affordable programming with easier access to mobile devices. this is just under half an hour. ntca foryou to the have any hosts this wonderful panel. the i interviewed and others i've been wanting to interview. i'm glad i have this chance to do that. let's get started. the most important personal question i have is for rob markets. -- marcus. after the deal gets done, what are you going to do? >> you are always picking on me. i get that asked a lot. i said the same thing to everybody. it is way too early for me to start on the next chapter. i have a lot ahead of me between now and closing. i will focus on that and not allow myself to be distracted. >> rob and i are neighbors in new jersey.

i know i've talked many times about consolidation in the industry. time warner cable and comcast only heard yesterday comcast will be offloading almost 4 million to charter. is are you a buyer or a seller here? >> you don't waste time, do you? i will tell you if i am a buyer or seller. >> are you actively looking? >> we are always looking for acquisitions that are strategic and add value to the company. it is a unique time in the business. there is a lot of consolidation. there is a lot of geometric changes in technology that is causing some shifts.

interest rates are a relatively all-time lows. it is a great time to buy. we kiss a lot of frogs before we find the right prince. >> outside of internet consolidation, in my view, are in the big threats really coming from down the pipe with google? those are really the big threats right now. >> there are several threats to the business. we have a programming cost structure that is growing at double-digit rates per customer. that is not sustainable. there is emerging competition from a number of companies that seem intent on getting into this crazy video business. , there is aed significant geometric change and new technology. those are the three risks.

we are trying to navigate through them. very videonk this centric view of the world that causes people to think of over the top providers exclusively as threats, and i have a somewhat counterintuitive view in that clearly over-the-top video is one of the things that highlights the value of the high-speed data connections that time warner cable and other cable providers offer our customers. so, the speeds, the robustness of our hd offering is made special by the fact that there is creative people delivering that content over the pipes. on the video side, there is the potential for competition, which is not bad. it drives us to be better than we were, but there is more that makes our offering more value. >> i would echo that.

clearly, social and video platforms are competing for dollars, advertising but we have a better product than they do, and when you hear yahoo! announced they want to commission comedy series, they want to get into our business. yes, they are competitive, but shame on us if we do not affect our turf and work together to sell the value because we have a better product with more value that is cheaper on a per hour basis with those companies and we are allowing them, in some ways, to accept the tone of the -- set the tone of the conversation. we should be setting the tone. we have the better project. >> it is easy for you to say that. you have a great job. you program sports, second of all, live sports. you are sitting pretty these days. >> i appreciate that. i do find that many people would

like to have my job, and almost all of those people are willing to tell me what i could be doing better as well. [laughter] there is no question we sit in a certain catbird seat. live sports is ascendant, and it is the most powerful form of programming on the planet. again, it is part of what we all do together. i make the same point. we need to be selling that. we have tried to use that to buttress the underlying power of this product to compete against those companies, and i think we need to continue to do that. >> even beyond line -- live sport, if you are in programmatic services, and nancy is in, and turner, the explosion of speed is dramatically increasing distribution. us,cost -- companies like it is fantastic. i think it will explode demand, and it will provide us opportunities to get products and services to more people in

more ways, in ways that they want to consume them, which we think will cement the value proposition -- >> of content. >> yeah. we do have a great offering today. i think all of the companies here are in incumbent skill positions to exploit those opportunities, and i think it is great for consumers. i think they are the ones that will win in all of this. >> one senior media executive had said to me one time, and i am quoting him because i do not want to offend anyone on this "look,but he said netflix is a perfect poster child of the failure of the cable industry to innovate." what do you say to that? i am highly skeptical of that comment. i am not sure that i get it. the fact that someone cap with

an interesting technique of aggregating and reselling other people's content over the cable infrastructure is in no way, in my opinion, a failure of the cable industry. >> you are seeing consumers use both. that is missing here. we would all like to be in a business where we do not have to report our numbers, two, so you are dealing with a netflix and amazon that is not sharing their viewership. anecdotally, there is a lot you are hearing a lot less about "house of cards" season two than season one. how do you work to renegotiate future seasons if nobody has metrics to base anything on? >> when you have a sony, to you and say look at our platform, look at what we can do with your content, what do you say? >> everyone has heard the pitch. they probably saw it last year at the cable show. it is a beautiful-looking

