AUTOMOTIVE MULTIMEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS

Detailed system and semiconductor demand analysis for in-vehicle infotainment, telematics and vehicle-device connectivity features.

February 16, 2011 21:16 rlanctot

Traffic data programs have long consisted of three elements: incident data, flow data and the behind-the-curtain algorithms that make all this information work smoothly together. With the emergence of multiple screen and multiple platform opportunities, though, has come the fourth element: video animation.

In the U.S., as in most markets, there is a limited supplier base for these information types. In the U.S., incident data is primarily available from a combination of public authorities and three radio broadcast organizations: ClearChannel, Westwood One and the Broadcast Traffic Consortium. Flow data is mainly sourced from Inrix, Traffic.com, TrafficCast, and AirSage. (Any organization, such as Google, is theoretically capable of creating flow data from GPS probe inputs from handsets or fleets.)

The companies with the data algorithms to process the incident and flow data into standard traffic information products are mainly limited to Inrix, Traffic.com and TrafficCast. Westwood One, which acquired Metro Traffic and Smart Route, has never created its own independent traffic data service, though it does produce and distribute traffic reports.

With the emergence of traffic video and multiple-screen traffic products and services has come the fourth element. Traffic animation is a valuable commodity in the traffic business. When it comes to monetizing traffic data, broadcast radio and television remain dominant. To better compete, suppliers of video have sought to extend their products and affiliated sponsorships to the Internet and mobile devices.

Live traffic feeds on television during rush hour are available throughout the U.S. and in most markets around the world. In the U.S., though, there are four sources of video traffic animation: Triangle Software/Beat the Traffic, The Weather Channel/WSI, Traffic.com and Westwood One/SigAlert.

Two companies are currently positioning themselves to lead the drive toward traffic-only cable channels: Triangle Software/Beat the Traffic and TangoTraffic, which uses Traffic.com animations and traffic data. Triangle Software/Beat the Traffic is in the process of suing Westwood One/SigAlert over the alleged infringement of multiple patents governing the representation of traffic data in three dimensions as well as routing and segment speed calculations – five patents in all. Also named in the lawsuit are TomTom, Volkswagen and Garmin.

Triangle/BTT, TangoTraffic and Westwood all have their sights set on three screen solutions – TV, Internet, phone – with Triangle the furthest along, followed by Tango and Westwood. The legal action, though, has both highlighted the importance of 3D traffic representations, while casting a shadow on Westwood’s prospects.

With the help of private equity group Gores Group LLC, Westwood has been assembling a traffic solution capable of serving as an alternative to dominant players ClearChannel, Inrix and Traffic.com. The company has cut distribution deals with TrafficLand (Dept. of Transportation traffic cameras) and AirSage (handset signaling data) and acquired SigAlert. In addition, the company is in the process of implementing Gewi’s traffic database system.

Westwood has been able to convert AirSage’s handset signaling information into flow data and has extended SigAlert’s reach beyond its original southern California territory. At the same time, Westwood has extended its products from television and the Internet to handsets. In spite of all this effort, Westwood is still confronting much larger and more entrenched competitors and now must contend with Triangle’s legal action.

The only good news emerging from the legal action is that it validates the value of the data processes behind traffic reporting and imaging. The bad news is it puts financial pressure on an industry still seeking to establish its validity with consumers. Sirius XM is learning the painful lesson that consumers have a limited interest in paying a monthly subscription for traffic data. The failure of the subscription model for traffic has served as a major impetus to pushing traffic into ad-sponsored monetization schemes driven by broadcast sources.

The emergence of traffic television channels, though, in the form of TangoTraffic (Comcast/Fios in the Philadelphia area) and Beat the Traffic (Time Warner in Southern California), may help to raise the profile of traffic information. With a higher profile and more revenue may come new solutions capable of delivering more timely and accurate reporting of traffic incidents on more platforms – maybe even in cars.

Conclusion:

The clash over video – both actual DOT video and animated “flyovers” – is an interesting one with significant implications for the automotive industry. Triangle Software’s video animations of traffic, which continue to see additional enhancements including 3D building representations resembling existing mobile and embedded navigation solutions, are changing the way people consume their traffic information. These images are redefining the value and usability of traffic information.

Car makers and their suppliers are still struggling to determine the most appropriate way to bring traffic video images into cars – either as still black and white images or color-coded 3D animations. At the same time, mobile device makers such as Route 66 and TomTom are making use of augmented reality to overlay traffic guidance on live video images of the road ahead or with enhanced junction views.

The resolution of Westwood’s, TomTom’s, Garmin’s and VW’s legal tussle with Triangle is less important than the business model implications of multi-screen traffic solutions and the emergence of new ways to visualize traffic information. Whatever the result it can’t help but be better than the old familiar and inferior red-green-yellow.

