Publishing

EPG Monitor

Decipher Publishing’s EPG Monitor is a comprehensive library of screengrabs and videograbs of the UK’s video on demand platforms. Delivered every quarter, this report provides clients with an easy to use guide of user journeys, channel branding and presentation of on demand content on the UK’s VOD platforms. Whether you’re interested in how competitor platforms are retailing their content, or how many platforms use their EPGs as a media space this report will give you the inside track on developments as they happen. Additionally, as a client of Decipher’s EPG Monitor you’ll have permanent, direct access to our analysts who can capture specific videograbs and screengrabs as you need them. Whether you want to see how the latest Lynx ad running on the box 360 or you want to know which films are using banners ads in Virgin media, or if you simply want to look at a basic user journey into catch up, the EPG Monitor delivers. Please contact This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it for more information about EPG Monitor and Studio facilities from iBurbia Education. 

Decipher Bulletin

The Decipher Bulletin is a monthly report which provides detailed analysis of emerging market and media trends. It is an essential read for senior figures or people aspiring to be senior figures in the evolving communications and emerging media markets.

Our bulletin is distributed to a select number of industry figures from across senior managerial positions at leading broadcasters, platforms, advertisers and brands. It's exclusive insight and knowledge, for an exclusive group of people. If you are interested in receiving our montly bulletin please contact us.  

To subscribe to the Monthly Bulletin click here or call Alex Street, the Product Manager for Publications. You can purchase individual monthly reports on our Reports and Publications page. 

 

TV Technology - a New USP?

Trade and national press articles describing acquisitions, partnerships and deals brokered between content owners and platforms are becoming more common. ‘HMV make iTunes downloads DRM-free’, ‘Amazon sign deal with TiVo’ and ‘Sky launch mobile TV channels on Vodafone’ (to name but a few) are dominating the headlines on a weekly basis.

Sky’s deal with Sony which allows PSP owners to access Sky’s programming and content on-demand over Broadband certainly stood apart from the recent announcements. Much of our recent research has focussed on how consumer and device-driven innovations are beginning to provide increasingly disruptive ways to watch TV content. Including:

• Place-Shifting Technologies (e.g. Sony Location Free TV, Slingbox) that allow people to access and use their Sky TV service via Wi-Fi anywhere in the world.
• Video over Broadband (e.g. BitTorrents, YouTube) that enable viewers to access content (illegally) for free
• ‘Cracks’ for Digital Rights Management Software that render any restrictions on moving video content around different devices meaningless.

Sky’s argument (quite rightly) has been that whilst their TV proposition in general is less technically advanced than their counterparts (less PVR tuners, lack of ‘true-VOD’ capability) they have always had the best range of TV content to serve to viewers. However in the new on-demand world where consumers have a heightened expectation of access to and control of content, even Sky are beginning to feel the full weight of the technical limitations of their platform. The lack of return path, ability to target audiences and true ‘Internet-like’ measurement has represented a significant barrier to Sky making the best use of their content.

Media Owners vs. Device Manufacturers

Whenever speaking to consumers in focus groups we often find that although content is king, functionality is fundamental. YouTube is a great example of how fusing TV content with PC like functionality (search, and on-demand viewing) provides a compelling platform for audiences to view content. This content often originates from traditional media owners and broadcasters (hence Viacom’s recent file for a lawsuit against Google). Whilst device manufacturers continue to create new distribution mechanisms to increase sales of their products and media owners struggle to control and monetise their content, they increasingly seem to be complementary rather than competitive organisations.

The Route To The Home Media Hub

Sony’s recent announcement appears to signal an emphasis towards creating more content deals as device manufacturers try to make their devices seem more appealing to consumers. From 2008 consumers will be able to buy a USB device that turns their Sony Playstation 3 into a HD capable Freeview PVR. The Sony PSP will be able to interact with the product to view live or recorded TV and set recordings. With Sony following fast taking the lead from Microsoft Xbox, PS3 owners will also be able to download HDTV and movies to their console storage capacity. Where once the PS3 was considered the incumbent king of gaming consoles, it is fast becoming a TV platform with HDTV, Blu-Ray, on-demand and place-shifting capability.

Final Thoughts

Recent developments within Sky and Sony appear to signal a realisation from content owners (even those with their own platforms) that device manufacturers are able to provide platforms with better functionality with which to let viewers watch their content. Device manufacturers appear to be resigned to the fact that TV is increasingly regarded as the ‘killer app’ to increase the attractiveness of their platforms, with obvious benefits to all market players by allowing.