platform. i do wish that our cable partners would take a closer look at how do we make the consumer experience better and better. that is where the partnership between, i think, the programmers and the operators, needs to be solidified. let's get out of the way of the negotiations, and in front of, you know, putting the consumer first, and putting the experience first, or a lot of competitors and technology companies will pass us by. >> can i take a different view? i do not know who mentioned that about netflix as a failure of the cable industry. >> are you trying to get me to name names? >> i am the gray hair on the panel, literally and figuratively, and what i remember is netflix would not even exist if it were not for the cable industry that developed the dialogue internet -- dial-up internet to the cable

system with the fastest speed than most capacity. so, there are a lot of companies that are in existence simply because we as an industry spent a lot of time in capital building the internet is this. >> they are actually existing on the infrastructure that you built, and on the content that we produce. it is ok. competition is not a bad thing. we have to do is respond, and figure out ways to innovate. i agree with nancy. one of the things we're doing that is important is figure out how to make authenticated television work, and allow people to get their content on every device in an easy mechanism because we could compete there. we have superior content. we have to have superior delivery systems to distribute the material error >> i have to amplify that one point -- material. >> i have to amplify that one point -- if there is a call to action in this convention or gathering, i think it is this -- for programmers and should bidders to work together to

continually improve the consumer experience -- consumers to work together to continually improve the consumer expense. authentic content is a barrier to usage, and if you polled the majority of the people sitting in the audience, and asked them what is the username and theword given to them by platform provider, the overwhelming majority of you all in the industry probably do not know -- i have three homes with three cable providers and i do not know anywhere -- any of them, so i do not have television everywhere because i cannot figure out how to use it. we have to make it easy, consistent, and the idea of dramatically improving the availability and robustness of video-on-demand is the single biggest opportunity that we, together, can create, which would create value for the district understand the programmers. >> the consumers wanted. in one short year of our tv offered,e app being

they have been downloaded more than 11 million times, but the is not great, and that means it is too difficult to do. 2010 world cup, one out of every three hours of viewing was on a device outside of additional television. that was 2010. we are getting ready to the world cup in june, and my guess is it will be north of that. >> what is the biggest challenge for you, john, when you see that? >> the biggest challenges i to committed by john martin here, we need an easier process of authentication. the people in silicon valley, they do this by simplification. once they have something, they can sniff it out and deliver you the content. >> i could give you that have perspective, for our part we are making great strides , available on a

platforms, and the most recently we announced on fantv. smarton android, samsung tvs. the video offering is available everywhere. usage has been impressive and growing quickly. ofgree that the process authentication used to be easier, but the early returns are quite good when you think about the fact that this way of viewing video did not even exist several years ago. the fact that last month we had one million unique users accessing our video product via something other than a set top box is significant. >> rob, when you hear the programmers say there is more than just authentication as an issue, but let's say you take that one issue as a cable industry. the operators are working on that, and as john martin says, working together, but you have silicon valley and the tech companies figuring out in that

time, in the space of a few months, they are able to figure out -- >> yes, but without content, the tech companies are just building platforms. they can build away -- >> most tech companies are creating content too, now. >> we like the dual model, a dual revenue stream, and do not want to go away. >> by the way, it is not either/or. i do the opportunity to collaborate with that tech companies as being part of the openness that time warner has demonstrated had the factor we are making video available on devices and unit -- user notrfaces that we do control is something that gives customers more choice. this contentng up providers versus cable providers is a false split. about provide a better customer experience. look, our customers are going to go to a netflix and two others,

and we want to make it easy for our customers because we want to be the provider of choice because as rob indicated, the more and more content that you view online, the more you're going to want to come to the cable, high-speed service, because it is the best out there. >> so, john skipper, when a line rob and jerry.g >> doubting them? >> gouging. >> i do not doubt the more gouge them. >> that got some applauses. is to createhe job value and work with distributors to sell their products in the market, and there's no question we greater the product with the most value, and it is the most expensive product in the market to create and to sell, and nobody doubted. ofry year they do a survey what is the most valuable network, and it is always espn.

