Livewire

Why aren’t that many good telecom services around?

2009-01-04T13:07:31Z

Are you satisfied with the service provided by your telecom provider? When was the last time when you had a good experience with your telecom service provider? To many, the answers to above questions are: no and never!! This blog attempts to bring an aspect as to why this might be the case.

Let’s go back to basics and discuss what telecom services are used for. In the good old days, there was, and still is, the traditional post delivery service where communication between people and organisations are through the exchange of written materials (e.g. letters). Then came the telephone where speech communication was made possible. As technologies move on, we now have emails, the Internet and mobile technologies. What is the common theme of all of the above? It is the transport of information or data from one place to another. That sounds simple enough. However, in this information age, providing and managing telecom network and technologies to do that are much more complex.

]]> With these complex telecom technologies, the keys for designing an end to end telecom service are: the ability to turn these network technologies into something that the customers want to use; making the customers feel that they are being looked after whilst using the network capabilities; providing the capabilities and tool for the operational personnel to looking after the customers and ensuring that customer payments are collected to make the business viable - all at the same time.

The major difference between Service Design and product development is the concept of providing a service. Designing a service is about providing the capabilities for monitoring and maintaining the service performance and designing the facilities to deliver after sales support. These are much more complicated than designing products that are sold without any maintenance agreement. This is especially important for managed telecommunications services and managed IT solutions, where the service providers are expected to resolve the problems or to fix faults before the customers or end users realise. A good service is supported by well thought through operational processes, well designed support systems as well as good underlying network technologies. The Service Design skill is the expertise to design, create and enable such service supporting functions.

Many companies think that introducing a new piece of technology is the be all and end all of launching a new service. On the contrary, this is only a small part of the equation as demonstrated above. In an increasing competitive telecommunication environment, it is the service that really matters. Having an advanced network technology is no longer enough as customers/ end users have taken the technology for granted and it is the personable service that really makes the difference and enables you to differentiate your services from your competitor.

Introducing new services will also result in introducing changes into the operational environment. This change management concept is not well understood by most. Hence many service introduction programme fails as a result. In summary, telecom services are actually very complex, involving many network technologies, support systems and operational processes as well as managing changes into the operational environment. These principles and the methodologies for designing a service are poorly defined. Many services are cobbled together by people without such appreciation and right skills to do so. Hence there aren’t many great services around.

What is your view on telecom services? Do you feel being served or do you feel that the telecom providers are just selling network capacity? What does service mean to you?

Texting into Space and Beyond with Virgin Mobile

2008-12-12T20:08:13Z

Virgin Mobile is running a promotion with a partner company called SentForever that will make your text messages intergalactic instead of simply ending up on your friend’s phone. The service uses a high powered transmitter located Cornwall, UK at BT’s Goonhilly earth station. While I shudder at the fact that other intelligent life may be bombarded by messages such as “U R my BFF LOL!!!!” because I am not sure they would deem us as intelligent (you can decode the message at www.internetslang.com), I am impressed with the value of the promotion to Virgin Mobile. In a down economy, they are running a free promotion utilizing an interesting gimmick that captures the sender’s and receiver’s first name, last name and email address which could provide a wealth of new leads for Virgin Mobile. I am always impressed with Virgin’s ability to connect with their target market and this is another example of their thinking outside of the box.

Video Everywhere, But How Do I Find It?

2008-12-04T19:16:51Z

We have more video available than ever before in the form of video on demand for television, internet and mobile devices. The amount is staggering when you add in user generated content and broadcast,. The good news is that, according to a recent Neilsen report (http://www.tvweek.com/news/2008/11/viewing_across_screens_grows_n.php), the average US household is watching TV for a whopping 8 hours and 18 minutes a day! You then add the 27 hours of online and 3 hours of mobile video per month for a seemingly massive customer base that cannot get enough video (or time outside the house).