Further Insight:

- Next Gen Traffic, Navigation: Hyper Local, Global & Always On - Insight Report - Lanctot - Automotive Multimedia and Communications Service


December 22, 2010 14:12 rlanctot
SAIC brought its InkaNet embedded telematics system into the market earlier this year at the Beijing Auto Show under the Roewe brand. The system is now available in dealer showrooms and it is opening eyes to the possibilities around innovative telematics solutions in China and elsewhere. The ability to deliver location-aware advertising is one capability worth a closer look especially for its potential to subsidize telematics services. The InkaNet system was created with the assistance of Pateo. The founder of Pateo is also the founder of Energy Source, which is an advertising agent established in 2001. The functionality of the system, described in literature distributed in Roewe dealerships, includes a wide-range of location-relevant applications and services. While the system does not explicitly state this objective or capability, the description of the system suggests it may well be the first automotive system (in China) able to deliver location-relevant advertisements. If so, it is not unlike the service deployed in New York City cabs by Creative Mobile Technologies. Fitted for rearseat viewing by taxi passengers, the Creative Mobile Technologies solution is able to use GPS data to determine when and where ads are shown in the rearseat. The system also enables credit card payments and CMT has started to release data regarding the kinds of information passengers have requested from the system by day of the week, such as news, weather, sports, business, Zagat or People Magazine. New York’s taxi commissioner commented in a recent NYTimes article that in lieu of demanding advertising revenue, the city hoped that the additional income for vendors might encourage them to lower the fees they charge to cab owners, which could in turn reduce the pressure to increase fares. The only current player in the telematics eco-system offering the prospect of sponsored content or services is Pioneer Electronics with its Platform for Aggregation of Internet Services (PAIS). Pioneer has made clear that this social networking oriented system, enabled through a smartphone connection or an embedded module is built around a revenue sharing model unmatched in the industry. As Google and Bing bring their browser battle to the automotive segment, the opportunity for sponsored search or other subsidized content in the car is on the table. (Will Baidu offer sponsored search for connected cars in China?) And ClearChannel’s iHeartRadio Internet radio service deal with Toyota Motor Sales could include some advertising or promotional element. It is worth noting that one of the most successful connected services delivered to cars – as measured from a profitability standpoint, is Sirius XM. Sirius and XM bought their way into dashboards which eventually led to positive cashflow. Maybe it’s time for more content and service providers to pay up. InkaNet is showing the way. NOTE: The InkaNet system is not without its shortcomings. For further details: http://tinyurl.com/2b5vbvx - Enter, the Dragon: China Getting Its Moment on the Telematics Stage - Lanctot - Insight – Automotive Multimedia & Communications Service http://bit.ly/gWT4QX - Automotive Electronic Design Heads East - Kevin Mak - Automotive Electronics Service

