Digital Media Strategies

We cover all of the major media sectors, including advertising, TV and video, music, games and social media.

October 18, 2010 19:10 Martin Olausson
Social networks, such as Facebook, MySpace and Twitter, which used to be a nascent Internet phenomenon only a few years ago, have now become an indispensable element for many of us in our daily lives. Accessing social networks and sharing information has quickly become one of the most important online activities for many Internet users around the world. With more than 500 million users globally, Facebook, the largest social network in the world, would be the third largest country by population, on the heels of India and China. And as a communication tool, social networks are already starting to replace or complement many of our existing online communication applications, such as email, instant messaging and news.   However, our just published report, “Global Social Network Market Forecast”, finds that there are significant regional differences in the uptake of different social networks as well as in business models for how social networks are monetized. Less than 40% of Internet users in Asia were regular social network users at the end of 2009 compared to approximately 60% in North America and Western Europe. Advertising remains the most widely recognized revenue model for social networks, despite that the highly commoditized social network ad inventory means that most social networks can only charge advertisers a fraction of the price other online publishers charges. Social games feed social networks with a cut of their virtual items sales, and social networks such as e.g. LinkedIn have for many years been successful at charging for a premium tier service, where recruiters and job-seekers can utilize the social network’s premium functions to reach their goals of finding a candidate or a new job opportunity. There are also different revenue models for monetizing social networks emerging in different regions. Whereas revenues from sales of virtual items are estimated to only represent around 9% of total social network revenues in North America this year, it is expected to represent about 22% of revenues in the Asian market. And while advertising has been and will continue to be the main revenue source for most social networks, revenues from selling virtual items and social network credits will likely ramp up more rapidly in Asia than in the Western World. Social networks, such as Tencent and Cyworld in Asia, already generate significant revenues by selling avatar accessories and virtual gifts. Nevertheless, based on the successful experience of these companies, we expect to see other social networks, both in Asia and in the Western World, to adopt the virtual items business model for gaining incremental revenues going forward. As the Asian Internet market continues to grow at breakneck speed, we projects that this region will represent the greatest growth opportunity for social networks over the next five years. Whereas Facebook has conquered most places in the Western World, it has struggled to gain traction in many Asian markets. We believe Facebook now needs to increase its focus and commitment to the important and rapidly growing Asian market if it wants to remain the world’s leading social network five years from now.

GLOBAL SOCIAL NETWORK USERS BY REGION, 2010 VS. 2015

sns-pic.jpg

Client Reading: Global Social Network Forecast


October 13, 2010 17:10 dmercer
I was speaking on the panel at the OTT 'mashup' eventat Ogilvy's London Docklands headquarters last night, alongside Turner Broadcasting's Casey Harwood and Anthony Rose, CTO at the BBC's Canvas (now YouView) project, amongst others. As a first-time masher-up and intrigued at the possibilities for the format, the event turned out to be organised along relatively familiar panel debate lines. Casey and I began with introductory comments, and were followed by critiques from the other contributors. The session was then opened up to debate, including audience questions. All the time, running on a display behind us, was a Twitter feed of comments from participants in the twittersphere, as well, presumably, as a few of the 100 or so people who joined us in the traditional, physical fashion. The only problem was that the panelists had to turn away from the audience to see if any particularly fascinating Tweets had appeared, and if they ever did, it was noticeable that the physical audience's attention would be diverted to the ominous gap between the panelists and away from the speakers. The one recommendation I would make is that questions and comments from the virtual audience could have been added to the debate; it did rather feel at times as though we were being Tweeted at without right of reply. Nevertheless it was an interesting evening and I hope the audience found the debate valuable. my own contribution centered on a few relevant datapoints from our recent survey of UK TV and online TV viewers. In particular I referenced the fact that 13% of UK people are currently watching TV on the internet at least on a weekly basis. So we needed to bear in mind that the OTT phenomenon is still restricted to a relatively small proportion of the population, and most of that activity is taking place on the PC. The number of people accessing web TV on their TV set is of course even smaller: 6% of people are connecting a PC to a TV, and 4% now claim to use a dedicated internet TV device. Having said that, our work with early connected TV adopters within our Digital Home Observatory suggests that television behaviour can change rapidly once viewers have access to some of these emerging technologies. This segment is motivated by a desire for greater viewing flexibility and access to preferred content. They also still see weaknesses in current connected TV solutions, especially in the field of control devices and interfaces. The panel also touched on the issue of business models, and in response to the question of how things might look in three years I replied that the basic alternatives would not change greatly: television in the UK will still be funded by a combination of public service licence fees, advertising and customer payment of one sort or another. The mix may change slightly, and we may see greater variety in pay business models. But it’s important to remember that customers are very sensitive to their monthly bills. The impression is often given, especially by new entrants, that new payment models can somehow overcome consumer resistance to the size of the overall television bill. The reality is that 80% of UK customers check their bank statements every month, and a similar proportion prefer predictability in their monthly payments. 69% would agree to pay only for the shows they watch, but only if it reduced the overall monthly bill. All in all I agreed with Anthony Rose’s comment that too little emphasis in connected TV discussions has been put on live, scheduled television. The assumption seems to be that this traditional model will break down rapidly as various on-demand options become available, but this trend is likely to happen only slowly over a long period of time. Even for early adopters, scheduled broadcasting remains an important part of the overall mix. The overall message is one of increased fragmentation of delivery models and audiences. Client Reading: Profiling the Connected Media Consumer - UK Add to Technorati Favorites

