Google Hor


Tech News

Nielsen: over 92% of viewing among U.S. adults still happens on the TV screen

Nielsen: over 92% of viewing among U.S. adults still happens on the TV screen

U.S. consumers may be cutting the cord with pay TV, but that doesn’t mean they’ve stopped watching the big screen, according to new data released by Nielsen this morning. In a report detailing the viewing habits of U.S. adults, the measurement firm found that 92 percent of all viewing among U.S. adults (those 18 and older) still takes place on the TV screen.

The data was collected during the fourth quarter of 2016, and compares TV screen-based viewing to viewing on PCs, tablets, smartphones, and other TV-connected devices like game consoles and streaming players such as the Apple TV, Chromecast, Roku and others.

Nielsen: over 92% of viewing among U.S. adults still happens on the TV screen

By combining the gross minutes viewed on TV (82.1 percent) with those minutes viewed using TV-connected devices (10.2 percent), Nielsen determined that the lion’s share of video watching continues to be on the big screen. Meanwhile, PCs accounted for 5.1 percent of video-watching minutes during the quarter, smartphones were 1.8 percent, and tablet video was only 0.7 percent.

These findings contradict the current belief that the increasing usage of mobile phones for video viewing has come at the expense of the TV.

“This analysis is based on actual, behavioral data and that is what makes Nielsen an industry leader,” said Peter Katsingris, SVP Audience Insights, Nielsen, about the company’s findings.

“What we found was that contrary to the popular narrative that smaller screens were taking away time from the TV glass, when we looked deeper we found that overall time spent viewing on the TV had the most minutes among every age or ethnic demographic looked at. In some cases the share of viewing was as much as 97 percent,” he added.

That’s not to say that TV-watching means linear television delivered through cable or satellite providers, of course. What sort of content was being watched was not a focus of Nielsen’s study. It’s likely that many of these consumers are not watching live TV, but are instead streaming Netflix or other video content from online services through smart TVs or attached players.

Nielsen: over 92% of viewing among U.S. adults still happens on the TV screen

However, while the TV still has a strong toehold for now in terms of total minutes spent viewing, when you delve into the data from other angles, you can see where the smartphone is gaining ground. For example, 91 percent of those 18 to 34 use smartphones each week, but only 79 watch TV. (However, these users do prefer TV-connected devices, as over half use them each week.)

In addition, smartphones account for 30 percent of the total average audience among those 18 to 34, versus 29 percent for TV. Compare that with the older age group (50+), where smartphones only account for 17 percent, and TV 54 percent. (Average audience is defined as the number of adults engaging with the platform in an average minute during the week.)

Nielsen: over 92% of viewing among U.S. adults still happens on the TV screen

And smartphones are more heavily used among this younger group (18-34) than TV, accounting for 19 hours, 39 minutes of weekly viewing, compared with 19 hours, 18 minutes taking place on TV.

Nielsen: over 92% of viewing among U.S. adults still happens on the TV screen

The larger takeaway here is that while


Riley raises $3.1M to help real estate agents rate and respond to their leads

Riley raises $3.1M to help real estate agents rate and respond to their leads

Businesses usually spend lots of time and money trying of attract potential customers. Now a startup called


Stealthy Boxbot wins the Pear prize for UC Berkeley with a tech for autonomous last-mile delivery

Stealthy Boxbot wins the Pear prize for UC Berkeley with a tech for autonomous last-mile delivery

It was a long road that took the two founders of Boxbot from drinks at Drake’s Dealership to winning the prestigious Pear Berkeley Challenge , but both Austin Oehlerking and Mark Godwin are very at home on the road.

The two had successful careers at Tesla and Uber, respectively, two companies that are inarguably on the vanguard of the autonomous driving revolution. But Godwin and Oehlerking both had been bitten by the startup bug, and wanted to solve the problem of last-mile delivery.

The still-in-stealth technology they developed was so impressive that it won the Pear competition — an annual event sponsored by the firm of the same name that awards $250,000 to a startup founded by students, alumna or professors from the University of Berkeley — along with some seed investments from House Capital Afore Capital and The Graduate Syndicate .

Given their pedigrees — even before joining Uber and Tesla — it’s little wonder that Godwin and Oehlerking took the top prize.

The 35-year-old Godwin began working with drone technology while at Berkeley, doing research for the Office of Naval Research. Godwin then became part of the team that Berkeley fielded alongside the University of Sydney to compete in the DARPA Urban Grand Challenge.

