Micropayments: Pay-as-you go billing. A small fee per article, premium rates for specialist content. What WSJ is really offering is a way for people to pay less than $100/year for WSJ content if they consume it at a limited rate.

Cable companies, long slandered for charging consumers for shows they don’t watch, are no doubt looking at the viability of this kind of model in combination with monetizing online offerings. Should someone who likes to watch shows like “House Hunters” or ongoing programming on CSPAN have to pay $3-$60/month for the full cable lineup? (How much longer will people tolerate this model? CNet)

ReadWriteWeb points out that Google and Apple have already entered micropayment terrain for commercial video content:

So what about charging small amounts for high quality, downloadable versions of commercial content on YouTube as a way to bring in money? Sure, Google already tried that with Google Video, and shut that service down citing an “effort to improve all Google services.” But Apple has had a lot of success selling TV shows and movies (they sold a million of them in the first 20 days, and move tens of millions of video downloads per year through iTunes), so the model is sustainable.

All-device, all-platform online access for subscribers to the traditional format. Once a consumer pays for content, they should be able to read/watch it wherever and whenever they want. That is the new standard.

CNet reports that Comcast has plans in the works to meet this standard (for a price!):

What is known is that Comcast expects to offer the service free of charge to its existing cable TV customers. In a recent interview with PC World, Karin Gilford, the Comcast Interactive executive in charge of the cable provider’s Fancast video site, said with a user name and password, subscribers will be able to access any standard or premium cable content that their cable subscription entitles them to watch.

The service will let users watch TV on their laptops or computers, and eventually it might even be available on cell phones. What will make the service different from other online video sites, such as Hulu.com or TV.com (which is owned by CBS, publisher of CNET News), is that it will feature premium cable content from sources like HBO, ESPN, and CNN. This content has largely been off-limits to free online video aggregators.

These new models are not limited to content — Microsoft is developing its products to conform to online delivery and new monetization models.

While consumers have enjoyed Web-based applications such as e-mail for several years, there’s a growing business movement toward the Web. In addition to using the Internet as a primary way to interact with customers, corporate technology managers are running more of their applications online — “cloud computing,” as it’s called — to save money and be flexible.

As every industry struggles to keep ahold of profitability as their users move online and expect more flexible service models, strategists are watching each other closely and keeping an open mind.

WebTVWire

A thought-provoking post on The Break it down Blog investigates whether Netflix has started throttling its service to PC users. The author, Riyad Kalla, has noticed a deterioration of the Netflix ‘Watch Instantly’ service on his PC compared to on his Xbox 360.

He details how he determined that it was Netflix rather than his ISP, Qwest, doing the throttling and asks whether this is due to Netflix having contractual obligations to provide a certain level of service to Microsoft via the Xbox 360.

This is the scenario ivi is built to avoid, offering virtually infinite scalability. Yes, these are the issues that make us proud as we go into private beta and beyond!
Whether or not this is happening at Netfilx, the issues are interesting and WebTVWire explores them well.

Video Nuze sez

They admit it’s bold, but here’s the core rationale:

Microsoft has significant financial resources, but it lacks the ability to be a credible competitor in the broadband-to-the-TV race. Together, I believe they could turn Netflix into the single-most potent broadband competitor to today’s multichannel video providers. My bet is that in ‘09 the two companies will come to the same conclusion.

It sounds plausible, but I have concerns. Netflix is an amazing 11 years old, and yet it’s still unarguably cool. On February 25, 2007, Netflix announced the billionth DVD delivery.

It’s in search of a next-gen model, and has made significant progress including existing offerings:

Netflix has a “Watch Instantly” feature available to all eligible subscribers. The feature enables subscribers, at no additional cost, to stream near-DVD quality movies and recorded television shows instantly, depending on the subscriber’s internet connectivity. Initially, the feature offered subscribers one hour of media for approximately every dollar they spent on their subscription. (A $16.99 plan, for example, entitled the subscriber to 17 hours of streaming media.) In January 2008, however, Netflix lifted this restriction. Virtually all subscribers now are entitled to unlimited hours of streaming media at no additional cost. Only subscribers with a plan of $4.99/one DVD per month aren’t provided unlimited access to the streaming service. (They are allowed two hours). The new terms of the service are a response to the introduction of Apple’s new video rental services.

Currently t[Netflix's] Watch Instantly service features more than 12,000 movies and recorded television shows available. Major studios including NBC Universal, Sony Pictures, MGM, 20th Century Fox, CBS/Paramount, ABC-Disney, Warner Brothers, Lions Gate EntertainmentNew Line Cinema are all distributing films and television shows via the service. On October 1st, 2008, Netflix announced a partnership with Starz Entertainment to bring 2,500+ new movies and television shows to Watch Instantly in what is being called Starz Play.

These advances show promise but not splashy domination.

Is Microsoft the right match to bring the future to Netflix?

You tell me. Living in the Seattle area and having work experience with Microsoft, I’m tempted to say no.

I’m tempted to think Microsoft is truly an enterprise-only entity that has yet to find a way to understand and serve the consumer. How can it when all its dollars come from Business Decision Makers rather than consumers?

Microsoft makes no sales directly to users. Doesn’t that say it all about a possible Netflix-Microsoft deal?

Argue! Prove me wrong! I want Netflix to have all the best money and minds behind it as it goes forward. And I know firsthand that people at Microsoft are very smart. But Netflix — the beloved red envelope coming soone r than you hope into your mailbox — is like a relative I believe in and want to help connect to the right people.

I got roped into it by Kara Swisher’s post “Finally, Original Online Video Done Right: Andy Samberg’s Lonely Island and “The Guild” on WSJ’s All Things Digital, though.

This post about professionally-concepted and produced online-only television-like content featured some references to a Microsoft online mini-episode series as well as something called The ‘Bu.

Regrettably, I looked at the Microsoft series first. Knee-jerk Microsoft bashing is boring, but I have to say, it happens for a reason. The episode and Christmas Special were stilted, predictable, and featured a single effective actor. Add some really bad-looking graphics and amateurish cartoon character representations and you have a whole lotta mess.

Contrast that with The ‘Bu — “young, sexy people that live in Malibu call it The ‘Bu, because when you say the entire word, it takes time, and then you wouldn’t be young anymore.” It’s a spoof of Melrose Place and hey! I lived by that show back in the day.

8 episodes in all were produced in January 2006, just about 3 years ago (Swisher didn’t mention that!). The comments are still rolling in (for Episode 1 as recently as 3 hours ago), and this week have mostly featured references to… the latest video from Andy Samburg/thelonelyisland seen so far by 8,425,631 people.

Make that 8,425,632. I had to watch it. And I might have to watch the CW remake of Melrose Place!