January 6, 2010 07:01 dmercer
The depth of the recession in the US consumer electronics market was highlighted today by CEA data which confirmed a decline in dollar revenues in 2009 of 12%. The outlook for 2010 improves but only in the sense that the rate of decline falls to 3%. In the meantime we're hearing news of new 3D TV channels already, with both ESPN and Discovery throwing their hats into the ring. This is great, if expected, news for the many 3D-ready TVs we expect to see over the next few days. At this evening's CES Unveiled event Sensio were showing their passive 3DTV, even though the company today announced its partnership with Visio to launch an active 3DTV later this year. Mitsubishi was also showing its laser 3DTV with the adaptor which will be necessary for compatibility with Blu-ray 3D players when they are lauinched. Logitech was showing its new Lapdesk N700, a laptop “cushion” with in-built speakers designed for enhanced laptop usage in the comfort of the armchair. The peripheral retails at $89.99 and also features an in-built cooling fan to prevent over-hearing, a familiar problem for those many TV viewers who now sit with a laptop on their knees. Logitech have thoughtfully added a grip to help keep the laptop steady, but unfortunately in my case it failed to prevent the Macpro falling to the floor. No damage done, luckily, but perhaps evidence of a need for further improvement in design. Logitech was also demonstrating the fruits of its recently closed acquisition of Lifesize Communications, a videoconferencing specialist. On display was its Passport set-top videoconferencing device. This retails at $2500 and allows anyone with a minimum 2-way 1Mbps broadband connection to communicate using HD video (720p). The service downscales to lower resolutions for slower bandwidth connections. Logitech claims that this device is a third of the price of any other similar product on the market. That may be true today but is unlikely to remain so for much longer. Videoconferencing and telepresence are shaping up to be one of the emerging trends of this CES and we will hear a lot more over the next few days, in addition to the Skype/Panasonic/LG announcement today. Yet another OTT video set-top box was being demonstrated by Syabas with its Popbox product. This grew out of the company’s Popcorn Hour device. The Popbox has been designed to be especially user-friendly, and the user interface does appear attractive and accessible. The service integrates currently 20 “content application channels”, which means things like Netflix, and is working with 200 application developers. It will launch in March 2010 and retail at $129, plus $20 for the optional WiFi module. The Popbox is 1080p-capable, although the only 1080p content was demonstration material. If Syabas manages to sign 1080p deals with content providers it will certainly be a step ahead of most competitors. ProVision CEO Steve Cliffe was confident enough in his company’s wireless HD technology to carry a laptop across the show floor while it streamed 1080i HD content, and there was no loss or deterioration in signal. This UK firm was founded by professors at Bristol University, and uses proprietary error correction and RF management techniques to improve HD video streaming over 802.11n. The company is talking to set-top box and TV manufacturers looking to support HD distribution to multiple home devices. Another UK firm, Imagination Technologies, was launching its Pure digital radio products for the US market. Pure is the leader in the UK but virtually unknown overseas. It will, rightly, tread carefully as it enters the notoriously challenging US market, and will obviously (since the standard is not used) drop DAB from its US product line-up, instead concentrating purely (sorry) on internet radio. Its Sensia product is the highlight of the range and features a full-colour touch screen LCD display as well as additional interactive capabilities like Twitter and Facebook. Pure confirmed to us that video-capable devices are a natural step forward and can be expected in the next year or so. Client Reading: HDTV: Standards Muddle Clouds Outlook For Wireless Displays Add to Technorati Favorites

