Recent Survey on OTT Video and Security Trends Offers Insight into Current and Future State of OTT Video

As it moves into the mainstream, over-the-top (OTT) video is maturing towards a pay environment, with sustainable business models. Premium content delivery is becoming both a more significant component of the overall online video business and a more dominant mode of video delivery.

Video content is not just consumed within the confines of the home either—increasing numbers of consumers are demanding more of the “everywhere” aspect of TV—watching live or catch-up programs on-the-go. The traditional set-top box tethered to the television set, once the center of consumer home-based entertainment, is now but one shared video device in a multi-screen world of personal delivery options.

These are some of the findings of a new StreamingMedia.com survey of 758 media industry executives, which sought to uncover their views on the current and future state of OTT video from inside the trenches. Respondents provided new details about the business, highlighting shifts in models, commercial and technical challenges and security implications for the growing business sector. These respondents in the three key sectors of this industry —pay-TV operators, content providers, and technology providers —already see significant parts of their businesses influenced by the OTT model, in which programming, both live and on-demand, is delivered directly to consumers’ devices, piggybacked on broadband networks.

Key findings of the survey include the following:

  • Over-the-top delivery is a growing business driver for the industry—Perhaps in large part because of the trend above, both the number of companies involved in OTT delivery will grow and the proportion of those businesses substantially invested in OTT technologies will more than double over the next three years.
  • TV is taking over the Internet (not vice versa)—The pay model for OTT services is seen as growing in dominance compared to a free or advertising-supported model. This is a very significant change of perception for Internet video, which was initially interpreted as a free alternative to traditional TV services.
  • There’s a new big screen in town—The tablet has established itself as the new viewing device of choice, according to respondents, although executives are aware that device preferences are changing rapidly, and that many types of technologies and formats will need to be supported within today’s multi-screen environment.
  • The Internet is not big enough yet—Bandwidth and quality issues are still seen as significant technology challenges by respondents. Video on demand, using HTTP Live Streaming (HLS), is now the most prevalent type of service, but executives expect to see more services focusing on linear content—the streaming of live events, especially where social networking capabilities are seen as a key piece of OTT offerings.
  • Challenges with gaining multi-screen content rights— Obtaining broad content rights to stream video to multiple screens is felt to be a significant business growth obstacle. The legal and legislative tangle is especially thorny in the U.S. market where there is ambivalence to breaking traditional business models.
  • OTT video security—Encompassing stream protection and digital rights management (DRM) is a murky area for many organizations to navigate. A transition away from proprietary technologies, such as Flash, has created a landscape of options. It appears too early in the life cycle of MPEG-DASH to see how this might help unify infrastructure and consumer electronics configurations.

Full results from the report, entitled “OTT Video: Coming to a Paid Channel Near You” is available as a free download from the StreamingMedia.com website.

Sponsored by

Survey Results: Content Owners Say Tablets Are Most Important Device For Success Of OTT Services

The challenge for OTT video delivery is to be able to provide consistent, secure, and high-quality content to this ever-increasing number of device types, and to be open and flexible enough to accommodate changing consumer preferences. There’s no question in the minds of executives that recently participated in a StreamingMedia.com survey that the prevalence of so many consumer devices from which they can view videos—not only PCs and tablets, but also smartphones and game consoles—means being able to meet a bewildering array of both open and proprietary technical specifications.

To illustrate how quickly hardware changes, the leading viewing device of choice in this survey did not exist three years ago. The survey shows that tablets rapidly have become the most important choice for OTT delivery. 80% of respondents say they are targeting delivery to tablets. 72% are also streaming to PCs/Macs, while 71% are also targeting smartphones. 80% agree that targeting multiple devices for video delivery is a key implementation challenge at this time.

Screen Shot 2013-09-02 at 9.40.48 PMThe survey also looked at the most popular operating systems underpinning consumers’ viewing devices. The two leading mobile platforms—at least, leading at the time the survey was conducted—represent the systems most likely to be supported
by OTT providers. Android barely edges out Apple as the most popular target platform for OTT initiatives at this time, with 74% of respondents saying they support this platform. An extremely close second is Apple’s iOS platform for smartphones and tablets, supported by 73%. The PC platform—once the dominant second-screen viewing device—ranks in the second tier of respondents’ platform choices, with another 61% targeting Windows 8 as a target platform, and another 60% targeting MacOS.

