Regarding the previous two HBO/Game of Thrones links, Dustin Curtis actually watched the videos (from late last year) to get some context around what HBO president Eric Kessler actually said.

As Curtis notes, the Forbes piece does seem to be linkbait-centric, but it doesn’t make the overall point incorrect. Just look at one key portion of what Kessler said:

What you don’t want to do is to pursue a distribution channel over here [ed: the internet], where you think, well, let’s go around the affiliate and we’ll get a couple hundred thousand subs. But the promotional, and packaging support we get over here [ed: the affiliate networks], which, by the way, is the foundation of our 30 million subs and enables us to get 10 million transactions, if that dissipates, and that shrinks, then we will lose a lot of subs over here. 

The error in this thinking remains the notion that the cable infrastructure may not shrink. It absolutely will. It’s just a matter of when. Kessler’s comments are disturbing because he seems to view it as at least partially his job to ensure that this doesn’t happen. But it’s going to happen. It’s inevitable. He doesn’t see it. 

Essentially, Kessler won’t act because he’s afraid to disrupt his own current cash cow. But by failing to act, he’s ensuring it’s going to be disrupted by someone else. Either you disrupt your own business on your own terms, or you get disrupted by someone else on their terms.

But maybe that will be a problem for HBO’s next president.

Can’t for the life of me imagine why this is.

No worries for HBO though, as cord cutting is clearly just a fad that will go away once the economy improves. Or something. 

Morons.

25 million downloads of season 2 so far and counting…

Great news for Google Wallet!

…Wait. Nope.

The company lost $3.2 billion in the last quarter to close out their fiscal year $5.7 billion in the red.

It was the fifth straight quarter that the company has failed to make (well really, keep) a dime. Worse, it was the fourth straight year the company has lost money overall.

And this year was the worst in the company’s 66-year history. Ouch.

In the coming year, they project to turn a (small) profit once again. We’ll see… Something not in their favor:

In November of last year, Sony projected that the total loss for the fiscal year would come in around $1 billion. In February, after a disastrous quarter, they changed the estimate to $2.9 billion.

The actual number ended up just about double that.

Sony clearly thought they could right the ship. But they have not. They lost more last quarter than they were projecting just three months ago that they would lose for the whole year.

Could have been worse though — could have been the $6.5 billion yearly loss the company warned about a few weeks ago. Some bright side.

Vic Gundotra:

To be clear, we’re not interested in a mobile or social experience that’s just smaller. We’re embracing the sensor-rich smartphone (with its touchable screen and high-density display), and transforming Google+ into something more intimate, and more expressive. Today’s new iPhone app is an important step in this direction—toward a simpler, more beautiful Google.

Alongside all my criticism of Google+, I’ve long held the belief that Google should have gone all-in on mobile for the product. The desktop/web social game is over. Mobile is different. And it’s still being decided. BUT, as Gundotra says, it can’t just be a shrunken-down port of your desktop experience.

Looking forward to trying this update out — and pleasantly surprised that Google went iPhone-first with it. Again, if you want to win this game, focusing solely on Android — even if you happent to control that platform — is not an option.

I don’t mean to be a dick, but whoever came up with this name should be fired. 

Sorry, the committee that clearly came up with this name should be fired.

Actually, spare the innocents. Whoever approved this name for marketing purposes should be fired. Does someone at HP really think that consumers are going to see this name and think: WANT? 

Simple rule: stick to one name. No “XT” add-on bullshit. No “Spectre” add-on that makes it seem like you’re trying way too hard. Is this a laptop for James Bond villains? I’m confused.

Just sell the “Envy”. Or whatever. One name. One brand.

Choice is great except when it’s the exact opposite of great. Yes, there are other Envy laptops that HP wants to distinguish this particular model from, but that’s nonsense. Do it by price. “Good” “Better” “Best” — the Apple way works for a reason.

WHAT THE FUCK DOES “XT” MEAN? “Sleekbook” sounds disgusting. “Ultrabook” sounds lame. 

This is all one gigantic pile of branding fail. This is 2012. Computers are ubiquitous in society. You’re not allowed to sell something called the “HP Envy Spectre XT Ultrabook”.

I’m sorry, you’re just not. 

When you initially read the description of Tizen:

Tizen is an open source, standards-based software platform supported by leading mobile operators, device manufacturers, and silicon suppliers for multiple device categories, including smartphones, tablets, netbooks, in-vehicle infotainment devices, smart TVs, and more. Tizen offers an innovative operating system, applications, and a user experience that consumers can take from device to device.

You think, WTF? What’s the point? Why are Samsung and Intel and Sprint and others messing around with this? It sounds exactly like Android, just without the Google element…

…wait a minute — maybe that is the point!

The weirdest thing about Amazon getting into high fashion is this, as reported by Stephanie Clifford:

Amazon’s decision to go after high fashion is about plain economics. Because Amazon’s costs are about the same whether it is shipping a $10 book or a $1,000 skirt, “gross profit dollars per unit will be much higher on a fashion item,” Mr. Bezos said, and it already makes money on fashion.

That’s the opposite of Amazon’s model for everything else. All we hear about is how Amazon doesn’t care about profit margins — all they care about is revenue and getting to a Walmart-like scale where profit margins actually don’t matter. But this is Jeff Bezos directly contradicting that line of thinking. He’s touting the margin of this business.

Maybe Amazon is tired and/or a bit worried after watching their profit plunge quarter to quarter, even as revenues rise. That’s what trying to break into the hardware business will do. Maybe this is a way to offset those losses.

Or maybe this is part of Amazon’s plan to sell everything. It does seem likely that there’s no way they could sell designer fashion the way they sell other things (at a deep discount), no designer/brand would go for that. So this is the only way to break into the market.

But again, the article directly states that Amazon’s decision here is about “plain economics” and the Bezos’ direct quote also suggests that. 

So much for the Walmart plan. I guess Amazon will now try to be both a high margin and low margin business? Next up: a core focus on razor blades, ink cartridges, and mixed drinks.