January 4, 2010 11:01 dmercer
Strategy Analytics will as usual have a strong complement of analysts and representatives in Las Vegas this week for the annual Consumer Electronics Show. Our diaries are full with meetings and events, and possibly the odd party, so we hope to get around to seeing all the major players, and a fair number of smaller ones as well. In terms of hot themes, in the TV space 3D and connectivity will be the main items getting our attention. What will be interesting is to see how companies are planning, if indeed they are, to combine these two emerging capabilities into the same device. They are quite distinct applications, with their own sets of technology and content challenges. By the end of this year, if all goes according to plan, a high end TV will be both 3D- and internet-ready. That could involve a complex set of messages which will need careful explaning to end customers on the retail floor. As I mentioned previously, wireless HD technologies are also likely to feature strongly. We expect major announcements on support for the competing standards from all the major TV vendors. We’ll be aiming to bring regular updates from CES as the show progresses. In the meantime we welcome any questions and comments from clients on specific areas of interest regarding the event. Twitter: twitter.com/DavidMercer_SA Client Reading: HDTV: Standards Muddle Clouds Outlook For Wireless Displays Add to Technorati Favorites Technorati code: XRKDPAZFT879

November 25, 2009 17:11 dmercer
How much is a cable-free TV worth? That’s the key question for TV manufacturers and technology vendors as they seek to stir interest once again in the concept of wire-free TVs and peripheral devices. While few consumers will have noticed, it’s been possible for a few years to connect high definition devices like set-top boxes and Blu-ray Disc players to HDTVs without using a cable. The technology has been built in to a few very high-end TVs from Sony and others, but at enormous cost. In fact, with 40” LCD TVs retailing at $600 or less, it can cost considerably more than that just to retrofit a wireless HD set-up. Clearly only those most passionate about clutter-free homes are likely to see the value in spending $1000 or more to remove one cable from their AV system. Until the costs come down dramatically it seems that wireless HD is likely to remain entrenched in its niche market. Those obstacles won’t stop two key wireless HD technology proponents from getting their messages across as CES 2010 approaches. We’ve published several times about this particular tech standards battle over the past few years. The conclusions in our 2007 review look pretty accurate with the benefit of two and a half years’ hindsight. At that time we didn’t expect much standards clarity or indeed volume in the market much before 2010, and that’s more or less how things have panned out. There are two major technology developers: Amimon, which supports the WHDI standard, and SiBeam, which backs WirelessHD. Behind each vendor is a selection of familiar names from the consumer electronics industry, with several appearing on both sides. For this reason alone it’s been difficult to predict the eventual outcome of this battle, if indeed one solution eventually comes to dominate the market. Sony in particular has flirted with both camps, and although it has recently indicated increased support for WirelessHD, executives have suggested they are still uncertain about the longer term potential for wireless HD technologies in general. According to Sony, the price increment is the main barrier to wider adoption. Amimon has also announced progress in the past few days, with the introduction of WHDI PC modules aimed at netbooks and notebooks. WHDI-HDMI adapters will also be launched so that HDMI devices can be enabled for wireless HD. Consumer products are expected to reach the market next year. Apart from the main technical differences between the two standards – one being that WHDI uses 5GHz, WirelessHD 60GHz – a key debating point is whether whole-home signal distribution has significant value. The WHDI camp pushes this as one its main advantages. Personally this strikes me as a strange argument: most peripheral devices will support one display at any one time, wherever they are placed in the home. There may be some demand for devices which support multiple displays (whole-home DVRs, for example), but these are likely to be an expensive alternative to buying multiple devices. The main user advantage of wireless HD technologies seems to me to be removing the wires within a single AV system, and both technologies do this job. The other arguments inevitably have focused on quality and performance, and these are always tough to judge from an independent perspective. I’m sure we’ll hear more from both camps over the coming weeks and during CES itself. But until they can guarantee more realistic consumer price points wireless HD solutions are likely to remain a distant prospect for mass market success. Twitter: twitter.com/DavidMercer_SA Client Reading: HDTV: Standards Muddle Clouds Outlook For Wireless Displays Add to Technorati Favorites Technorati code: XRKDPAZFT879