October 22, 2010 15:10 rlanctot
The battle is on to capture the most and the most accurate traffic incident data on a global scale. Several strategies are being deployed to collect this information including traditional journalistic traffic reporting and a growing variety of technology-based solutions including GPS-based probe solutions or GPS Floating Vehicle Data (GFVD) from smartphone and connected PND makers and carriers to cellular network-based probes (CFVD), video cameras, mobile phone camera probes and crowdsourcing. GPS-based probe data networks are particularly popular with companies ranging from TomTom and Nokia to Inrix, Google and RIM. The significance of the emergence of probe data is the fact that any organization with connected devices, applications or vehicles on the road is a candidate for delivering probe data. The industry is facing a proliferation of probe data sources encompassing everyone from Waze, Skobbler and Navigon to OnStar, TeleNav and TeleCommunications Systems. The CFVD crowd includes TomTom, AirSage, iTIS Holdings, Cellint, Intellione, TrafficCast and a few others. The inaccuracy of probe data, GPS or otherwise, is stimulating interest in license plate scanners, tolling networks and Bluetooth roadside scanners from companies such as Bluetoad. In fact, TrafficCast has already deployed or received approval to deploy Bluetoad scanners in 20 states. The Bluetoad technology with its range of up to 200 feet picks up signals from passing Bluetooth devices which have become nearly ubiquitous in mobile devices. The beauty of Bluetooth scanners is that they can precisely identify both the roadway and speed, making them ideally suited to creating flow data. The downside, of course, as with all sensor-based sources, is the high cost of deployment – usually borne largely by local DOTs who gain access to the data – and the not infrequent failures to which they are prone. Of course, all of these solutions are only really able to act as proxies for identifying incidents as they can only identify the results and not the causes of backups. That is where cameras and observers and journalistic data from companies such as Clear Channel, Westwood One and Navteq’s Traffic.com come into the picture. Two years ago this analyst was a strong believer in the power that video could bring to the traffic data reporting and interpretation game. When I met the team at TrafficLand I came to believe that I had found the ultimate solution for the driving public: show people what the traffic disturbance is rather than tell them. TrafficLand had – and has – a near monopoly on DOT traffic camera installations, but its real value add is managing those images on the back end. TrafficLand not only captures most of the data but it also serves it up to handheld devices and Websites and, soon, to automotive head units. Alas, a lot can change in two years. Cameras do play an important role in traffic reporting and interpretation, but the cameras that are likely to make a difference are not the ones mounted along highways. Front-facing mobile phone cameras are the new frontier waiting for a clever entrepreneur. More than one industry executive has talked to me about the potential power of a network of camera probes transmitting real-time traffic camera information from the road. The user interface is a potential issue as is the required bandwidth, but what is a market changing proposition without a few challenges? There is more than one way to make such a network come to pass, these executives suggest, including everything from a dedicated dashboard camera to a smartphone-mounted device to a forward-facing camera on a PND or even the use of existing on-board cameras. Solutions already exist. Navigon has shown augmented reality navigation solutions using forward-facing cameras and Imaginyze has a lane-departure warning app based on a similar device. There is even a company, Apollo Video Technology, with an iPhone app to allow transit officials to view live video feeds from buses, trains, police cars and transit vehicles. Even the execs working on the Next Generation 911 solution for the U.S. are looking for ways to integrate video and text reporting of incident information from smartphones or other devices. It shouldn't be too long before a crowd-sourced traffic solution is introduced for smartphones that allows for the automatic uploading of photos and video stills from a dashboard perspective of traffic conditions under predetermined circumstances. To make such a crowd-sourced solution effective requires a sufficiently large and connected network of users and an automated application. In fact, it is almost shocking that neither TomTom nor Nokia have taken the leap into crowd-sourced traffic video feeds. Or is it? While I was a big fan of integrating traffic video feeds into navigation solutions two years ago, with today's emphasis on mitigating distracted driving the idea has lost significant traction. In fact, U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood is on a personal jihad to ban even voice calls while driving. Video is important and can be powerful, but the time is not right and the concepts currently in the oven - including Visteon's TrafficLand app - need more time to reach maturity. What is available today, however, is crowd-sourced traffic data from Inrix via its iPhone app (and soon on Android). The app-based Inrix system is the most complete solution, designed around one-touch incident reporting along with the ability to validate the entries of nearby drivers as well as to share the resulting data with local departments of transportation. Aha Mobile has been combining its own crowd sourced inputs with Inrix flow and Clear Channel incident data since late 2009. In fact, Inrix's approach stands as a model for future crowd-sourced traffic solutions with its tools for ranking participants and identifying "trusted sources" and the integration with local traffic authorities. Since June, 47 of 50 state DOTs in the U.S. have adopted Inrix's agency model for sharing this user-generated data, which the DOTs are able to view on the large screens in their traffic operations centers and then check by dispatching their own responders. Inrix says it is processing these crowd-sourced traffic feeds in real time thereby revolutionizing traffic reporting. In this way, Inrix is distancing itself from the existing competition through the integration of an entirely new source of data and a closed loop approach. The challenge for Inrix, though, is the limited size of its probe network, based on users of the downloadable iPhone app.  To have an impact Inrix, mainly seen as a white box supplier to the industry, will need a little help from its industry friends. Crowd-sourced traffic information has become the new standard and Inrix is setting the bar. Waze may claim to have the largest user population worldwide, but the company has chosen not to integrate other corroborating traffic information sources. Fusion of multiple types of data sources is a critical foundation for using crowd-sourced data, along with building  validation processes. Inrix has the largest North American population of users and has recently rolled out its apps in Europe. It is collaborating with ClearChannel in North America and other incident providers internationally for journalistic data. Crowd-sourcing of traffic data is nothing new. Crowd-sourcing by mobile phone users has been around for decades. It is only recently, though, that smartphone apps have enabled the automation of the process and, now, with Inrix's system, the integration of crowd-sourced data into local DOT traffic feeds - although Inrix traffic app users get the data right away, including inputs from nearby drivers. What is curious is that Inrix, while not the first to market with crowd-sourced traffic, is the first to take it to a level where it is integrated with official traffic feeds. While the crowd inputs are validated or rejected by other users on the network, the local DOT is also involved in the validation process. The open line of communication with local DOTs also means that real time street closings and openings can be transmitted along with incident validation. Inrix is not alone. TeleNav has a crowd-sourcing function for its app and TrafficTalk has been testing a crowd-sourced offering. Harman's Aha Mobile and competing mobile platforms will no doubt seek to bring their own offerings to market as well. Looking at the Inrix model, one has to wonder why TomTom, OnStar, ATX, Google, Nokia, RIM, TCS or TeleNav haven't moved in the same direction. OnStar has its good Samaritan function for reporting accidents, but there is no provision for instantly integrating an OnStar user-reported accident on the in-vehicle navigation/traffic display  - let alone sharing it with public authorities in real-time. The same is true for ATX. Conclusion: The automotive environment is ripe for crowd-sourced applications, which already include the reporting of speed traps (Trapster). The world of thumbs up/thumbs down, check-ins and trusted providers of reviews/data is rapidly proliferating on mobile devices and migrating into embedded automotive solutions. It is fitting that traffic information lead this migration since this form of data is of the highest relevance to drivers and rapidly changing. The power of crowd-sourcing of traffic data has the dual effect of creating a new source of incident data along with its own validation process. One of the greatest challenges to creating reliable traffic information systems is validating journalistic data inputs. The crowd is able to view live traffic data, create new data and validate that data. The next step is to open the taps to other data types from parking and gas pricing to weather and event information. Eventually, crowd-sourced video will work its way into the mix as well - and probably sooner than anyone expects. Additional insights: http://bit.ly/dniNxa - Navigation Heuristic Evaluation: Telmap5 – Schreiner – Automotive Consumer Insights http://bit.ly/95NCoW - Automotive DMB Digital Radio: Marketing Strategies an Increasing Priority – Blight – Automotive Multimedia and Communications Service http://bit.ly/dtRE5C - Automotive Telematics Services: Shifts in Pricing and Monetization Expected – Canali – Automotive Multimedia and Communications Service http://bit.ly/bwdwcW - Connected Vehicle and Vehicle Device Connectivity System Database by Feature, Region, and Price 2010 – Canali – Automotive Multimedia and Communications Service http://bit.ly/d0aLhq - Connected Vehicle Telematics: Car Maker Profiles – Canali – Aumotive Multimedia and Communications Service http://bit.ly/deumcd -# Traffic Data Quality Will Determine #Telematics Winners - Lanctot - blog - Strategy Analytics