]]> This creates a situation with numerous entrants trying to secure their piece of the market. YouTube is dominating user generated videos, Hulu is fast approaching critical mass with syndicated online content, Cable and Telco providers are providing massive amounts of video on demand for their customer bases for tradition TV consumption, and Over the Top providers like Netflix and Blockbuster (http://www.blockbuster.com/corporate/newReleases) are launching their own “in home” service with a separate set top box. However, I just described a bunch of silos that have limited portability across channels and a poor user interface for discovery for the TV, which is still the main consumption channel. This completely misses the user delight of “anytime, anywhere” content. The biggest issue is being limited by a remote control that uses arrow keys and poor text input capabilities that prohibit the navigation of thousands of video titles. The next need is to effectively bring the internet to the TV in a more usable manner to better capture the online video. The last major concern is the need for portability to different devices within the home or on their person.

Interestingly enough, the closest anyone is coming to solving the above problems has been the IPTV deployments such as ATT Uverse multi-room DVR (http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6613355.html) and their supporting mobile access via select devices. However, they are still constrained by the TV remote control input device and user interface which stunts internet integration and content browsing. It will require another step forward for the set top box or remote control manufacturers to solve the problem of access and discovery. Some have postulated that motion sensing controls to allow quick scroll or keyboards will be required for input (which is basically like using my computer so I don’t see the value of TV). I am not sure of the answer, but I know the amount of hardware providing more video choices is growing in my house and I still can’t find anything to watch. Any ideas?

Expanding the Value Chain and Bumping Into Incumbents

2008-12-03T04:53:50Z

Here is some news that may have flown under your radar, Nokia is supposedly launching a MVNO in Japan in 2009 (http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/nokia-launch-its-own-mvno-japan/2008-11-24). This received considerably less press than Google looking to buy spectrum in the US, but has similar ramifications as it gives the handset giant an ability to test the waters as a service provider (obviously not owning network assets) in an eastern market targeting high end phone users. The significance here is the evolution from handset provider to creating direct to consumer relationships via retail stores (online and offline) to owning content with Nokia Live venues to providing content platforms for mobile service providers to now being the mobile service provider. Assumedly, Nokia should understand phone distribution, content retailing, provisioning and billing enough to be successful if their service is attractive to their target niche.

]]> Will Nokia ever become more than a MVNO and expand into multiple geographies? Maybe they find other MVNO successes, but I don’t see them owning spectrum and a network anytime soon. Traditional incumbents, such as the current mobile service providers, have invested considerable resources in their business models which does not allow for entry of a Google or a Nokia. Incumbent service providers are already battling to avoid being commoditized into the “dumb pipe” and will continue to try to own the customer relationship. That means keeping handset manufacturers and platform providers in a secondary role. Nokia’s Ovi content distribution platform (forward integration) has received limited uptake by western service providers, whom some see as a Trojan horse for other Nokia direct to the customer services. The most recent enhancements include mail, maps and messaging (http://www.rcrwireless.com/article/20081202/WIRELESS/812029995/1084/newsletter31). Google has been initially successful in deploying their Android platform (again forward integration), but I wonder if it is more to do with having a lower price point device and service provider fear of the iPhone that is boosting ATT. Google is not one to sit idle, so I am sure they will be making other moves to expand their role in the value chain.

The issue is not so much that mobile carriers are doing anything insidious, it is about protecting your future viability as a company with an exercise with Porter’s Five Forces Strategy (http://www.quickmba.com/strategy/porter.shtml). You also see with Telecoms battling Cable companies for video subscribers, Telecoms and Cable companies battling Over the Top (OTT) providers of similar services (who run on the former’s networks), or content owners battling certain online distributors just to name some examples. The real issue is that not everyone can provide the same service to the end customer since that creates commoditization and ultimately impacts profits which make participants to leave markets. That scenario does not work well for participants that have high capital investments in those markets. The fight revolves around ownership of the customer and the resultant revenue streams from that relationship. However, inefficient incumbents cannot maintain those customer relationships through blockage alone (as discovered by the music industry), but though continual innovation. At Infosys, we guide customers through continual re-invention and business transformation to ensure competitive advantage is maintained, because if you are not getting better, you are getting worse. Do you have any thoughts on the topics above? I would be interested in hearing them.

Are websites keeping pace with the Mobile Web evolution?

2008-11-24T18:39:15Z

As I mentioned in my previous blog entry, the evolution of web browsing experience triggered by iPhone, Android, Blackberry and other new devices have attracted a large mass of users to mobile web. Even the mobile browsers like Safari and Opera have started to evolve to dramatically improve the mobile web browsing experience. With these radical changes taking place, the lines between the PC and Mobile browsing experience have started to blur. But do the B2C websites keep pace with this mobile web evolution?