November 11, 2009 12:11 dmercer
Global advertising revenues are forecast to decline by 8.5% this year, according to Strategy Analytics’ latest Global Advertising Forecast. In such a tough environment the need to find new communications platforms and ad-based business models is more urgent than ever. In theory the arrival of so many new IPTV services, in both managed and over-the-top environments, should give cause for optimism. If IP technologies have any advantage over traditional alternatives it is that they enable closer, more measurable relationships between those with the message (advertisers) and those receiving it (viewers). So far, however, with a few exceptions, we have seen little commercial evidence of these capabilities in the real world. These are some of the issues we will be exploring at the forthcoming “Future TV Advertising Forum” in London on December 11th. I will be chairing a session on Advertising in the Age of Convergence, with speakers from Coca-Cola, Thinkbox, RomTelecom and the Co-Operative Group. Other keynote speakers at the event include Turner Broadcasting, Sky, Channel 4, ITV, Discovery, Telenet and Ford. It promises to be a compelling and thought-provoking event. Early bird conference passes are available until the 25th November or register to watch the event live online FREE of charge at www.futuretvads.com. Twitter: twitter.com/DavidMercer_SA Client Reading: Online Video: YouTube vs. Hulu - Let the Battle Commence! Add to Technorati Favorites

November 2, 2009 21:11 dmercer
Things certainly didn't run according to the slick rollout plan Sky and Microsoft had promised us. In the grand scheme of things that is unlikely to have any major impact on tomorrow's world of connected TV. But the fact that two well financed global players can stumble so badly at the first hurdle demonstrates the severity of the challenges that lie ahead in the race to bring online TV to the big screen. The day after the official service launch Xbox posted the following message: “due to the unprecedented levels of simultaneous demand, we did not have the capacity to satisfy all service requests”. Xbox indicates that “many tens of thousands” of users tried to use the service. We, on the other hand, are surprised that this level of demand was not predicted in advance for such a high profile launch. The service will certainly have to cope with much higher volumes if Sky’s expectations are realised. The current status as far as we can tell (neither Sky nor Xbox have admitted to a more detailed analysis of the problems so far) is that some Xbox owners are successfully using Sky Player, some have downloaded it and been unable to use it, and others have yet to be offered the service. After the furore of the first day, when the application was withdrawn within hours of its launch, Xbox admitted that there were issues with some servers and that the service would instead be rolled out gradually to ensure that quality was not compromised. My own experience has veered from the excellent to the frustrating. I can say that we have managed to watch an on-demand streamed movie from beginning to end without a single glitch, and the video quality was quite acceptable. By contrast an on-demand sports game yesterday refused to play for more than a few minutes without buffering. I am currently still encoutering many buffering problems and Sky Player disconnections. I have also noted a few minor niggles with the user experience. The Xbox controller switches itself off after a few minutes of non-use, which is inevitable during the viewing of any TV show or movie. So live pause or any other functions cannot be selected until the controller has connected with the console, a process which usually takes 10 seconds or so. The aspect ratio on a number of shows, notably in Sky World News, are incorrectly set, so that tops of heads and captions are chopped off. News tickers are affected by jerky motion. The release dates of some programmes are not indicated in the programme description, which can be especially frustrating in the news genre. Most of these issues will surely be resolved over time. Both Sky and Xbox may be surprised (although they really have no excuses) at the initial demands put on their software and network systems and have to make further investments in order to maintain quality levels. One further point to note is that fast forward during advertisements during on demand shows has been disabled, which should certainly please advertisers. Assumign that these early problems can be solved quickly, it is clear, as we indicated before, that Sky on Xbox has the potential to shake up the UK's online TV market just as the BBC's iPlayer did two years ago. When it works, Sky on Xbox offers an entirely new way of selecting and watching TV on the big screen. The Sky Movies channel experience alone is transformed by the ability to choose instant start from a selection of hundreds of films. On-demand movies in our view will be one of the most used services, at least until Sky and its broadcast partners populate the libraries of television shows, which currently are somewhat restricted. We remain to be convinced that the streaming platform is yet sufficiently robust to support the expectations of subscribers who choose to get Sky for the first time using the Xbox platform. Given the monthly premium of up to £41 which Sky on Xbox customers will be paying there will be no room for the quality problems which are apparent at this early stage. We are also doubtful that many existing Sky customers will opt to pay an additional £9.75 a month to use the Xbox for live television on an additional TV set. The appeal of on-demand TV is immediately apparent, however, and we expect this to be a key selling point. It could be enough to tempt existing Sky customers to buy an Xbox 360. Xbox had better make the most of this window of opportunity: the rumours are already circulating that the PS3 will also offer Sky Player before too long. Twitter: twitter.com/DavidMercer_SA Client Reading: Online Video: YouTube vs. Hulu - Let the Battle Commence! Add to Technorati Favorites