He then went on to found a company called Automa Systems , an early Uber competitor that eventually turned into an Uber for trucking. That company was on the cusp of signing a term sheet and raising capital when Uber approached Godwin with an offer he couldn’t refuse.

Stealthy Boxbot wins the Pear prize for UC Berkeley with a tech for autonomous last-mile delivery

For Oehlerking, the path was a little bit less circuitous, but no less impressive. After attending Massachusetts Institute of Technology as an undergrad, Oehlerking took a job as the director of vehicle engineering for Arcimoto , a Eugene, Ore.-based company making electric three-wheelers.

The 30-year-old co-founder then went back to grad school to do more work on electric vehicles, and landed a job at Tesla after graduation, where he worked on their partnership with Toyota, working on the Rav 4 drive train and then on the Model S.

Knowing that he wanted to run his own firm, Oehlerking returned to the East Coast to get a business degree from Harvard and then made his way back out West yet again.

The two men were introduced through a mutual friend from Harvard Business School, and were both on the same messaging channel for Stanford and Harvard alums interested in new mobility technologies.

Stealthy Boxbot wins the Pear prize for UC Berkeley with a tech for autonomous last-mile delivery

Those common interests spurred Oehlerking and Godwin to launch Boxbot. And while the company is still in stealth, one could imagine that their last-mile delivery solution will combine aspects of autonomy and drones.

A longtime supporter of student efforts a Stanford, Pear has been active investing in companies from the other side of the bridge thanks to the talent that’s been on display, according to Pejman Nozad.

“UC Berkeley is a boiling ocean of entrepreneurs,” says Nozad in a statement. “The next big thing might be coming from the other side of the bridge!”

The $250,000 equity commitment that Nozad


Judah vs. the Machines: For when you can’t bring yourself to go shopping

You’d be forgiven if you can’t be bothered to drag yourself to the store to shop for shoes and clothes and things for your bedroom. The internet is there for you, after all. But if you don’t know what you want? Well, I guess there is an app for that. And Judah Friedlander wants to take it on.


Snap said to leverage discounts to drive growth

Snap said to leverage discounts to drive growth

After a painful first-quarter miss, Snap, the parent company of the popular social app Snapchat, is looking to avoid the same fate in the second.

According to Digiday , Snap is working to drive new and increased business ahead of the end of its second quarter. To do so, the company is said to be cutting deals. In the words of the report, Snap is “looking to goose its ad business with offers of discounts and incentives to ad buyers.”

At least some of the discounts have an end date, it appears. The same report, citing “multiple agency executives,” notes that Snap’s proffered “bonuses, discount coupons and media credits for ad buys” are tied to the close of the second quarter. If the incentives work as likely intended, Snap could book new top line inside the current quarter that might help it meet or best market expectations.

Alex Wilhelm is the editor-in-chief of Crunchbase News and co-host of Equity , TechCrunch's venture capital-focused podcast.

More posts by this contributor:

Of course, incentives are not new, and potentially using discounts to drive growth is not something inherently bad. Snap declined to comment on the purported deals.

After its first-quarter miss, Snap’s share fell steeply, erasing much of the company’s post-IPO gains. Snap, which went public at $17 per share,  traded as high as $29.44 . It’s worth $21.30 today. Therefore, it is not surprising that Snap wants to avoid another embarrassing earnings miss. And to see the company allegedly turn to discounts with expiration windows is not an utter shock.

There is a bit more to the story, however, that we should understand by viewing Snap’s first quarter’s results inside of proper historical context.

Snap’s first quarter

Grounding Snap’s discounting push are its first-quarter results: The company grew rapidly, lost billions and missed expectations on both ends of its line. Snap reported first quarter revenue of $149.65 million. The street had  anticipated  a $157.98 million tally.

The company was expected to be deeply unprofitable in the quarter, due in part to one-time share-based compensation expenses. Even so, Snap bested the market’s expectation of a $1.92 per share loss with a steeper $2.31 per-share deficit.

And finally, Snap’s growth in daily active users, or DAUs, fell 2 million under the expected tally of 168 million.

That is broad context for why Snap may be pushing hard to ensure that it doesn’t miss again in the second quarter. A similar setback to its share price will put it either at or below its IPO price, a dramatic repudiation of the young company.

Second quarter dreamin’

As such, Snap must not miss when it reports its second-quarter results. But there is something lurking beneath the firm’s first-quarter miss that is interesting for us to consider: seasonality. Or perhaps more clearly: too much seasonality, and too soon.

In  its S-1 , Snap noted that it seasonality impact its business. That fact surprised no one. Ad-based businesses often see more sales during the fourth quarter when holiday buying cycles push consumer