]]> A number of market research studies continue to indicate that the web browsing experience remains to be poor despite the evolution in the mobile browsers. I would like to point you to some statistics that I came across related to this topic. Jeremy pointed me to an interesting market study by Bango that indicated that “half of the top 20 most trafficked websites are not optimized for mobile devices, despite the fact that mobile web users now account for an average of 5 percent of all site visitors”. A recent worldwide study indicated that a poor experience on their initial use of the mobile Web made them "reluctant to access" either the site - or the Internet in general - on their mobile phones again.

With the increasing number of users trying to get to the Internet from their mobile phones, I believe it is time for the websites to get up to speed with this new trend and see how they can best utilize the mobile web. Major Internet sites are beginning to optimize their site layout to address the population of consumers accessing the Internet through their mobile devices. But the number of users with the high-end phones like an iPhone or a Blackberry is far less compared to standard phones from manufacturers like Samsung, LG and Nokia (even these phones have started coming with an enhanced browsing capability). So when the websites are being designed to support mobile based access, they need to keep in mind a wider range of phones than targeting only high end phones which is the only way to increase traffic to their websites through Mobiles.

The Mobile Web user experience still has a long way to go and this time it is the websites that will need to evolve to address these user experience issues. With increasing mobile web usage and an increasing number of consumers with Mobile phones, will the B2C websites start taking this trend more seriously and start optimizing for mobile based access? How quickly will B2C websites take advantage of this evolution and start unlocking the revenues from an increased traffic generation is a question that remains to be answered. Will online retailers take advantage of this trend to start driving more transactions through the mobile phone? These are some interesting questions and we will have to wait and see how these websites evolve over a period of time to start addressing the Mobile Web market. I would like to hear your thoughts about this topic.

Death of Long Tail User Generated Content?

2008-11-20T15:25:24Z

I have been sifting through a number of articles lately in regards to long tail video content. The latest meme has been the death of the long tail, I would say more specifically, the death of monetization of user generated video content. Just to be clear, long tail content available from various artists and producers will continue to be consumed by niche users, there is a model to monetize those revenues with a large digital library that is not moving physical goods (see The Long Tail by Chris Anderson). Additionally, certain user generated videos will continue to draw “crowds”. However, there are a few different trends that are affecting the model that we initially assumed where money would follow the user generated content (UGC) eyeballs.

]]> First, the very tools that helped drive the UGC sites are now drowning those sites in video inventory. Inexpensive video editing or video capture tools with easier upload processes have created significant participation, hence exploding the long tail of UGC video. This enhanced participation has not created more valuable property, which is opposite the network effect. As an advertiser, it is now even more difficult to properly target your audience and protect your brand from being placed next to a less than desirable video. Proctor & Gamble’s GM of Inactive Marketing Ted McConnell was a bit more blunt in his assessment of social network UGC "What in heaven's name made you think you could monetize the real estate in which somebody is breaking up with their girlfriend?" (http://adage.com/digital/article?article_id=132606).

Secondly, the economics are still developing for online video advertising. According to the CEO of BlackArrow, video watched on TV commands $.50 per thousand views on average as compared to the same content being consumed online by the same audience size would only get $.05 per thousand views from advertisers (http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/13/online-video-wheres-the-money/). That is a ten-fold decrease from advertisers for the same professional content, this is not even considering amateur video

Lastly, the content houses themselves are starting to wake up to the internet as a complimentary channel. As I noted in previous blog entry, online video consumption doubled in the US last year. Also noted from TechCrunch, this has been aided by the trend of people using the internet as “catch up TV” for episodes that missed recording on their DVR. Sites like Hulu or the content owner’s (e.g. Comedy Central.com, ABC.com) are providing this outlet which is more attractive to advertisers who have better confidence in the target audience (however still with a lower price point). This shift from the content owners has developed this new viewing habit which actually captures more audience with real time, time shifted (DVR) and place shifted (what the DVR missed). Essentially, long tail professional content can be monetized, but long tail UGC appears to be challenged.

