Livewire is Infosys’ blog for the emerging communications industry. Discuss the latest trends with our experts.

« July 2008 | Main | September 2008 »

August 29, 2008

Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) for everyone

I thought it was just me, but I was thinking that there seemed to have been an unusual number of announcements lately regarding Content Delivery Networks (CDNs). Luckily, Dan Rayburn of Frost & Sullivan (who has a good blog by the way http://blog.streamingmedia.com/the_business_of_online_vi/) confirmed those suspicions recently in some of his postings and reports. His number for new CDN investment over the last 18 months is near $400M, this is in addition to whatever investment has been made in current CDN providers’ infrastructure (e.g. big players like Akamai or Limelight Networks or telecoms like Level 3 or BT). If this seems eerily similar to the heady dot com days circa 2000, I feel you have guessed correctly. That last meltdown resulted in a fire sale of cheap fiber to beneficiaries such as Google and others who astutely picked up those assets. How will it turn out this time?

To answer that question we need to look at what is driving demand in this latest round. The need to distribute even more content to greater reaches of the network for sharing for sites like YouTube or social networking is part of the equation. The other side being for enterprises requiring data management or content owners (e.g. Viacom, Disney) needing reliable distribution. However, this just begs the question of at what point do we have enough bandwidth? You could look at Microsoft’s decision to spend $2B to further develop its own data center and network infrastructure to create competitive advantage and provide managed services to large enterprises as a proxy answer being “obviously not enough”. Well, closer inspection reveals that the new managed services or other value add on top of those large pipes is the real opportunity beyond bandwidth, basic management and reporting. For this reason, I really like what CDN providers such as BT have done with their BT Mosaic service which allows their customers to manage and distribute the content transported over BT’s network. It is those types of services which will create competitive advantage in the CDN marketplace. As for competitors that are simply “pipes” providers? I believe the next round of consolidation is on the way for those players in a commodity business. The revenues do not support “infrastructure only” models particularly when the experts of the network, the telecom providers, are quickly ramping up operations. What are your thoughts?

August 25, 2008

The promise of mobile advertising

The ability to directly target hundreds of millions or even billions of pre-qualified potential customers with specific messaging is an advertiser’s dream. With the mobile phone being a highly individualized device that is typically not shared, this promise should be a quick reality by simply mining some existing data owned by the mobile operator. Eric Schmitt, the CEO of Google, has even recently said in an interview with CNBC that “over time we will make more money from mobile advertising” than with online ad serving.  If we take the scenario further, the promise of location based technologies will create additional value by quickly serving up contextual advertising just in time as you pass by the shop that is trying to lure you inside. Analysts have put the value of serving those ad avails for the mobile advertising market in the range of billions to hundreds of billions of dollars. At a time when mobile operators are struggling to maintain margins, is seems that they are sitting on a goldmine, right? Well, not so much.

There are a number of factors to consider, the first being the assumption that good and accessible customer data exists for each mobile device. As you move out of the western and in particular the US market, the number of prepaid customer dramatically increases which means that reliable customer data to which to match to a psychographic [definition] profile for ad targeting may not exist. Additionally, if the data does exist, it is often stored in a myriad of different customer systems owned by the mobile operator which makes a common extraction scheme more difficult. Second, due to a diversity of mobile handset operating systems and device characteristics, the rendering of the ad to ensure a common look or branding experience is challenging. Mobile rendering technologies exist, but you will still have issues between viewing an ad on a smartphone with a large screen and a mass market feature phone. Nokia has taken some steps in the right direction to address these issues with their Nokia Advertising Alliance, but again you are limited to phones served by the Nokia Media Network. This complexity is also another reason Google is launching their Android platform. Third, it is highly unlikely that mobile operators will share customer data so the launch of any pan-operator ad campaign would be limited by the customer base of a single mobile operator and need to be repeated with other mobile operators in that region. Fourth, the assumption that people are breathlessly awaiting advertising as they move around town is a bit off base. Granted, opt-in profiles can be exploited; however, we have not seen a good model in which to do so. Partially for this reason, location based services have been long on promise and short on delivery for quite some time. We also have already seen the legal issues internet service providers have faced with the NebuAd deployments where users were served advertisements based on web surfing behavior without any opt-in, so having approval of the targeted customer is vital. I feel the best opportunity here would be location linked to mobile search e.g. show we restaurants in my vicinity when I search for restaurants. Last (certainly not the final complexity to this problem), would be the maturing of the mobile operator’s role in the advertising value chain. They are just starting to develop models to exploit this opportunity and will need to become more efficient in operation for ad agencies to appropriately be able to execute advertising campaigns.

So where does that leave us? We have issues with data access for appropriate ad targeting, ad rendering across mobile devices is complex, ad serving across multiple operator’s customer bases implies replicated effort, location based targeting may not be an advertising boon and the mobile operators are still developing their own models to even efficiently operate in the advertising value chain. My colleague Bryon Morrison, the president of Ipsh! whose company executes mobile campaigns on behalf of big brands, equates some of these growing pains to the early days of the internet where the promise existed, but it took a while for monetization mature. If we start there, ad serving on the mobile internet has good short term potential since it bypasses the issues of data access and device rendering, but provides relatively small screen space and weak usage penetration. Serving ad campaigns via SMS is currently the simplest and most effective manner due to ease of management across operators and devices in addition to relatively good click thru success. The most significant new wild card in some regions has been the use of image recognition via the integrated camera on the phone which has met with significant success by again creating significant click thru and taking the complexity out of rendering mobile websites via url input by automatically navigating the user to the ad landing page once the image is captured.