we worked very hard with our partners, with you guys to create value. we were the first in the market with authentication. we were the first in the market with an hd channel. we were the first in the market with a 3-d channel. we are open for business to do things that create value, and i do not think there is any doubt that in this market that the single greatest buttress her of the -- buttress of the pay espn.s -- i hear this a lot. i am respectful of you asking the question, but we need to be working together because we are providing something of great value that people want. there is another canard in the market, the notion that only a few people are watching sports and other people are paying for product they do not watch. 150 million people consume espn every week. 86% of people do consume espn in a corner. it is not the case, no matter how may times barry diller says it, that a few people are

watching sports and a bunch of grandmothers are paying for it. it is not the case. >> my mother loves it. there's a grandmother in a house that was a lot of espn. >> i do not know many people that do not have someone in the household not watching espn. is a nice rhetorical device, but not effect. >> your predecessor has been vocal about the fact that programming costs are getting out of hand. >> there is no question where a model where your cost of goods sold is growing at a rate that exceeds that the market will bear at retail is problematic for the sustainability of our overall ecosystem. john has his own problem. when he goes to negotiate with teams and leagues and conferences about the next round of licensing deals, he has costs that are also accelerating. so, there is a fundamental problem in the ecosystem. at the end of the day, we have to figure out a business model to pay forillingness

these elements of content, whether it is john or a distributor, are more responsive to what customers are actually willing to pay. you have a disconnect now which is that for the most part john is not going directly to end-user customers, so he does not have the feedback loop to guide what he is willing to pay for product. we are stuck in the middle. that is a problematic element of the model. we have to figure out how we introduce a greater degree of flexibility that gives us more consumer feedback, that ultimately drives cost profit. >> our products are sold at the same rate, so we are making discrete choices about how to make investments to make our network-branded environment as valuable as possible to each industry bidders as well as consumers. >> i do not want to be cavalier, but rob is right. there is pressure on prices. it is a $70 billion business, and we are making money, but since all of us have pressure to grow, we're not going to all

grow and make more money, unless we can figure out a way, which is why i was advocating we have sub becausepay-tv if you have a stagnant market, we will have pressure, and we will find we are discussing who is getting a larger or smaller share. there was not this discussion when there was a growing pie, going from 70 million households with pay-tv, 280 million, two 90 million. we have to find a way to grow the pie. >> we are always following the trap of focusing on this are cost problem, which is a real --, but it is a list important to all of us to tout the value that we deliver to the customer every day. it depends on the calculation, but it is not unreasonable to assume that roughly -- that we essentially charge customers $.20 an hour of video viewing. that is a staggeringly good value by any measure, and

sometimes -- >> you said $.20 an hour. >> $.20 a viewing hour, which i think is well worth the price of admission, and very often in the context of these conversations, what we do have to grapple with a programming cost issue, we loose track of the fact that we are still delivering tremendous value. >> are consumers at a breaking point? >> there are some segments of the population where affordability is a real issue. >> yes. >> we have to figure out ways to design products that accommodate the more budget-conscious customers. we have light video, light hd products that are designed to not necessarily deliver all of the capabilities of the full products, but that meet certain customers budgetary needs, and it is essential that we be able to do that. >> i am concerned that we're going to reach a tipping point where we are going to start pricing some households, ethically those with distressed household incomes, out of the market -- particularly those

with distressed household incomes out of the market. we need to have the flexibility, working with program partners, to be able to offer less expensive tears. >> à la cart pricing? >> not necessarily à la cart, because i do not know how you do that. and what they say here are 300 channels, go through each one and tell me if you want it or not? but more affordable types of packages what people have more choice rather than putting everything in an expanded basic until. unless we do that, one of three things is going to happen. cable operators are going to have to continue to raise prices, which is not consumer-friendly. the government is going to get involved, like they are in canada. they are starting to take steps to doing mandated à la carte. or, operators are going to have to make tough decisions about what programmers i am going to carry, and which ones am i not going to carry. >> some consumers are given à la carte already through netflix,

amazon -- it might not be à la carte in the way we thought it could arrive, but the customers have choice, and they are still overwhelmingly choosing cable. >> because they want to watch espn. [laughter] channel, or cnn, or tbs, but i hear a lot of talk about it -- what would create the action with the entire industry starts to pull -- trend that way? >> as some operators this -- discovered they will not carry certain programmers because it is too expensive, or we continue to see prices rise and some people start disconnecting from cable altogether. that will put a lot of pressure on all of us if we hit that point. >> speaking about programs and content, i want to ask programmers, clearly, you are looking for the big hit shows.