September 1, 2010 17:09 rlanctot
When IBM had the personal computer industry in a headlock, the company was able to freeze customers’ plans to purchase competing PCs by releasing fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD) in the marketplace. It achieved this goal by announcing its own plans for new products 6-12 months in advance. Sirius XM used its earnings call earlier this month for the same purpose, announcing plans for Satellite Radio 2.0 for Q4 2011. The difference, of course, is that Sirius XM does not control the market for broadcast radio content. In fact, the company is facing competitive pressures from both terrestrial and Internet-based sources. Further diminishing the Satellite Radio 2.0 gambit, is the declining portion of Sirius XM’s revenue and unit volume coming from retail, aftermarket devices. (According to estimates from the Consumer Electronics Association, satellite radio sales to dealers fell to $64M in 2009, with declines forecasted through 2013.) Sirius XM executives stated in the Q2 earnings call plans for the launch of the XM 5 satellite in October and the launch of Sirius 6 in Q4 2011. Also due to arrive in Q4 2011 is the newly touted Satellite Radio 2.0. Sirius XM execs said that SR 2.0 will offer consumers greater capacity and more functionality – both enhancements are intended to stimulate average revenue per user (ARPU). These same execs noted that no additional satellite launches will occur for several years, setting the stage for improved cashflow and profitability. In addition to the satellite and service launches late next year, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) limitations on Sirius XM subscriptions will end in August 2011. All of these indicators are positive for Sirius XM except for the fact that competition has intensified. With the FCC limitations removed, Sirius XM will have a much broader scope of subscription options given the 150+ range of stations to choose from. SR 2.0 promises even more ARPU upside with added channel content and, as Sirius XM execs clearly indicated in their earnings call, a wider use of data for telematics and other applications. It is interesting to hear Sirius XM getting excited about telematics as a potential ARPU contributor, and it is an indication that the company is moving in the right direction and recognizes the shortcomings of the existing service. It is also, no doubt, a response to competitive pressures from HD Radio and Internet radio. The question is whether or not this awakening at Sirius XM is coming too late to matter. HD Radio technology is proliferating as more OEMs adopt the technology and more radio stations join the burgeoning ranks of participating broadcasters. HD Radio is appealing since it operates over the same FM frequencies, though requiring some additional hardware, and it is free. At the same time, more and more OEMs are lining up music service solutions such as Pandora along with Internet radio - via smartphone connectivity in the short-term and embedded solutions in the long run. The success of Pandora is a testament to that company’s ability to deliver a solution that is able to integrate seamlessly with automotive systems. Competitor Slacker’s content-caching music service is not less compelling, but OEMs have not found integration to be nearly as simple. Still, the tide that is lifting Pandora's boat will likely benefit other music services and Internet radio providers, such as ClearChannel's IHeartRadio. The timing and manner of Sirius XM's announcement of Satellite Radio 2.0 suggests that Sirius XM is attempting to prevent OEM defections to HD Radio, music service solutions or Internet radio. OEMs are in the process of making decisions today that will impact vehicle platforms four and five years hence. Sirius XM executives refused to explain exactly what SR 2.0 will be. But given the short launch window, it will no doubt arrive in the retail aftermarket first. The company is currently briefing OEMs regarding its confidential plans. Sirius XM has already lost momentum in the automotive market. Car makers (and aftermarket system makers) have shifted toward offering satellite radio as an option rather than as a standard feature. And both Sirius XM and its OEM customers are using subscription conversion data to determine which cars should and should not be offered with the service. This means that even though Sirius XM has been able to show subscriber gains in its past two quarters, rapid growth is a thing of the past and pales by comparison to the subscriber numbers of a Pandora or Slacker. On the earnings call Sirius XM execs said that availability of satellite radio technology in cars was at approximately 60% of car models with a paid subscription conversion rate of 47%. The company currently claims more than 19.5M subscribers and anticipates somewhat more than 20M by the end of the year. OEMs say that if it weren’t for their multi-year agreements with Sirius XM they might have walked away from the relationship a long time ago. (Several OEMs are also shareholders in Sirius XM.) This sour sentiment does not bode well for Sirius XM moving away from the subsidy model it maintains in the automotive market. This subsidy model also means that the cost of acquiring new subscribers – given the decline of retail satellite radio sales – will continue to rise as the balance between retail and OEM sales continues to shift toward subsidized OEM subs. Further clouding the otherwise rosy long-term outlook for Sirius XM is the mandated switchover to XM. OEMs currently offering Sirius satellite radio service have been told they will have to switch to XM by 2016. The honeymoon for Sirius XM is clearly over. The question now is whether SR 2.0 can save the store. Satellite Radio 2.0 There are three areas where SR 2.0 could help Sirius XM hold onto its existing subscribers while attracting new subscribers. Here are Strategy Analytics’ thoughts on what SR 2.0 will look like: Audio – Sirius XM faces its biggest audio challenge from Internet radio and music services generally and Pandora in particular. All of these services are paid and Internet radio has suffered a blow from the onset of tiered data plans limiting the use of such services. Nevertheless, OEMs have embraced Internet radio because of the powerful consumer demand and awareness – several times the user base of satellite radio and widely and easily accessed on multiple platforms without any additional hardware. The only solution Sirius XM can offer is more or better-targeted audio channels. Ironically, the more channels Sirius XM adds the more difficult it is to use. Expect Sirius XM to update its content search and save capabilities to better replicate an Internet radio experience. Sirius XM can also be expected to enhance its iPhone and iPod integration with song-tagging not unlike HD Radio’s capabilities. Expect Sirius XM to add additional capabilities, along the lines of what iBiquity Digital has been showing in HD Radio demos for the past 2-3 years. Enhancements are likely to include more artist, track, album information; album art; song duration; maybe even reviews or other metadata from suppliers such as Gracenote or Rovi. Traffic – For some reason Sirius’ traffic data services are not comparable to offerings from direct competitors such as ClearChannel’s RDS-TMC. Side-by-side comparisons conducted by this analyst of both XM NavTraffic and the Sirius traffic service have found them to be lacking in comparison to both PND and embedded solutions. The only good news for Sirius is that RDS-TMC is only offered standard by half a dozen car makers. Still, with the proliferation of HD Radio technology, Sirius will soon be up against TPEG traffic data content, putting it further behind the eight ball. Sirius must bring its traffic data services up to a competitive grade. Strangely, the company does not even use the same flow and incident sourcing between its data (Traffic.com) and broadcast traffic services (Westwood One). Expect Sirius XM to do something about the shortcomings in its traffic reporting. OEMs are definitely making comparisons between HD Radio and satellite radio traffic services and making critical long-term decisions. Expect major traffic data improvements in SR 2.0 including the implementation of a standard traffic database system – such as Gewi’s TIC 3 – and/or TPEG traffic information services. Only time will tell if the changes will be enough or will occur soon enough to preserve strong OEM relationships. Even more ominous for Sirius XM is the fact that more and more OEMs are building the cost of traffic into the cost of their vehicles. The $3.99/month traffic subscription for Sirius XM traffic data will not survive this process of commoditization - especially if the data quality is not competitive. Data – Sirius XM’s Travel Link service, offered by Ford, is an impressive voice-driven offering of content such as gas pricing, ski conditions, news, weather, and sports. Expect Sirius XM to bring this offering up to speed with a greater variety of content delivered with improved graphics. The competition here comes mainly in the form of smartphone solutions, so the challenge to compete is steep. Can Sirius XM breathe life into its retail aftermarket position with SR 2.0? Can the company preserve its standing with OEMs, which are more concerned with reducing costs and complexity? For now, Sirius XM is on a path to continue to build its subscriber base, enhance its service and reduce its operating expenses. But the future of the company hinges on whether car makers will continue to tune in beyond 2016. Further insight: http://tinyurl.com/2bz9zq6 - Google, Nokia and New Entrant Positioning in Automotive Infotainment - Lanctot – Automotive Multimedia and Communications Service http://bit.ly/dniNxa - Navigation Heuristic Evaluation: Telmap5 – Schreiner – Automotive Consumer Insights http://bit.ly/95NCoW - Automotive DMB Digital Radio: Marketing Strategies an Increasing Priority – Blight – Automotive Multimedia and Communications Service http://bit.ly/dtRE5C - Automotive Telematics Services: Shifts in Pricing and Monetization Expected – Canali – Automotive Multimedia and Communications Service http://bit.ly/bwdwcW - Connected Vehicle and Vehicle Device Connectivity System Database by Feature, Region, and Price 2010 – Canali – Automotive Multimedia and Communications Service http://bit.ly/d0aLhq - Connected Vehicle Telematics: Car Maker Profiles – Canali – Aumotive Multimedia and Communications Service