Screen Shot 2013-09-02 at 9.43.34 PMWhile consumers have a wide array of choices in terms of viewing devices, this also continues the fragmentation of the OTT space, in the view of one respondent. “At the moment, you need several different devices to view content from competing companies,” the respondent points out. “You need a Roku, Apple TV, Amazon streaming, and several others, and you still don’t get the full spectrum of available content. There needs to be a way to have all these outlets in one place so the TV area isn’t cluttered with nine different types of content boxes.”

Full results from the report, entitled “OTT Video: Coming to a Paid Channel Near You” is available as a free download from the StreamingMedia.com website.

Why MSOs Should Not Consider Switching Directly from MPEG-2 to HEVC

imagesWith all the excitement around HEVC and all the reports we have put out at Frost & Sullivan on the topic, we get asked all the time if MSOs should skip AVC and directly switch from MPEG-2 to HEVC. Why is this such an enticing notion and does the idea actually bear merit? To answer that question, first, some history is in order.

Back in the nineties as North America transitioned to digital cable, MPEG-2 was the state of the art compression technology at the time. North America was ahead of the game even with HD and thus nearly all cable applications relied on MPEG-2 for SD and HD alike. But the industry paid a price for that early innovation – no sooner were they done with HD deployment than AVC broke onto the scene and fundamentally disrupted the video compression equation. Faced with a weak economical outlook (remember the dot com crash of 2002, anyone?), and having just made major investments in HD rollouts, the cable industry was unable to take advantage, in a meaningful way, the benefits offered by AVC. In contrast, as Europe began to transition somewhat later in the game, they did use MPEG-2 for SD digital cable but predominantly use AVC for HD.

Fast forward to 2013, when the growth of North American cable subscribers slows and IPTV is surging in popularity with its vast array of content and the lure of rich applications enabled by bi-directional connectivity. The writing on the wall is clear to MSOs –they can transition their primary business to broadband services, or they must dramatically reinvent themselves and the user experience they offer to remain relevant as mainstream Pay TV service providers. Wherein lies the rub – how do MSOs meaningfully and strategically invest in infrastructure that will ensure they are at state of the art over the next decade?

AVC has matured since its early days, and state of the art AVC encoders can themselves offer twice the compression efficiency of first generation AVC encoders. Transitioning to AVC is the most obvious route to grow quality and/or quantity of Pay TV content without expensive expansions of bandwidth. (Arguably technologies like Switched Digital Video are also options, but let’s not complicate the discussion). The problem is, this is easier said than done. Consider the USA has approximately 56 million cable subscribers, with approximately 2 set top boxes per subscriber. Multiply that by a conservative $100 per replacement set top box, and the cost of transitioning end user clients alone exceeds a staggering $11B. Add to that the costs of truck rolls, upgrading head-ends, overhauling quality monitoring infrastructure, and more, and it’s easy to see why no MSO wants to do this type of systemic upgrade twice. Which brings us to HEVC.

In theory, HEVC promises twice the efficiency of AVC. Why, MSOs might ask, should we allow history to repeat itself and spend so much on one systemic upgrade when another disruptive technology is right around the corner? It’s a fair question, but let’s take a look at three of the key assumptions it is predicated on:

  • HEVC offers twice the compression efficiency of AVC: Well, yes and no. That’s the theoretical advantage, but practical encoders are only offering about 20-30% improvement on HD content and even less on SD content. That, by the way, is the same level of improvement that state of the art AVC encoders can offer over legacy MPEG-2 encoders at this point in time. Moreover, they can do this at a fraction of the cost, a fraction of the power consumption and a fraction of the rack space. Given that a large number of modern encoders are built-in software (even if they are appliance form factors) rather than rigid hardware, CAPEX is not in jeopardy if a service provider upgrades to an AVC encoder immediately and eventually soft-upgrades it to HEVC when that ecosystem is mature and ready.
  • HEVC products are being released very quickly, and if I do not transition I will fall behind the curve: There’s certainly plenty of buzz around HEVC; it’s arguably the hottest hash tag at IBC this year. However, there is a difference between first generation products that are a must-have for pilot testing, and a mature product ecosystem that enables mainstream creation, monitoring, delivery and storage of a compression format form end to end. The AVC ecosystem is ready and available today, and costs are falling rapidly as commoditization sets in. The opportunity cost of waiting three years for HEVC products to mature needs to be weighed against the ability to cost-efficiently purchase and deploy AVC infrastructure immediately.
  • UltraHD is coming, and HEVC is the key enabler: Again, yes and no. Certainly twice the compression efficiency is critical if you are quadrupling resolution. HEVC’s flexible transform unit size is ideally suited to compressing UltraHD content. However, there are catches. First, if a service is only deploying one or two channels in the short-term, there is usually enough bandwidth already available to achieve this via AVC. Second, there’s not enough UltraHD source content available yet to justify the deployment of content beyond – most likely – nature, sports and movies. If that. With global penetration of HD itself at under 33% despite the age of the technology, expecting a more rapid pace of deployment for new UltraHD technology is, well, optimistic. Third, there are gaps in the technology ecosystem – for example HDMI 2.0, which is necessary to enable full UltraHD rendering, has not yet been finalized. So UltraHD may be coming, but it’s not something that will happen as a mainstream movement tomorrow morning.

The metrics behind these assumptions will definitely change over time, and the ROI that HEVC can deliver will definitely improve over time. While it’s clear that HEVC is a solid technology advancement and no mere flash in the pan, it is important to keep in mind that a mature ecosystem takes time to develop. By all means, MSOs must begin evaluating HEVC as a key technology component for future infrastructure. However, there’s little reason to consider jumping straight from outdated MPEG-2 to unproven HEVC. AVC offers concrete benefits immediately, and by selecting software-based products during this upgrade, MSOs can ensure long-term, future-proof returns on infrastructural investments.

We’ve done a lot of work at Frost & Sullivan on the topic of HEVC and in addition to three reports analyst Avni Rambhia has already published, we’ve done a lot of private research on HEVC for clients. If you’re looking to get more details on HEVC technology, get copies of our reports, or need any custom research on the HEVC market, please feel free to reach out to me for more details.

More HEVC related posts:

Cutting Through The Hype Of HEVC (H.265)

HEVC (H.265) Adoption Is At Least Five Years Away For Consumer Content Services

Thursday Webinar: Best Practices for Enterprise YouTube Deployment

Most enterprise organizations use some kind of a “YouTube like” social video platform for streaming on-demand video and live webinars inside their firewall. As global enterprises seek to leverage video to improve communication, engagement and collaboration, the need has arisen for an enterprise quality video portal that solves the challenges of governance, security and delivery, with all the functionality employees have grown to expect from exposure to consumer technologies. On Thursday September 5th, at 2pm ET, I’ll be moderating another StreamingMedia.com webinar, this time on the topic of, “Best Practices for Enterprise YouTube Deployment.”

Join this streaming webinar to learn best practices from recent enterprise YouTube deployments at medium and large enterprises across various industries. Some of the challenges examined will include:

  • Delivering HD video to a globally distributed workforce
  • Creating multimedia presentations for internal and external viewers
  • Delivering video to audiences with varying bandwidth requirements

We’ll have a full Q&A session in which your questions will be answered and as always, all StreamingMedia.com webinars are free. So register here and save the date for this instructional webinar.

Majority of Industry Executives Believe OTT Can Be Supported As Its Own Direct-Payment Channel

A majority of industry executives believe that OTT is valuable enough to support direct payments from consumers. These are some of the findings of a new StreamingMedia.com survey of 758 media industry executives, which sought to uncover their views on the current and future state of OTT video from inside the trenches. 54% say a monthly subscription-based model is the best economic model for OTT delivery. However, looking down the road a few years, there will be more impetus for charging consumers on a pay-as-you-go (rental or purchase, sometimes referred to as “pay-per-view”) model for programming. Fewer executives see the monthly subscription approach as working over the long run—the percentage seeing this as the best revenue model slips from 54% today to 46% seeing it as feasible in five years.

Screen Shot 2013-09-02 at 9.22.11 PM

Instead, many executives predict the pay-as-you-go model for program delivery will catch hold over the next few years. Close to two-fifths, 38%, of respondents predict the pay-as-you-go model will prevail in five years, up from 29% that see it working today.