To sum it all up, I am not yet completely sold on the current ad market projections since I feel too many obstacles still exist. However, I do value mobile as an advertising channel and am encouraged by the efforts of those like Bryon at Ipsh! who continue to exploit this evolving market. Additionally, I am very bullish on image recognition as a game changing technology to completely change the way we interact with print or display advertising. What are your thoughts?

August 12, 2008

Is mobile finally ready to live up to expectations?

It seems that we are constantly hearing about the promise of mobile data, applications or mobile internet. In fairness, there have been a number of factors conspiring against progress including handset capability, competing standards, user interface issues and even complexity in billing plans. However, there have been a few positive steps that will hopefully continue to push the market in the right direction.

First off, the announcement of Symbian going open source along with an alliance with Android to create a common open source platform should help coalesce the developer community in addition to removing operating system (OS) variety. Kudos to Nokia’s and Google’s foresight in regards to this issue. At the last Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, I heard the then CEO of Vodafone, Arun Sarin, call for mobile OS consolidation in the marketplace during his keynote. A fragmented marketplace does not benefit content owners who must incur increased development and testing expense to support the various OS configurations, which in turn does not benefit the mobile operator. To illustrate the point, I had a conversation with the European Mobile Head of a leading games publisher who mentioned that for each game title, his team supports a matrixed spreadsheet by phone type and by mobile operator to track development build or test certification. This consolidation will help all content owners or application developers spend more time making compelling experiences for the end customer.  

The second big achievement for mobile is the rise of the handset which is interestingly being led by Apple. While this is in contradiction to open OS, the iPhone clearly demonstrates the value of device driven experiences to encourage consumption. It has been well documented that 95% iPhone users regularly surf the mobile internet which is multiple times higher penetration than other phone models. Additionally, the Apple App store has recorded 60 million users downloading applications in the first month of being launched. The point is not to further applaud Apple, but to highlight that mobile devices can be game changers and that the “iPhone killers” are already being launched by the competition which will bring a new wave of innovation into the market place. This will only help drive usage of mobile internet services.

The last trend has been the mobile operators providing more attractive mobile data plans to remove the complexity from the end user. Most consumers struggle to understand the number of bytes required for a download which leads to confusion or a surprise when the bills come due. In the US at least, the major operators have all announced new plan options from Sprint’s “Simply Everything” to similar options from ATT or Verizon that promote mobile data usage by enabling experimentation, and hopefully adoption as well, by the end user who would not be constrained by download limits.

Results announced by Chetan Sharma Consulting for the wireless mobile data market have been very positive. In the last quarter, data related average revenue per user grew $.50 to help offset declining voice revenues. That put Verizon and ATT at $2.6B and $2.5B in data services revenues respectively. The interesting caveat to those numbers is that non-messaging revenues accounted for 50-60% of those totals which implies a strong uptake of mobile content or internet services. Actions by the operators, platform providers and handset manufacturers seems to be finally in alignment which should only benefit the end customers and allow mobile services to reach its market potential. What are your thoughts?

August 05, 2008

Content is King…. for whom?

Particularly in the IPTV space, many articles can be found regarding “content as king” with the implication that compelling content will drive viewership, assuming all other things equal such as quality of service, etc. A recent report from Analysys Mason regarding multi-play services (this was the Triple Play of phone, broadband and video/IPTV with mobile not included in the particular analysis) in the Western European market found a “lack of compelling TV content from telcos” and “difficulties in transferring telco brand attributes to the TV content market” as barriers to Telco TV penetration. I definitely agree with the assessment as Telecoms cannot have an inferior offering to current cable incumbents. The issue becomes, at what point does content remain a differentiator and at what price is that content still worth purchasing? There have been numerous US-based IPTV providers announcing expansions of VOD libraries or increased HD offerings just as European IPTV providers have announced rights to sports such as soccer. At some point, these triple play offerings start to look very similar to the end customer which essentially makes a premium offering of video commoditized. We have already seen downward price pressures on the bundles in certain US markets were competition exists with a cable incumbent and Telecom IPTV entrant. This further skews an already difficult business case for IPTV while hampering the ability to pay additional content premiums.

In my opinion, content is part of the “table stakes” offering. Creating compelling experiences that span multiple channels such as broadband, video and mobile will be a true differentiator. This is one of the reasons that we at Infosys have been investing in research projects for personal virtual libraries, products to easily port web content to video or mobile and enabling secure handoffs between network access modes. This involves getting closer to the connected home to enable easy transfer of content between those consumption mediums so current silos of content become transparent to the customer. It is taking the taking the talk of “anytime, anywhere” content and making it a simple reality or compelling experience for the end customer. One very good and simple example is the deployment of multi-room Digital Video Recorders. This is not cross-channel, but it is cross-location in the house and does not tie the user to a particular TV.  It is a great experience for the customer. The winners in the Triple Play race will build more experiences like this to differentiate their offering while using content to establish market parity.