August 23, 2010 13:08 rlanctot
The gold standard for telematics success is daily relevance. One of the greatest challenges for companies introducing telematics systems and solutions is to bring daily relevance to their offerings. Human beings are creatures of habit, which means that driving directions are normally not required daily, gas pricing and parking choices are predetermined, and weather and news are available for free over the radio. Movie times, skiing conditions and restaurant reviews are nice to haves. But they are available from other sources – most notably mobile phones – and are an occasional not a daily information requirement. And we all hope we never have to use either automatic crash notification or roadside assistance. Traffic data, on the other hand, is something that is relevant five days a week to a substantial portion of the working public. Companies that get traffic data right have a huge competitive advantage not only in providing traffic data, but also for providing a wide range of data feeds and services. In fact, the very infrastructure required for delivering traffic data – storage and processing facilities and servers and, in some cases, broadcasting capability - is a suitable platform for providing other telematics services. For this reason, traffic data providers Inrix, ITIS Holdings, TomTom and Navteq also serve as content and service aggregators. (It is also one of the reasons for TeleCommunications Systems’ acquisition of Networks in Motion and why TeleNav has a content and services platform.) The opportunity to provide additional telematics services is the brass ring for which traffic data providers are reaching. It is for this reason these companies are seeking to bundle traffic data offerings with traffic-influenced routing, developing mobile apps for smartphones and connected navigation systems, and other initiatives focused on moving up the value chain – ultimately leading to sponsored content, reviews and location-aware advertising and promotion. The daily relevance of traffic data is a powerful elixir for delivering additional location-aware added-value services, including advertising. This is why Google, TeleNav, TCS, Nokia Navteq, RIM and TomTom are moving quickly to introduce or enhance their probe-based (handset GPS) traffic flow solutions to develop their telematics business. The winner(s) to emerge from this marketing scrum will be the company or companies with the highest quality traffic data. Traffic data quality, in turn, is determined by a handful of critical factors including data sources, integration, and delivery. (The quality and nature of the user interface is important as well, but is the responsibility of the device or service designer/manufacturer.) The determining factors within each of these areas are essential to understand: Sources: There are a handful of key sources of traffic data and they include commercial fleet (ie. taxi cabs, trucks, etc. and other types of probes such as GPS handsets, PNDs, etc.), regional departments of transport, embedded and roadside sensors, and incident or journalistic data. A handful of companies – principally TomTom, ITIS Holdings and AirSage - are translating cell tower signaling data for flow data analysis. This technology is currently deployed by both TomTom and ITIS in parts of Europe. ITIS licenses its technology to partners in Australia, Ireland, Russia, South Africa and Singapore. A North American solution has yet to be delivered. TomTom delivers its cellular flow data in HD Traffic for its connected devices in Europe, which still stands as one of the best, if not THE best, live traffic solution in the world. (It is worth noting that HD Traffic received low scores in BMW's QKZ evaluation.) Traffic flow data from these sources is valuable for many use cases and applications including showing traffic on a map and traffic-influenced routing. Journalistic data complements the flow data by providing context about the cause, location and scope of the traffic problem. This is particularly useful to receive as a traffic incident alert before leaving on a journey or to provide context when actually stuck in a traffic jam, as the driver generally can’t safely read a description about an incident while driving.Incident data come from public sources such as emergency responders, department of transportation traffic cameras, or public or private spotters that may be on the ground or observing traffic conditions from some form of aircraft. Much of incident data is public information – some of it freely available to the public - and most is freely available to commercial traffic information providers. There are some private sources, however, including radio and TV stations with their own spotters, cameras or sensors and these include companies such as ITIS Holdings, SmartRoute, Traffic.com and ClearChannel. ClearChannel and ITIS Holdings have emerged as the dominant suppliers of incident data in the U.S. and U.K., respectively. The two companies have the widest market coverage and the broadest roster of clients. Of course, operating a traffic incident collection and reporter network on a national basis (much less internationally) can be extremely expensive and unprofitable, and companies such as Westwood One and Traffic.com operate under the pressure of that expense. Not surprisingly, ClearChannel and ITIS are also distinguished in applying the so-called QKZ traffic quality assessment standards to their solutions. QKZ, which is the name of the index used to evaluate traffic data, is the standard applied by BMW in evaluating different traffic solutions. BMW recently selected MILE Traffic and Travel (ITIS, Infoblu, Mediamobil consortium) to provide a pan-European traffic solution. BMW is already partnered with ClearChannel in the U.S. for their RDS-TMC solution. It is important to note those elements of the traffic data picture that are global in nature vs. local and to make a distinction between flow data and incident data. There are thousands of local sources of incident data and there are local aggregators of that data, but incident data is fundamentally a regional phenomenon. Flow data, in contrast, is ruled by systems that can be applied globally. There are five providers of flow data currently operating across borders and these are ITIS, Inrix, Nokia Navteq, TomTom and TrafficCast. ITIS is unique in using a licensing model. TomTom has yet to find a customer in the automotive or mobile device market for its flow data. TrafficCast has a handful of customers. And Inrix and Navteq currently compete for contracts in North America and Europe. Car makers are most interested in identifying global solutions, while navigation device makers and mobile application developers are content with regional solutions.  