Skip to content

About us

eCounsel group

A boutique firm with unparalleled expertise in business and technology. We have good command of industrial ecology and legal practice, and have undertaken highly regarded cases. Because the small business scope, we pay more emphasis on effectiveness and efficiency, and choose clients with deliberation. The managing partner not only has extensive experiences in various legal issues more over than 20 years, but invests and manages several technology companies. In addition, he always checks each case rigorously. Clients’ business objectives are our primary focus. To achieve the same in the most cost-effective fashion trumps all seemingly sophisticated legal discussions.

Subscription Based OTT Services: Cancel Anytime

2018 - 02 - 01

“Kevin Clarkson subscribed to CBS’s All Access streaming TV service shortly before the network’s “Star Trek” reboot premiered in September. He plans to cancel it soon after the season finale.” – WSJ

Streaming service providers not only provide quality video content for their users but also impeccable customer service experiences, of which the freedom to cancel the subscriptions at any time becomes an essential part of their services.

This flexibility, unfortunately, leads to a higher level of cancellation rate than in traditional TV, of which usually requires an annual contract with a deposit of sort. Therefore, streaming service providers, especially subscription based like Netflix, need to spend more on customer retention and development, in the expectation many customers will leave anytime.

According to WSJ, Netflix loses about 7% of its subscribers each year, which is pretty low comparing to many other smaller service providers who can lose more than 50% per year. Although most streaming services are relatively inexpensive comparing to traditional cable, many subscribers still try to “gaming the system a bit”, such as password sharing and unsubscribing regularly.

We think that the core value of OTT services shall be bridging the supply and demand, not simply boosting paid members with negative cash flow. An OTT service provider should attract users with sufficient metadata and content,  and collects user behavior and data for advertisers to place more effective ads, the ad revenue shall then be shared with the original content provider. Because in essence, Google and Facebook make money from ads, not original content.

Source:  Streaming TV’s Problem: Subscribers Cancel Service When Their Favorite Shows Are Over – WSJ Business 

Recommended article 

Internal Control Systems : Born With Flaws (Part 2)

Internal Control Systems are usually designed by accountants or underwriters according to company practices in similar fields and internal controls regulations. 內控機制的先天缺陷-制訂內控制度未能全面涵蓋重要營運事項 內部控制制度通常是由會計師或承銷商為公司所設計,但他們不是憑空產生,而是參照其他相類似產業的公司與相關法令的內部控制制度來設計的,然而其所引用、參考的母版對原來的公司而言都可能已經有不完備的現象了,更別提以削足適履、東打補釘、西改褲長的方式來為新的委託人規劃內控了,產生疏漏是命中注定的事情。    除了上述會計師、承銷商設計內控的問題之外,公司內負責執行內部控制作業的部門通常是內部稽核單位,但是內部稽核人員是否充分了解其他部門的作業習慣以及可能產生弊端之處呢?實務操作上十分困難。因為真正了解全盤情況的高階主管必須負責處理公司內比「撰寫內部控制制度」更迫切的問題如拓展業績、尋找有利之融資管道、規劃新的產品線及通路佈局、美化財報數字等,根本不可能將此種稀有人力資源花費在陪同會計師處理內部控制制度之問題上。 肇因於上述的兩個理由,企業的內部控制制度常常不符其需求。照道理來說,內部控制制度應該包含公司所有營運活動,而公司為他人背書保證、負債承諾、將公司資金貸予他人等處分公司資產之重要事項卻常未訂定相關程序,或是未訂有相關人員違反時的罰則。 如果對於公司本身背書保證、負債承諾、將公司資金貸予他人之行為不予控管,那麼就等於敞開不肖人士掏空公司的大門。管理階層可以輕易的動用公司資金來從事有利於其自身的活動,比如說未經董事會審核而將錢貸與或投資另一家管理階層人士掌控的公司、管理階層自己向銀行貸款而以公司資產作保,之後卻不償還債款致公司資產被變賣,這些行為都是實務上常見的現象,沒有一個有效全面的內控制度,公司資產安全堪慮! 印鑑管理也是某些公司會出現的問題,有些公司雖然訂有印鑑領用之程序,卻忽略印鑑有無歸還以及定期盤點印鑑,使印鑑易被盜用。無獨有偶,國票案及理律案都恰好在印鑑管理上有極大缺失,理律案因為「信任」兩個字而授權劉偉杰全權處理客戶股票事宜因而將相關印鑑統一由其保管;國票則是將印鑑隨意放置在員工辦公桌上,對於每個員工所持有的印鑑缺乏有效的管理機制,隨後才會引發一連串風波。

The Trump Effect

Markets worry about president-elect’s trade policy would be bad for Apple. Trump has publicly stated that he would force Apple to move its manufacturing back to U.S. 川普上台,市場普遍擔心新任美國總統的貿易政策將對蘋果不利,因為他曾公開表示:上任後將逼蘋果將產品生產搬回美國。川普效應對蘋果的影響,此篇作者的分析非常淺顯易懂,值得一讀,摘要如下: 1. 川普想讓蘋果回流美國製造及組裝 2. 川普請蘋果創造美國工人就業機會 3. 川普想對中國進口貨物課反傾銷稅 4. 川普想對企業調降海外盈餘匯回稅…

Housing: U.S Middle-Class Can No Longer Afford

Since 2012, U.S housing recovery has began in 2012, but a revamp housing market didn’t create an equal economic benefit for everyone, but a generation of renters who can no longer afford a house. Continue reading