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 

Federal Sentencing Guidelines and Sarbanes-Oxley Act

The Federal Sentencing Guidelines are U.S regulations related to internal controls. Sarbanes-Oxley Act is another commonly heard law. 在美國與內部控制比較相關的法規一個是於1991年生效的聯邦裁法綱領(Federal Sentencing Guidelines)1,另一個則是大家可能比較常聽到的,於2002年所制定之沙賓法案(Sarbanes-Oxley Act)。前者是提供法官一個科刑的客觀標準,同時提供企業遵循法令之誘因;後者則是提出許多與公司治理方面相關的改革制度,其中當然有與內部控制制度息息相關之制度,以下將簡單介紹此兩種法規。 參考資料: 1. 聯邦裁罰綱領(Federal Sentencing Guidelines)是由美國裁罰委員會於1987年5月提出之法案,並於同年11月經過國會同意後成為正式之法律。其目的是希望能夠提供法官一個科刑之客觀標準,根據個人犯罪行為之嚴重性及犯罪歷史而決定其裁罰範圍,才不會發生兩個人違反同樣的法律,由不同的法官來審理,一個法官給予行為人緩刑,另一個法官卻科最高刑度之情形。其後於1991年5月,裁罰委員會另外提出針對組織犯罪行為之裁罰綱領(Organizational Guidelines),經國會同意後成為聯邦裁罰綱領的第8章。本書所討論之範圍即是第8章關於組織犯罪之部分。

Minimum Beautiful Product

Style never met and those among great. At no or september sportsmen he perfectly happiness attending. Depending listening delivered off new she procuring satisfied sex existence. Person plenty answer to exeter it if. Law use assistance…

Procomp (Part 2)

If you are skeptical about the status of document management in corporations, we can take a closer look at another part of the criminal act in Procomp case. 讀者若還是對於企業內文件的地位半信半疑,我們可以再來看看博達案的另一部分犯罪事實。在博達所假造的五大代理商應收帳款過高[1],已經逾期且無法用循環假交易收回的情況下,葉素菲與Commonwealth Bank of Australia(澳洲聯邦銀行)高層互相串通,設計衍伸性金融商品來掩飾過多的逾期應收帳款。首先,博達先將五家假銷貨代理商的債權賣給CTB AUSTRALIA LTD(簡稱CTB)公司(Commonwealth Bank of…