you're looking for the next big "duck dynasty," right, or the next big show on cnn. how do you find that? is it getting harder to find that? >> absolutely. the demand for content has never been greater, and the competition for creative talent has never been greater. it is probably the most commonly asked question in the turner &eoup, and certainly in the a group. there is not a single machine. it is a taste-driven, instinctual art of the business. i think it is about having ipeccable relationships with creators, show runners, directors, writers, and we spent a lot of time in our company focused on that, and we get it wrong a lot, but we get it right more. those are the odds that we are

playing. i worry a lot about where the next generation of creators is going to come from. >> why? >> i look around and i see a lot of smaller production companies selling for astronomical prices, and people cashing out, and the is optingof creators to go to youtube, opting to go , different avenues. how do we attract them to our platforms and our storytelling, and our systems? i worry a lot about that. >> as do we. i think we have an advantage position in that ecosystem, though, because it really is about brands and scale. i think in order to stay relevant, we are going to need to try to find those taste-makers, or those individual voices that are not being exploited on television turner, wefor us at

spend almost $4 billion a year on programming costs, so, it feels like we are in a good position to be able to not be able to be outspent by competitive forces, but we have to be able to have those outstanding relationships with the creative community, which you need to consummate cultivate and turnover. i think it is an amazing development in television that the number one show on television is on cable. >> the number one, and the number two, maybe. >> we are talking about -- >> "walking dead." dead," ok. >> at the number of years ago, people would have said that is structurally impossible. if you can find that good of the voice, you can see that cable is as strong a vehicle as any to which the consumer. i would look to see over the next five years any remaining distinction between broadcast and cable annihilated, blown up, it is irrelevant. we have some of the most profitable television networks in the world. we want to be in the market with

the very best projects and we want the best people working for us, so -- >> it is getting harder. there is an arms race for programming, and there is more outlets for people to express individuality. >> all right, well, i wish we had more time, but we have to wrap up. u.s. a much to a great group of panelists, and a great discussion -- thank you so much to a great group of panelists, and a great discussion. >> thank you. [applause] >> the next panel from the 2014 cable show looks at how technology will impact the future of the cable industry. michael freeze has the international cable company liberty global, and phil mckinney is president and ceo of the research and development group, cable acts. they are among the speakers. this is 20 minutes. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> great to be with the three of you, and i want to pick up on some of the conversations you heard with the other panel.

you, one ofil, to the hd things we heard from the programmers was how the technology, for the cable companies, has not really caught up with what consumers want, and has not made its moving up -- this whole idea of tv everywhere. what is coming out of cable lapse, your company, that will allow the consumer experience to be better and better? >> from our perspective, one of the areas we are working closely with all of the members and cable operators on is the improvement of high-speed data. feedse the multi-gigabit that allow members to consume more of the content. the second area is the improvement of wireless, wi-fi in the home, in the community -- those kinds of things. previousnts from the panel about the ease of authentication, there's a lot of work going on along -- are --

amongst the members of how to do a better job of identity management and authentication. it automatically happens. the user does not have to think about it, a member what their long and credentials are, in order to get access to those services. there's a lot of work going on in a lot of different areas, and everyone in the industry has rallied around how to make that insanely simple. >> i am curious on authentication, since it became a topic we were focused on, i guess, why didn't the industry figure that out that that would be a problem for customers before rolling that out? >> i think part of it is the complexity of the variety of devices that people want to consume on, the radical changes happening in the technology state -- look at things coming out of silicon valley. there is something new every other day people get excited about. the other is making sure that you have the rights and you are approved to distribute that