Clearly, the growth trends for UGC video will continue unabated as community participation continues to grow. It is my opinion, that the business model of Hulu, for example, with long tail professional content provides a better business model even with a smaller audience. Granted, having a large audience is easier than creating a large audience, but you still have to make money in the end. What are your thoughts?

CTO in the Limelight

2008-11-20T15:21:55Z

One of the more interesting developments mixing technology and politics has been the intent of the US President Elect Obama to create a CTO cabinet position for his White House team. Currently, there is not a single position in the Cabinet that drives technology strategy for the White House and this only seems like a logical position to create. My question would be “why did this take so long”? No major company operates without the use of technology to help run their business. Furthermore, leading companies use technology to create competitive advantage against their rivals through an optimized supply chain, business intelligence capability, sales force tools or a number of other uses. The same should hold true for the US government which is a massive entity in its own right.

]]> There has to be significant opportunities to create shared service approaches for all the different e-government initiatives in addition to reducing dependence on paper based filings. This would create transparency and ease of use for the constituents. Also, a CTO position can drive initiatives to help US competitiveness by advocating for technology infrastructure improvements or programs to create skill sets needed for the future of business. I feel it is a terrific first step for a position that I hope continues to evolve and grow since it should be beneficial for all companies services the technology sector. What are your thoughts? Are there any other similar examples you have?

As mobile phone content explodes, the Walled Gardens crumble…

2008-11-16T10:13:05Z

Over the past years, we have seen the Wireless industry undergoing a significant change – the service providers’ walled gardens have continued to disintegrate with the explosion of the content and applications available for Mobile phones. In my opinion, a couple of factors have contributed to this phenomenon.

]]> With the introduction of phones like iPhone and G1, the web browsing experience has moved away from a simple WAP-based access to a more PC like experience (though not there yet!!). Today, with browsers on many smart phones providing a near-PC web experience, not only has the mobile web usage grown but the number of channels through which the content on the internet can be consumed has multiplied. With consumers seeing more and more options to obtain and consume media on the phone off the deck, service provider’s control on the content being served has diminished considerably.

Mobile App Stores (lead by Apple and Google) are evolving and customers can now get access to thousands of applications. These App stores have created a distribution platform that connects the application developers directly with their consumers. On the other hand, the Service providers, who until recently, controlled what content and applications are made available to their customers, have started to lose control over marketing and distribution of applications and content.

As the Walled garden continues to crumble, the wireless operators should not become mere “conduits” to mobile content and applications like the Broadband service providers are in the traditional Internet world. I see this as an opportunity for the Wireless service providers to not only drive up Data revenues and introduce new Ad-based revenue streams but also to create new business models to remain competitive in this market place. I also see this as a potential opportunity for application developers and other companies to produce innovative content and applications that would attract consumers. What do you think the Service providers will need to do to retain their revenue streams from content sales and media delivery?

Innovative Ways to Drive Advertising Revenues

2008-11-14T16:08:12Z

Two recent stories really caught my attention as innovative ways to drive additional advertising revenue. The first comes from Sky TV in the UK and the second from MTV Networks (part of Viacom). I would consider both case studies very significant and unique.

]]> In the case of Sky, which does not own mobile assets, they will now offer cross-platform advertising placements on their TV and online assets in addition to T-Mobile and Vodafone mobile portals (http://www.nma.co.uk/Articles/40382/Sky%20takes%20possession%20of%20mobile%20ad%20sales.html). This direct sales relationship allows for Sky to offer a full bundle and effectively compete with a quad-play (voice, broadband, TV, mobile) telecom service provider. Alternatively, T-Mobile and Vodafone deserve some credit for opening up their platform to allow this type of direct selling which creates value for all parties in addition to generating more mobile advertising opportunities. Supposedly Adidas and Fiat would be the first brands to take advantage of this bundled capability from Sky.

For MTV Networks, this seemed to be a case of “if you can’t beat them, join them” as they will be serving advertisements with their pirated content on MySpace (http://www.crn.com/software/212000095). No, that was not a typo considering the battles Viacom has been fighting to stop piracy of their content, just simply a different way of going about things. When MTV Networks metadata is detected for a video clip posted on MySpace, instead of forcing the clip to be taken down, an advertisement provided by MTV will be served. Now I do not agree with piracy, but the value of content does increase with distribution (assuming it has been properly monetized) and this is a unique way of creating value via an undesirable distribution method that is difficult to fully police. A tip of the hat to MTV Networks for coming up with an innovative way to address this problem.