October 22, 2009 17:10 dmercer
The tone of this year's Supercomm is certainly more political than usual, with net neutrality at the center. Otherwise benign speeches and presentations are punctuated with "keep government out of broadband" taglines. All of this is very à propos, of course, as the FCC today is expected to vote on a proposal giving the green light to rules formulation on net neutrality--something the Telcos view as an existential threat. In yesterday's keynote, Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg ripped the idea of net neutrality as "a mistake, pure and simple--an analog idea in a digital universe," and blasted the "Silicon Valley digital elites" (oh God, using "elite" perjoratively is sooo 2008!). Net neutrality threatens to stifle progress, he suggested, noting that "if we can't earn a return on the investments we make in broadband capaicty, our progress toward a connected world will be delayed, if not halted altogether." In what some have referred to as "astroturfing," i.e., creating an artificial grass roots movement, Seidenberg suggested that net neutrality could create a public safety hazard, saying "If we can't differentiate betewen packets, we can't prioritize emergency communications for first responders, telesurgery or heart-monitor readings for digital medicine, or videoconferencing over spam for telecommuters." While it may tug at the heartstrings, the argument is a bit of a red herring. Nothing in the net neutrality discussions occuring now would prevent lawful and reasonable network management. Today's decision should come as no surprise to anyone; the US policy on net neutrality was effectively made last November with the election of a new administration. Twitter: twitter.com/DavidMercer_SA Client Reading: US IPTV Market Sizing: 15.5 Million Subscribers by 2013 Add to Technorati Favorites