content. so, part of it is a little bit of catching up on the technology side, but also getting the -- negotiating the rights to deliver the content on those devices. just because you have the rights on tv, it does not mean, as a cable operator, you have the right to deliver that content on a tv everywhere, so you may not -- entireentitled channel lineup from your cable operator, and it is not because of the cable operator, but it is the industry not catching up to the distribution rights to allow you to do that across all of those device that forms. >> mike, when you look in your company five years from now, do you believe -- i have heard this from many ceos -- technology and innovation from silicon valley will transform your company and it will look different in five years? >> it is already. i would have answered the question about netflix differently, so if you want to ask me at all -- [laughter]

technology has driven aspect -- every aspect of our business, changing how we interact with content providers, the rights that we secure online, out of home, off footprint, in multiple windows. it has impacted a relationship with regulators. the entire net neutrality debate is about video. do not be confused for a second. it is half of the consumption on the network today. in europe, it is less, but it is growing. whether it is a fast lane, or volume-based billing, it is all about video, so it is changed, very much, our relationship with regulators. it has impacted the competitive environment that we operate in. so, the innovation you are describing, netflix, for example, has already impacted us . i will tell you one thing, it did expose a failure of hours. it exposed we have a massive functionality gap. we have great content. we have great networks. we have massive, you know, speeds, and terrific

relationships, and great programming delivered a -- delivering, we had a functionality gap. cooler, simpler to access content through a netflix environment, navigate, search, the recommended to. we are bridging that gap. we have launched horizon in europe. i see it in my household. i kids spend far more time on x2 than they do on other environments because it is giving people what they want, a better user expense, a slicker environment. if you bridge the functionality gap, which we did not do, you solve the problem. >> this is open to all three of you, what happened there, what happened with not seeing the functionality gap, as you call it? >> did we invent the dvr? no, but every cable provider offers a dvr today. you do not have to be first, necessarily, to find your own weaknesses, and react to them. i am not concerned about long

run, and i do not think most operators are, but we have to work together because it requires skill to deliver a new experience. so, we are collaborating with comcast and time warner on a software environment that works for advanced set-top boxes and cloud-based interfaces. if we were together as an industry, we can achieve anything, quite friendly, but i do not stress the past, just worry about the future. what is -- tell me about what's is going on with your investments in mobile in the canadian market. >> well, we are a mobile company, so, i mean, we are a cable company, but we are a mobile company, too, so we do not experience some of the same problems that are existing down here. notffer wi-fi, but we do offer it as a competitor to ourselves. we just offer it. there is a big, big difference in how we approach mobility.

it all amounts to the same thing in the end. want smallns, people screens -- want to watch it everywhere, anywhere, anytime, and they want to get to it as easily as they possibly can. that is all it is. it is very simple. >> yet. >> what is the future of screens? in five years, what will the screen look like for the consumer? what is it? >> everyone gets all excited 4k, ultra-high-definition, but today, when you look at, you know, what people are doing on the small devices they carry in their pocket -- i still think we will see a wide diversity of devices, and people will take the appropriate content, long-term for the bigger screen.

screen skies this -- screen sizes will grow. they will start at 55 inches and go bigger or your home at 4k. you need that size to detect a resolution. >> i will say one thing, big screens are alive and well. >> are you surprised that people can watch movies on a small screen? theof viewing is still on big screen. that 15% is coming from other activities. of tv time is relatively flat. at the cable industry, it is good news. when you walk into the household, if you have children and you do not immediately on theted them to get wi-fi network, the at&t or verizon bill is through the roof appeared 70% of tablet activities in the household. -- the roof.

seven percent of the tablet activities in the household. 70% of the tablet activities are in the household. our services are available on all devices. yourrope, you can watch television on any device. we're somewhat indifferent to that. i'm not concerned. >> what is the biggest difference yet seen between the u.s. and european markets? same basicthe drivers. we are so focused on triple play penetration. about broadband speed in consumption and penetration. we have huge markets like germany was 70%. 30% still has the at all. we have a million homes still watching analog television. really an us is

important part of our growth. it is a third of our growth for the next five years. we are very much in the mobile business as you are. we are doing it through reseller arrangements. mobile is a big piece of our business. the macro environment is solid. it is all too percent or two percent gdp growth. telecom environment is fragmented. we got 50 billion and acquisitions in the past five years to help consolidate the european market. that is inevitable. consolidation is important. >> consumers in europe or overseas, are they consuming in a different way? >> our average consumer is downloaded 1.7 gigabytes a day. that is up eightfold in the last seven or eight years, growing