Companies such as Waze, Aha Mobile and TrafficTalk are attempting to open up a new channel of user-reported incident data. But the industry is still seeking to determine how to evaluate the quality of these ad hoc sources and integrate their inputs. Integration: The process of data integration produces a picture of traffic flow including not only real-time traffic flow or speeds but also a predictive model based on both historical and real-time data sources. This information is critical for determining accurate travel and arrival times as well as routing or re-routing.The five leading flow data companies distinguish themselves by their processes for integrating and manipulating traffic data, vetting sources and interpreting the different inputs. A virtual duopoly exists between Inrix and Navteq in the U.S. The European market is rapidly evolving from regional traffic providers to pan-European aggregators. TomTom has developed its proprietary HD traffic in a handful of countries, but is only deployed with its own smartphone and connected PND solutions. Navteq has a solution in place with Garmin, but has limited European coverage. Inrix and MILE Traffic and Travel appear to be emerging as powerful challengers in Europe. Delivery: The last link in the chain is delivery and this is the area experiencing the greatest degree of technological change. The most widespread platform for communicating traffic information is radio, but there are multiple radio-based platforms for traffic information delivery. Analog radio is the most dominant and familiar source of traffic data reports and the most widely available traffic data broadcast network in this medium is RDS-TMC. RDS-TMC is widely criticized for the limited amount of information it is capable of broadcasting in a metropolitan area and perceived delays (latency) in delivering the latest information to the embedded or portable navigation system in the car. Emerging digital radio technology enables a richer stream of traffic-related content and maintains the critical local elements. Digital radio is also a superior platform for delivering other forms of content. RDS-TMC is being replaced by TPEG technology. TPEG allows for a wider range of content, a larger volume of information and can be distributed over HD, DAB or cellular networks as it is XML-based. TPEG also encompasses arterial road coverage. Handset-based solutions are promising, though hampered by the smaller screens and challenging in-vehicle user experience associated with mobile phones. While technologies such as Nokia’s Terminal Mode offer the prospect of delivering handset traffic images to in-vehicle displays these solutions will take a few years to reach the market. Many OEMs, however, are in product development now with solutions that use handsets (or are fully integrating embedded GSM/GPRS modules in the vehicle) for sending traffic data and other telematics information to/from the vehicle. Product development is moving briskly in the handset/smartphone space and innovative solutions such as TrafficTalk and Visteon's TrafficCamJam are in the offing. But the companies creating these applications will likely require expensive voice interfaces. Public authorities will likely not accept handset-based applications in cars that require a touch screen interface while the vehicle is in motion. Part of the power of these smartphone-based applications, though, lies in the fact that they are location-aware and sharing location data even as they are reporting traffic conditions. As a result, these devices remain a wildcard in the evolution of traffic data. Sirius XM’s traffic data service in North America, based as it is on a single national stream of broadcast data to a vehicle’s navigation system, is fatally flawed. Based on this correspondent’s own experience with the Sirius feed in Mercedes and the ClearChannel feed in BMW, the lag introduced by the sequential transmission of multiple-market’s worth of traffic information down a single pipeline is the source of Sirius’ downfall. It is no coincidence that BMW offers Sirius' audio content but eschews its traffic offering. And some industry observers believe OEMs are dropping Sirius/XM traffic data services from their roadmaps for MY13 and beyond in favor of connected services over GPRS/GSM. In Sirius XM’s most recent earnings call two weeks ago the company touted its planned introduction in Q4 2011 of Satellite Radio 2.0. Presumably the company will have a fix for the timely delivery of traffic data. Conclusion: The biggest pipeline to the car of all is the embedded telecommunications module. With new embedded solutions set to launch from multiple car makers in multiple geographies over the next 2-3 years, drivers can expect to see vast improvements in traffic information quality. This is at least one reason for optimism regarding the future uptake of telematics services overall. With the emergence of both digital radio technologies worldwide and the proliferation of embedded telematics systems, the expectation is that the companies that will dominate traffic will be those with the highest quality data. What distinguishes these companies today are their processes for validating data quality. If the data is sound the daily relevance will follow as will subscribers. Further insight: http://tinyurl.com/2bz9zq6 - Google, Nokia and New Entrant Positioning in Automotive Infotainment - Lanctot – Automotive Multimedia and Communications Servicehttp://bit.ly/dniNxa - Navigation Heuristic Evaluation: Telmap5 – Schreiner – Automotive Consumer Insightshttp://bit.ly/95NCoW - Automotive DMB Digital Radio: Marketing Strategies an Increasing Priority – Blight – Automotive Multimedia and Communications Servicehttp://bit.ly/dtRE5C - Automotive Telematics Services: Shifts in Pricing and Monetization Expected – Canali – Automotive Multimedia and Communications Servicehttp://bit.ly/bwdwcW - Connected Vehicle and Vehicle Device Connectivity System Database by Feature, Region, and Price 2010 – Canali – Automotive Multimedia and Communications Servicehttp://bit.ly/d0aLhq - Connected Vehicle Telematics: Car Maker Profiles – Canali – Aumotive Multimedia and Communications Service