October 22, 2009 09:10 dmercer
In a press release published today, we predict that AT&T and Verizon will post double digit IPTV subscriber growth for the third quarter. Both have seen an impressive growth clip over the past year, and are likewise experiencing increased consumer take up percentages. Consumer take up, clearly, is key here. In a report we released back in September, we talked about drivers and inhibitors to IPTV growth in the US market. One key driver of IPTV uptake is household broadband penetration, which is currently at 63%, and estimated to grow to 81% by 2013. Likewise, household familiarity and comfort levels with bundling will drive uptake-this has certainly been the case in European markets including France, where IPTV was initially "bundled" with broadband as a giveaway. The "content is king" adage continues to hold true, and operators able to secure exclusive premium content will likewise have the upper hand. Satellite provider DirecTV's exclusive "NFL Sunday Ticket" has proven to be an effective churn mitigator and revenue source. Finally, aggressive marketing, such as the print and television campaigns currently underway by AT&T and Verizon, will continue to raise awareness and generate demand among television households. Several factors stand in the way of consumer takeup, however, and these must be overcome if IPTV is to truly take off in the US market. Among these potential inhibitors are "Over the Top" (OTT) content-programming and content available for free or inexpensively online-which to some households will obviate the need for pay television altogether. Customer unfamiliarity is another key hurdle Telcos must overcome; to date Telcos have done an inadequate job in communicating the benefits of IPTV over cable or Satellite. They must make this a priority. Likewise, strong and aggressive competition from cable players, who currently have pipes into 90% + of US homes, must not be overlooked. Twitter: twitter.com/DavidMercer_SA Client Reading: US IPTV Market Sizing: 15.5 Million Subscribers by 2013 Add to Technorati Favorites

October 19, 2009 21:10 dmercer
The UK’s 1.3m Sky TV subscribers who own Xbox 360s are about to get a real treat. Instead of putting up with Sky’s archaic EPG they will soon be surfing Sky’s content using the slick Xbox Live interface. We were given a live demonstration of the service today and everything (well, almost everything) is looking good for the commercial rollout on October 27th. Let’s get the slight caveat out of the way first of all: today’s demonstration from a central London location used a broadband connection to the production servers which will support the commercial service rollout. However, during live IP “broadcasts” one of Sky’s sports channels the picture was not 100% reliable, and occasional freezing and jerkiness was noticeable on several occasions. This would not perhaps be significant on a normal streamed video service to a PC, but it seems doubtful if TV viewers will be quite so forgiving. I’m sure Xbox and Sky will ensure that the commercial service is not plagued by these slight problems. Sky’s Griff Parry, who heads the Sky Player group, and Microsoft’s Jerry Johnson, head of Xbox Live in Europe, offered a united front to the partnership, claiming that, after initial and understandable caution, both teams had worked together extremely well and with considerable mutual respect. Of course we have seen previous apparently rosy partnerships involving Xbox fail to deliver, but this is clearly different. Sky would not be putting its substantial reputation for quality and reliability on the line if it was not convinced that the Xbox Live platform was robust, and the evidence so far (subject to the earlier qualification) is looking extremely promising. As expected the Sky programming sits behind one of the Xbox Live menu items in the Video Marketplace tab. As soon as the Sky option is selected the background and colour scheme become blue, reflecting Sky’s corporate image. The Sky menu items closely reflect the standard Sky TV EPG, down to channel and genre options. For relevant options there is the choice to watch on demand or live. In my view the biggest benefit of Sky on Xbox will be for Sky Movies subscribers to have access to a considerable library of true VOD movies on their TV set. Sky believes there are two major opportunities from this initiative: first, to secure loyalty from existing customers; and second, to tap into a lucrative 20-30 demographic for which its traditional satellite-based distribution may not be appropriate. Sky is thinking here particularly of young males who have yet to “put down roots”, who may move home frequently, and who inhabit apartments where satellite dishes are prohibited. This segment is seen as prime Xbox owning territory and therefore ripe for upgrade to premium TV services. Besides increasing the overall customer base, the Xbox Live platform offers Sky a new avenue towards advanced services. The early example of avatars sitting in front of a big home cinema screen watching live football together may or may not prove to be a gimmick. But a real opportunity for Sky certainly lies around integrating communications and content into exciting new services. Parry admitted that he sees headset-based voice chat during programmes as one of the most compelling opportunities in the early days of the Xbox Live venture. We can only imagine the possibilities as Xbox continues to add peripherals such as the set-top camera/microphone – the crowd noise during live sports could soon become the sound of a million home-based viewers shouting at the TV screen . Given what has been possible before, it would seem that Sky and Xbox together really can take the TV experience to a completely new level. If anything disrupts progress it will be corporate disagreements, rather than technology failings. Twitter: twitter.com/DavidMercer_SA Client Reading: Online Video: YouTube vs. Hulu - Let the Battle Commence! Add to Technorati Favorites