30% or 40% a year. same as the u.s. our broadband speeds are little faster. our average consumer today is getting 50 megs. the vast majority of our new ads are 100 megs. we had to push the speed accelerator. it is a slightly more indebted to markets. that is why 3.1 is hugely important. about 3.1. how transformational is it going to be for consumers? >> from the standpoint of the consumers, the european members of moving very aggressively into the higher speeds and above. cable operators on a roll out basis. we have been able to negotiate a consensus standard globally. it will be able to give you multi-gigabit, 10 gig down, 1 gig up. that is the criteria.

existing plan. from the standpoint, there is no digging new digits. the thing you have to do to the whole. everyone is what doing in the able to take that. rather than we get into arguments over fiber, look. fiber miles,e where the largest employer of fiber today. maybe it is better out there. how are you going to serve all of the homes that we serve today? you have to have a technology that works. first order the type partners this year. certification begins and 15. we will see this in the second half of 2015. >> how widely adapted do you think it will become?

>> we now cover all of north america, europe, asia, china, japan, taiwan. as with 3.1, we roll it out immediately. we have fiber competition and media competition. speed is a very important part there -- factor. we work together as an industry. there needs to be more of that. scale is everything in this business. everything in the audience knows that. without a scale we do not thrive. we're competing with hyper giants. they do not have to build networks or do anything. as an industry -- >> how close are you watching charlie? >> i can see is building for my office. >> he is going to be rolling out

internet tv, his version this summer. how closely are you watching it? what do you think? a very smart,is successful entrepreneur. i think you would be well advised to watch everything and anything he does. he does have the old pioneering spirit were not everything he does is going to work. he is ok with that. you watch what he does but you also realize that a certain amount of things are not going to work and he is cool. he measure success differently than the rest of us in some cases. isterms of what he launching, he is working on for quite some time. >> the key there is he has to watch everything. if you're going to play the the only ideae, is or so. he had to be able to be willing and opel to really reach out to other people into it they are doing.

>> tell me your thoughts on that. they have this early on. they continue to play. it is important. it is how the internet is going to be treated. >> we roll the netflix out on the tivo platform in the u.k. and it is doing fine. we actually partnered with netflix. you can search for content. it will search everything including netflix. watch know,to lying. but you do not have to leave our environment necessarily. >> is it popular this way? >> it is working fine.

we may launch our own services we will really differently in each market. it is important for all of us to be willing to embrace that form of it into steel the best of it. be just as well. that is key. >> we spoke a couple of things that consumers want. authentication is one of them. it also hires faster speeds. they want to have a seamless interface. from your experience being in touch with consumers, ultimately, what is the holy grail? that isthe holy grail really going to make a difference? >> i can tell you what it is not. we still have not come up with the proper formula for consumer

care. us.an, it is plaguing we are spending more money. we are developing more systems. expectations are rising, too. we might have satisfied them on five years ago. us.they are expecting they are still love their own what they expect us to be delivering. as is a major problem for us. >> why do think that has not been addressed fast enough? people spend all their full-time on this thing. it is just a tough nut to crack. >> we have done a couple of things differently. we have had some success in europe. 90% of our advanced setups are self install, plug and play. we need can just set something in and it works and avoid the

phone call, that is magic. consumers appreciate that. netlso have indebted promoter scores. -- created next promoter scores. are the ratings of the cable operators in europe-they are here? >> i do not have the numbers but we struggle from the same issues. it is a high touch business. nobody ever calls google. we have to be much better at that. >> is there any technological innovation or something where it addresses this? >> there's a couple of things. we have been working very closely with the operators are working on predictive tools. there are customer satisfaction issues. it is some form of an outage. we have done the second actually predicts issues before the