January 4, 2010 05:01 rlanctot

The marketing battle between traffic service providers will continue into 2010. The good news is that 2009 firmly established the value of traffic data. The turning point came with the introduction of multiple mobile phone navigation solutions, most of which arrived through the aegis of the application store model pioneered by Apple. But new, unusual and creative solutions will arrive in 2010 and change the existing balance of power.

 

Users of these new navigation systems and the developers quickly discovered that reliable traffic information was the real killer app that mobile users were seeking. In the process they discovered that to deliver reliable travel times they needed a wide variety of traffic data including real-time, historical, predictive and incident data. Unfortunately, one of the key sources of traffic data – radio and television stations with cameras, ‘copters and spotters to report incident information – have suffered in the current downturn. In fact, there are anecdotal indications that radio stations are dropping traffic reporting. A model for delivering nationwide incident data that was previously fueled by advertising and sponsorships is becoming frayed at the edges as TV and radio advertising suffer.

 

Traffic.com, ClearChannel and Westwood One/SmartRoute, among others, are all seeking new funding, new business models or new owners in a bid to preserve or enhance their market positions. In the meantime, Google has barged into the market with its own traffic data raising questions over the viability of incumbent players. Google’s entry into any market raises these questions, although the reliability or robustness of Google’s traffic solution has yet to be proven. Inrix, on the other hand, has not based its model on sponsorships or advertising and, as a result, has for the most part avoided the negative impact of the downturn in advertising activity. But with Google getting into the traffic data aggregation and algorithm business, no traffic data supplier is safe including Microsoft's ClearFlow.

 

Of more immediate concern than Google entering the traffic market is the changing role of mobile-phone based navigation. Google is a player here as well, but it has more company in the form of Networks in Motion and TeleNav and their carrier partners. (TelMap's efforts in Europe have been hindered by the fragmented nature of the market and the negative impact of roaming charges.) While companies such as Cellint, AirSage, and IntelliOne have been seeking to integrate cell-tower triangulation data for probe traffic inputs, expect the carriers to introduce GPS-based probe data in the new year – representing a key added-value advantage. GPS-based probe data derived from mobile phone handsets will not replace triangulated data, which will always represent the greatest volume of “anonymized” location data, but the GPS data is likely to be more timely and accurate, critical to traffic reporting and analysis. The GPS-based data will likely require opt in participation vs. the triangulated data which to date has been applied involuntarily.

 

Still, good probe data is almost worthless without incident data. Without incident data the system is unable to interpret slowed or stopped traffic – ie. is it weather, volume, construction, a fallen tree limb, an uphill grade? The battle for reliable traffic data will come down to good incident data. This means the industry will see vastly enhanced probe data in 2010, but the gap between reliable flow and reliable incident data will suddenly become much clearer.