Do you have any interesting new twists for monetizing advertising opportunities? I would like to hear them. At Infosys we realize the value of advertising to our customers (particularly telecom service providers) and have multiple ongoing research projects to create IP for making multi-channel advertising more effective. It is just one more way to stabilize average revenue per user as other parts of the bundle (voice, broadband, TV, mobile) come under price pressure.

A New Brand Launched in the US

2008-11-05T15:06:44Z

In a slight diversion from my typical subject matter, I cannot help but take note of the truly historic change that happened with the US Presidential Election. Barack Obama was voted in as the new Presidential Elect and represents a dramatic shift from past US Presidents in his ethnicity and background. Brands are represented by a logo or spokesperson, the new brand for the US is one of multi-culturalism. While the US already participates in the global economy, this new face demonstrates inclusion in the global community by example and not just words. While I do not believe that President Elect Obama has any superiority over past Presidents simply due to his ethnicity, he does have a unique opportunity to as an ambassador to the billions of other fellow travelers on the planet who may find hope in his message of inclusion. Working for a global company like Infosys has given me new insights as how we are so interconnected. My hope is that this connectedness only improves for the betterment of our global neighbors. Regardless of political stances, I hope all Americans can rally behind the new Presidential Elect as we all navigate the currently turbulent global economy in his term ahead.

Use of Mobile in the 2008 US Election

2008-11-03T15:38:58Z

While we have already seen candidates in past US Presidential elections utilize the internet, mobile has become significantly more important than in previous election cycles. This has as much to do with shifts in consumer behavior as it does with new campaign strategies. While Americans were early adopters of the internet, a large part due to the telecommunications infrastructure in place, they had much slower uptake of mobile data services in comparison to peer countries in Western Europe.

]]> The most intriguing use of mobile services during the current campaign was the announcement of Barack Obama’s Vice Presidential pick. While this would have been a first of its kind announcement, the anticipated 3M+ text messages had trouble being delivered and many went out late (http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/obama-text-message-promise-proves-unworkable/2008-08-25). I believe it is less of an indictment of the concept and more an issue of the vendor’s attempt to run mass messaging. (ed note- I really hope the emergency notification service works better than this). Another interesting thread is the sale of mobile content for the candidates John McCain and Barack Obama. As reported by the content aggregator Thumbplay, content such as realtones (high fidelity ringtone) and wallpaper have been selling almost 9 to 1 in favor of Barack Obama (http://www.fiercewireless.com/press-releases/obama-or-mccain-thumbplay-com-could-hold-answer-0?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal&cmp-id=EMC-NL-FMC&dest=FW). I am not sure this translates into a real comparison as to how people will vote since Thumbplay’s customer base is predominantly between the ages of 18-34 and live in metro areas which would skew to the profile of the average Democrat voter. Regardless, these are interesting uses of mobile and show how the use of mobile data services is continuing to mature.

Do you have any stories regarding the use of mobile for election purposes? Please share them.

Breaking Through with Android and the G1

2008-11-01T03:46:54Z

I have to hand it to Google, they have shown considerably more momentum as of late in regards to their Android platform. Maybe their strategy is to lull you a bit before striking, as release in to the market was panned by many writers as being uninspiring. I myself have been a bit lukewarm in previous blog entries in regards to the Android initiative as well, but I am starting to reconsider my position. While I am not completely sold on the idea that T-Mobile will get the boost from G1 that ATT is getting in terms of new customer adds in the recent quarter from their iPhone (2.4M third quarter iPhone activations http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=4800&cdvn=news&newsarticleid=26227). I am sold on some recent moves by the handset manufacturers and the Android model for the operators.

]]> The rumor mill had Motorola developing a new social networking phone especially for Android. I am not sure of the full benefit here in regards to social networking (does it find me a new BFFL? Ha!), but it is an interesting concept into the youth market. Then Motorola more recently announced that they would use Android instead of Symbian going forward in an effort to reduce costs (http://www.rcrwireless.com/article/20081030/WIRELESS/810309993/-1/rss01). While they are not a the dominant providers of Symbian phones, this is still a significant move since Motorola still has brand cache. It would also make sense that they could further consolidate their Linux initiatives with Android unless that would create an issue with Verizon’s LiMo announcement (http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2008/05/verizon_limo_li.html).