• Broadcasters and media owners access to PC-like functionality including search or true ‘on-demand’ viewing to allow viewers to access their content.
• Advertisers and brands to effectively target and measure their campaigns across all platforms.
• Device manufacturers to increase sales of their products by focussing on making their platforms the most intelligent and consumer friendly way to watch TV alongside their core functionality (e.g. gaming).

Mobile Video Hits the Wrong Number

As the social role mobile phones play in our lives has evolved, the functional role they play has not developed at the same pace. Has mobile TV hit the wrong number then? Despite the ever-increasing level of functionality offered by mobile phones, only a minority have adopted these new video and media-rich services. Despite pushes by mobile operators to increase take-up, consumer behaviour has continued against the grain of the networks’ business plans, which had cited video downloads as an important future revenue stream. Potentially, this is a reflection of the ‘against the grain’ nature of entertainment services on a device predominantly seen as a tool for social and communicative purposes. For mobile video to make its big break, handsets need to break out from this narrow definition. ‘Mobile’ needs to mean media, as much as messaging in a converged device. This is a perception as well as a functionality issue. Perception of Orange = mobile phone network, yet Orange claims to be ‘‘the number one brand associated with film in the UK’’ (Orange, Jan. 2008). The brand lines are blurring along with the question of who will own and profit from mobile content. This is an issue that been hotly contested for some years, so it is perhaps unsurprising that innovation has come from outside of an industry built on profits from phone calls and text messages.

 

When Apple’s iPhone was released, it broke the mould in terms of mobile usability. It offered a level of technological integration and functionality that, in theory at least, made video and media rich services marketable. However, sales of the iPhone have not lived up the hype. Steve Jobs, Chief Executive of Apple, has accepted that to reach the mass market the iPhone needs to ‘‘more affordable’’ (FT, June 2008). Only 6m have been sold since launch, with only 2m of these having been sold this year - short of the 10m target for year-end, 2008. In terms of consumer perception, the iPhone was not a competitive proposition, hence the increasingly generous inclusive minutes and texts package that have brought it into line with the competition. This seems an acknowledgement by Apple that it has failed to sufficiently challenge the traditional market economics of the mobile communications industry, where competition has been defined by the number of minutes and texts offered for free and not the media-rich potential of the handset. Mass-market penetration of the iPhone could lead to mass adoption of video services, which could trigger adoption across other network providers on competitor handsets. The question is, who will profit out of this and where will the content originate from?

 

Traditionally, the video on most mobiles tends to be personal and reflects the social and communicative function of the device. In other words, it was recorded by the handset owner and is of people and events in their life. Video is often used then in a similar way to a text message or photo. As opposed to an extension of the handset’s overall functionality, it just creates a more media rich version of the existing functions. Significantly, the photos and video have typically been physically recorded onto the device and not acquired over the network. Of all the data services consumers are accessing, video accounts for one of the smallest parts: In recent months, around 9% of mobile users in the UK watched a video on their mobile, compared to 16% who accessed news or information via a browser, while around 27% have downloaded games and more than 30% have sent or received a video or photo-based message (M:Metrics, Feb 2008). This is in spite of mobile media’s relatively high reach, defined as subscribers who browsed or downloaded in any form in a month (below).

 

Age	Male	Female
13-17	32%	24%
18-24	39%	27%
25-34	35%	24%
35-44	26%	19%
45-54	19%	13%
55+	12%	11%

Reach of Mobile Media Usage by Gender and Age, Feb' 2008 (adapted from M:Metrics)

 

Video content has then been shared amongst friends commonly for some time, but little of it has been commercial. Much like a digital camera, consumers have used mobiles to record moments they wish to share later on. Our perception of downloadable video-content on mobile has then changed little since it was first launched. Users have adopted the mobile’s camera-like qualities, fused this with its communication functionality and defined their relationship with the handset on these terms. The iPhone, as stated earlier, is a converged device which occupies a different territory, in terms of these functionalities and the ease at which they can be accessed and experienced. This convergence means consumers will combine their expectation of an iPod’s media capability with that of a phone. However that’s not to say consumers will commence using the network operator’s download services - the iPod generation has been schooled differently.