 

Through all the enhancements to traffic reporting consumers have been expressing their interest in better and more timely information and, in particular, more real-time incident information. As an example, RDS-TMC is notorious for the 5-10-15-minute delays in incident reporting, sometimes worse. Drivers want to know what is happening in real time.

 

In 2010, drivers will begin to get real-time information. Whether that information comes from Twitter, TrafficTalk, Aha Mobile, Waze, TrafficLand or some other solution is not clear. What is clear is that drivers want to know BOTH what has happened in the past and what is happening now. But what they really want to know is what is happening right in front of them.

 

The solutions will come in 2010 from three key sources: mobile-phone-based crowd-sourced info, traffic cameras and, perhaps, vehicle-mounted cameras. The challenges to delivery include the creation of traffic reporting “crowds,” something TrafficTalk, Waze and Aha Mobile are working on; and camera input interpretation and delivery platforms. Developments in 2009 clearly indicated that drivers must spend less time looking away from the road to navigation interfaces. More information must be conveyed via voice.

 

Traffic information suppliers will still be looking at a combination of subscription-based and sponsored traffic information. Consumers have clearly indicated a willingness to pay for traffic data, both in Strategy Analytics surveys and in the combined 10 million subscribers to Networks in Motion, TeleNav and XM/Sirius traffic information.

 

The industry will see some outlandish innovations ranging from delivering traffic camera info to mobile phones to – in 2-3 years – aftermarket in-vehicle cameras to capture traffic incidents. Two things are clear. Better incident data is required and solutions are in the pipeline.


December 26, 2009 18:12 rlanctot
The latest connected portable navigation device from Best Buy, the Insignia NS-CNV43, is both groundbreaking and disappointing. The device introduces Twitter posting of destinations – an industry first - and maintains the Google Search feature of the original Insignia connected PNDs, while adding other connected content services for weather, gas prices, and movie listings. But despite its virtues and advances some vital ingredients are still missing and in a head-to-head comparison to an embedded navigation system in a BMW, the Traffic.com sourced traffic data appears to be inferior to the Inrix-enabled ClearChannel Total Traffic Network data in the BMW. At $149.99 (list: $199.99), the feature rich NS-CNV43 makes a powerful value statement in a Best Buy department crowded with 20+ devices mainly from Garmin and TomTom and including units intended for hiking and boating. The device has haptic touch feedback and Bluetooth phone connectivity, unusual features in a relatively inexpensive PND. (Surprisingly, the device does not allow for voice dialing or voice destination entry, limiting the attraction of the Bluetooth.) (For details on other PNDs and connected PNDs: http://bit.ly/7Zgw7V.) Improvements on the original connected PNDs from Best Buy, introduced more than a year ago, include an improved windshield mount and text-to-speech. (Nuance has replaced Loquendo.) The Google Search function, alone, is an attractive proposition, but the addition of other content services and Bluetooth make the device a standout. (The Lithium-ion battery included with the device is described as having a two-hour capacity, but in the tester’s experience was capable of lasting less than half an hour and gave repeated low battery warnings almost immediately after being disconnected.) The two biggest shortcoming in the new device relate to the routing software and traffic information – elements critical to its performance. From a routing standpoint, the device delivers the user to the anticipated destination in most cases. But while testing the device in Detroit recently, the NS-CNV43 appeared to fall victim to a Michigan left turn on a divided local highway, putting the user in an endless loop or “make a U-turn” instructions half a mile before reaching the destination. This failure was reminiscent of several similar malfunctions experienced with the original connected Insignia PNDs which are built around deCarta software. (The device also does not display the current speed limit, which is a popular, though-often inaccurate, PND feature) Just as important as routing acumen is the integration of traffic data. Reliable traffic data is critical to determining both arrival time and the quickest route. On two recent journeys the NS-CNV43 appeared to be outperformed by the embedded navigation system in the BMW, against which it was being tested. On a trip to FedEx Field for a Monday night football game working through a combination of rush-hour and pre-game traffic, the Insignia-branded device was unhelpful and appeared lost relative to the unerring guidance from the on-board system. Similarly, navigating rush-hour and holiday traffic to a dinner engagement, the BMW was able to find a back road, avoiding a local highway jam to which the Best Buy device appeared to be committed. Following the guidance of the BMW navigation, the tester arrived at the restaurant ahead of a second car that had a 10-minute head start. All in all, the connectivity of the Best Buy device is attractive and the Twitter function is fun, although probably only practical in limited circumstances. Of greater concern is the longer term cost of the device. The NS-CNV43 comes with a free three-month subscription to the Insignia Internet connected services – and includes the warning: “Insignia reserves the right, at it’s (sic) discretion, to limit excessive data usage on any device.” One of the attractions of the device is that its box promises: “On-demand connected services – no monthly fee required.” What this means is that when the free access to connected services expire they can be purchased on an a la carte, as needed-basis directly from the device. According to a CNET review, as few as three days of service can be purchased for $4.99 or as much as 12 months for $99, with various increments in between. In Summary The new device has improved TTS and an industry-first Twitter function along with Google Search, connected content, Bluetooth and Traffic.com data. The low $149.99 retail price is somewhat offset by the cost of on-demand subscription services that are more expensive than offerings from TomTom and Garmin. Best Buy is making progress, but has more work to do in refining its portable navigation offering and integration of Traffic.com data or the data itself appears to be inferior to ClearChannel Total Traffic Network data.