While in the minority, there is still a sizable segment of executives who believe in the advertising-supported model to monetize OTT programming, enabling faster distribution to a wider audience. About 40% support advertising-supported delivery, a number that will hold five years from now as well. There is less support for OTT as being delivered as an adjunct to traditional pay-TV packages. About 30% foresee OTT being funded as part of a value-added service as part of TV subscriptions, while only 7% feel it will work as an additional charge on top of TV subscriptions.

When looking across the three primary industry segments, there is general agreement that monthly subscriptions to OTT services are the dominant approach, and will remain so with a rise in pay-as-you-go plans as well. Pay-TV operators are more inclined than their counterparts to see more potential in bundling OTT services into pay-TV subscription plans.

Screen Shot 2013-09-02 at 9.27.31 PMUltimately, in the view of at least one respondent, pay-as-you-go is the most logical business model for OTT going forward. “If the costs are kept proportional, pay per view is the highest plateau of ‘democratic’ viewing,” the respondent says. “Viewers are choosing the program, and their money can go directly to the source—producers and delivery providers— eliminating the need for commercials. That means more revenues for content creators and delivery providers.” However, the respondent adds, there is still a place for commercials, which “can still find eyeballs if content is free to watch.” To be successful in this new hybrid market, providers need to “trade in high-cost delivery, which only reaches a top tier of income earners, for more viewers at lower cost.”

Full results from the report, entitled “OTT Video: Coming to a Paid Channel Near You” is available as a free download from the StreamingMedia.com website.

Tuesday Webinar: Best Practices for Video Search and Discovery

Screen Shot 2013-08-19 at 2.10.36 PMAnalysts agree that video is growing, both in terms of volume and the need to expose it to search. In fact, Cisco’s 2013 VNI study predicts that globally, consumer Internet video traffic will be 69 percent of all consumer Internet traffic in 2017, up from 57 percent in 2012. But video as a format inherently lacks comprehensive metadata that would make it searchable in the same way text-based content is, thus rendering it an “invisible” asset even if the content is appropriate and meaningful. Applying rich metadata to video content is manual, time-consuming and costly — until now. On Tuesday August 27th, at 2pm ET, I’ll be moderating another StreamingMedia.com webinar, this time on the topic of, “Best Practices for Video Search and Discovery.”

During this session, you will learn about several best practices that can be applied to unlock the value in your video, and make it more discoverable for your target audiences, including:

  • How automatically creating a rich metadata “fingerprint” for video enables it to be discovered via search
  • How that metadata can be further exposed and cultivated to create experiences that drive users to related content, and increase video stream starts and time on site
  • How metadata can be used to drive contextual advertising experiences that offer additional revenue generating opportunities for you and your advertisers.

We’ll have a full Q&A session in which your questions will be answered and as always, all StreamingMedia.com webinars are free. So register here and save the date for this instructional webinar.

CDN Provider Highwinds Closes $205M In Debt Financing

This morning, content delivery provider Highwinds announced they have closed $205M in a debt financing deal with Cerberus Business Finance and Goldman Sachs BDC, Inc. along with a follow-on investment from General Catalyst Partners. Highwinds plans to use some of the money to buyout older investors, but won’t say how much of the $205M will be left once that’s done. The company raised $100M in financing between 2006-2010, so one has to imagine at least half of the new debt financing will go directly to Highwinds expansion.

Highwinds has been in the industry since 2002 and use to be in the large volume, low price, video delivery business but exited that market a few year’s back to focus on the gaming, advertising and software delivery markets. The company plans to use the money to expand their network in China and Russia and further expand their presence in Latin America. The company has egress capacity in excess of 4Tbps and plans to add to that as well. Highwinds isn’t disclosing revenue numbers, but I expect the company will do about $100M this year. One thing Highwinds is open about is that they are profitable, with the business generating a lot of positive cash flow each month. The majority of Highwinds business is CDN related, HTTP and NNTP delivery, with only a small portion coming from transit and co-location products and services. The company has done a good job of signing up PC gaming customers including Valve, GameFly, Wargaming.net, Hawken, World of Tanks, Bigpoint and others.