannot handle a flood of last-minute orders. More
sophisticated methods use an automated toll-free phone number. Most
advanced of all is a system (currently in 1 million PPV homes) in
which viewers can place orders by simply pressing buttons on their
cable remote-control device. "It's very clear that cable systems
that have simplified the order-entry process see increases in buy
rates," says Larry Gerbrandt, senior analyst for Kagan.
The advent of pay-per-view has thrown a scare into the
prospering home-video industry. If movies are released on PPV and
cassette at the same time, home-video executives fear, viewers
might opt for the convenience of punching buttons at home rather
than trek to the neighborhood video store. One study has shown that
video rentals dropped as much as 50% for films that had heavy play
first on PPV. Under pressure from the home-video industry, the
major Hollywood studios now delay the release of most movies to PPV
until 30 days or more after their arrival in video stores. (The
pay-cable release generally comes about six months later.)
But PPV's eventual place in the video universe is still
uncertain. Cable and videocassettes are already eating up a sizable
portion of viewers' home-entertainment dollars. Will pay-per-view
induce them to shell out even more? And if so, will it cut into the
revenues of -- and maybe even supplant -- other TV choices? For the
TV industry, that is the ultimate question.