 

Consumers believe that mobile video-content is slow to download and is unreasonably expensive. Consumer perception is reality and this reality has survived through successive generations of handsets. Unsurprisingly, the distribution and commercial models that existed for this initial generation of video content download services have now all but disappeared. The original business concept was promising - data-rich mobile networks would offer video content owners and advertisers high levels of targeting and accountability through their download services. The problem was that the consumer facing product was an inferior user experience. Downloads were slow, the screen was small and it was expensive, simply because the 3G license had been expensive - this made mass-adoption of 3G services a commercial imperative for the industry. The commercial imperative is much like O2’s heavy investment in the iPhone, however the difference on this occasion is that commercial success is in contract subscriptions, rather than in changing consumer behaviour. This is because in the top tariffs O2 has packaged ‘unlimited’ airtime as part of the subscription deal, so subscribers will have already agreed to pay more, regardless of the level at which they adopt the new services. Furthermore, contract length, subsequent reduced churn and perceived exclusivity also have a commercial value that should be accounted for. This is just as well, because mass market adoption of side-loading has effectively killed off the commercial marketability of a mobile-video download proposition. Side-loading is the process of shifting content from one device to another, in this case from a PC or PVR to a mobile, for example. Side-loading has become mass market precisely because it is straightforward, fast and cheap; often it even costs the user nothing. Even with 3G, mobile-video downloading is still by far the slowest method in the market, which is not to mention the difficulty of actually watching video on mobile, where the screen is too small make it a worthwhile and, more to the point, a sellable experience. It seems a lesson well learnt, as compared to the advent of 3G, when network operators, O2 included, began encouraging consumers to download over the network.

 

The iPhone has probably got the screen issue sorted, great quality and at a perfect size – no wonder Apple is getting into the video rental and download to own market. However to Apple, it’s more or less irrelevant whether you download over the network or side-load, because iTunes has locked down the device to both. This means an iPhone, like the iPod, can only run media content that originates from iTunes. Indeed, iTunes has the momentum transferable to video as it already takes ¾s of all music downloads (FT, April 2006). This approach to digital content management has consistently been at the heart of the company’s financial success. Apple has developed its existing relationship with consumers and shifted it across media types. Having attempted to build their own A/V propositions, networks are increasingly involving brands more commonly associated with TV in their efforts. Sky Mobile TV and it’s like up with Vodafone, Orange and T-Mobile are similar Apple’s approach, because it builds a propostion out of the existing relationship consumers have with the brands. There are 200, 000 Sky Mobile TV subscribers, who pay, on top of their existing mobile and Sky subscription, £3 for a basic ‘starter pack’, then £5 for sport, £5 more for music and a further £5 for an ‘entertainment’ pack. An expensive proposition, which begs the question, at what point Sky may use this line extension to outflank Virgin Media by making the content their subscribers have already paid for available across. Certainly the Playstation Portable is being ‘’groomed’’ as such device through the joint efforts of Sky and Sony; a proposition for Nintendo’s DS is though to be next on Sky’s list (Guardian, March 2006).These cross-brand initiatives are as much a reflection of the rights issues associated with the content, as they are an acknowledgement of the respective strengths of the brands involved; Sky on the content corner, Vodafone, Orange and T-Mobile in the network corner.

 

Indeed, if there is to be any new money on the table for mobile operators in the provision of video content it is likely, again, to be in facilitating behaviour that is built out of existing consumer relationships with the devices or platforms being used. For example, it looks like the mobile networks will increasingly be part of a video content solution pushed by platforms and content owners, like Sky, rather than building propositions of their own, which in perception terms is outside of their brand territory. On the other hand, users will continue to share ‘personal’ video with friends. This content will have been recorded or found its way onto the device through video-messaging or Bluetooth. So there may be an opportunity for brands to facilitate this viral banter, either by subsidizing or sponsoring video-messaging: such WKD ‘side’ banter could create richer media experiences around existing social behaviours. Indeed, one of the two big spikes in usage data for mobile video downloads is late at night, probably due to ‘‘the pub effect’’, states Mike Eaton, Head of Content at Vodafone (Guardian, March 2006). The other spike, perhaps unsurprisingly, is during the commuting period.

 

So where next for mobile video, has it hit the wrong number? As handsets evolve into fully functioning converge devices their multi-media role will expand in our lives, along with our perception of what ‘mobile means; mobile will no longer be synonymous with telephony, but a whole array of multi-media. The screen size will also become less of an issue as this transition from mobile phone to mobile device transpires. However, consumers will not be downloading over the network on mass just yet - side-loading has become too engrained. Additionally, consumers will expect the TV and video content they already pay for to make the transition across the three screens of PC, TV and mobile. This process should, if it is to push mobile video usage levels into the mass market, happen automatically and not incur any additional cost. Consumers will look to their TV provider to do this and therefore networks will need to link up with broadcasters and platforms, as rights owners will look to expand their rights into mobile. Mobile networks will then be part of an integrated video content solution, rather than the owners of independent video propositions. So mobile video may have hit the wrong number before, but this time it’s not so much redial as rethink what you mean by mobile TV.