consumer ever sees the problem. the key there is that you can solve it so they will never have it. nothing is ever 100% foolproof. issue really address the before the consumer ever sees them? then you head them off. you do need to raise that bar. it is shared. this is not something where the industry sticking their heads in the sand. has thousands of people who constantly are working at how do i do this? how do i take this out? how do i reduce this issue? this is a high-tech industry. >> this has been counted out. you're young and probably do not remember. i would not bet against it. we did this many times in the last 50 years. i think we have tremendous opportunity going forward. wrap up thisave to

panel. thank you so much for all of you. >> thank you very much for lonnie to host this panel. have a great show. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] cable industry got some attention on capitol hill this the week with a hearing on proposed merger between comcast and time warner cable. david: and robert mark is both testified before the house judiciary committee. and roberthen marcus both testified before the house judiciary committee. this is from day two of the expo. it is about 20 minutes. all, thank you for

joining me on this panel. a very timely one. we got a good-sized audience. let's address the elephant in the room right off the bat matt was telling me his rock band -- broadband speeds at home last week. by about half. midst ofs in the attempting a distort merger with time warner keep. from a communications month ago did not mince words describing how bad you thought the deal was for consumers. partly you said from the regulatory perspective it is difficult to imagine a transaction that could concentrate this more than the proposed comcast -- comcast merger. concentrationhe

of subscribers that will now be less. earlier this week there was a transaction where comcast been off some subscribers to charter. is that entirely make this a good deal? is a greatnk it deal. it is a great deal for comcast. >> what took you from bad to good? well, it is a smaller deal from the comcast perspective. i think from an organization of the industry first that did it is a much better outcome. to competeable better as a result the way the

assets are deployed around the country. it is good for the in place of .he company both are committed to serving the community and serving their customers in a dynamically positive way. grew up, 23 years at time warner cable. i have enormous respect for the people that work there and the quality of the people there. of the people in time warner will be ending up in great company. i think the people moving from charger and comcast -- charter end up int will all a better, more efficient industry committed to being successful. al franken has been pretty outspoken in the senate about how he feels about this. why thes out reasons impact on consumers.

most people on an individual level know their experience calling up the cable company trying to get something. what can comcast do to win the customer better? you see the numbers. they have a billion 200 million people around the world using facebook. netflix just hit 35 million. we are getting 7 million more customers. a little bit i agree totally with trying to give the industry a better opportunity to have a footprint regionally that can't compete better. to your question, if you go out

to the show, you will see our platform which is a game changer. being able to take the brains of that experience that for 50 years has been in a box and move it to the cloud to a state-of-the-art technology and the able to quick remote control and as fast as you can normally can indicate with a box now go to denver and back in the same amount of time, which is haveboggling and therefore wherever in the cloudy might be going is going to give consumers better services, better features there are better benefits for making the service better. from showtime's perspective, you provide content. there is a play in the streaming gain. -- game.

these after very important and popular. how do you see a transaction now.bthe ones overwill not work streaming. we will see how it all plays out if the merger goes through. does that matter to you? >> sure it matters to us. it is great to be up here with the entire cable industry now. [laughter] the biggest benefit we see is that my pne is going to go down. we have great relationships with charter and comcast. the business is evolving very quickly. , this use app world of technology to better serve our customers. we have notogue

just charter or comcast. i think there will be situations like that that will take the themselves out. we're trying to work on the brains, what we're delivering to consumers and using whatever technology is available to us among diverse forms. to make sure more our customers get our product when and where we wanted. we talk a lot about the cloud. cloud is not a brand. it is something that exists over there and may help someone sitting with an iphone or an ipad. they use showtime. guys have see these all of the technology. >> i would just add if i could that if you look three years ago

, homage of from ways there were to get showtime versus 2013 and to see all the content you produce in the platforms it is on, the competitiveness, the rapid way it is all changing. if you step back, we just thought this with olympics. there was tremendous content available on all platforms. there's always going to be a specific case. each company finds a way to support an innovative -- innovate it. i look at twitter's role as helping social media change the way people here about things -- hear about things. there are a lot of positives about ways to consume about one third have not been there all the years.