In regards to the mobile operators, Google has set up a beneficial revenue share model for value added services to entice adoption. Remember, Google does not care about a revenue stream from Android (it’s free) or Android services, they want the associated search and advertising serving on each of those handsets. They seem to be willing to pursue some creative paths to achieve that goal. However, at some point they do need to care that some of their applications that they have opened up to the wider development community are completely killing their phones, user experience anyone? (http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/103008-new-android-apps-a-mixed.html?page=1)

As always, I would like to hear your thoughts on Google’s next steps.

Consolidation and Pressures on the Telecom Industry

2008-11-01T03:32:24Z

Consolidation is normal in most industries. Obviously extreme market conditions can lead to the “shotgun” marriages that are now happening in Financial Services, but Telecom has been relatively unscathed in the recent downturn. In the case of Verizon getting Alltel, Verizon may have benefited from the private equity consortium offloading Alltel only after holding it for one year (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/06/technology/06phone.html). Since most private equity firms hold their portfolio companies for considerably longer than one year, Verizon might have lucked in the deal to now create the largest wireless carrier in the US. The most recent merger news has been CenturyTel acquiring Embarq, which is a good move in my opinion, to give CenturyTel additional scale in its core market (http://www.centurytel.com/Pages/AboutUs/PressRoom/pressRelease.jsp?page=Corporate/Press_Release66.html). In full disclosure, I have met most of the C-level executives at CenturyTel and have faith that they will do a good job in with the combined entity even though they are merging with a larger company. My only current concern would be lack of a stronger wireless footprint in order to create a “quad-play” offering. This is probably the start of other rollups of rural operators.

]]> While we may not see significant movement with large Telcos combining, I feel there may be significant activity for the industry’s software and content providers. In a previous blog, I had addressed impact in the venture community from the current credit crisis. Ron Conway from Sequoia Capital has reportedly advised his portfolio companies to start cutting costs while finding a way to profitability (http://gigaom.com/2008/10/08/sequoia-rings-the-alarm-bell-silicon-valley-in-trouble/). This is not always easily achieved since one (cost cutting) tends to adversely affect the other (building new revenue streams). The latest MoneyTree from PWC report shows a considerable third quarter dip in venture financing so Ron is obviously not in isolation here. In order to save portfolio investments, I would expect more match making with smaller software companies in order to provide scale to whether the current market. My concern is that these are new innovators and constraining them effectively constrains the launch of new and innovative value added services. On the other hand, with consumer spending starting to dip and recent reports of shrinking mobile spend, maybe this is a wise choice on the part of the venture firms since there may not be buyers for those services.

What are your thoughts on what will happen in the Telecom industry? Will more big companies merge or simply ride it out?

Bringing Interactive to the TV

2008-10-17T15:34:31Z

Occasionally good fortune befalls me for timing with my blog posts. Sean Buckley had a nice piece on changing TV viewing behaviors (http://www.telecoms-mag.com/article.asp?HH_ID=AR_4518) which corresponded nicely with my attendance at the Microsoft Mediaroom Developers conference this week where I was able to see some of the newer innovation possible on their TV platform. While I saw some incredible user interfaces with interactive applications, the question really comes down to an issue of usage by the end customer. As a veteran of many discussions regarding “lean forward” or “lean back” experiences for the TV, I tend to agree more with Sean’s position regarding the need to change user behaviors before traction will occur. This is not impossible to overcome. A good parallel to draw in regards to customer uptake would be significant explosion in online video consumption where users started using the online channel when compelling content became available.

]]> While I do understand the argument that TV is often reserved for time to relax or “zone out”, I feel there is still tremendous opportunity for interesting interactive news or sports applications which could be game changers for the TV experience. Providing non-intrusive widgets displaying friend’s status, messages or interesting statistics changes the complexion of viewing a sporting event by providing a community element. In regards to news, giving the ability to the user to immediately drill down into a particular subject provides significant value. How many times have you heard something briefly on the TV only to then have to go online to find out more information? Another intriguing use case I saw at the conference was the use of a wifi device (in this case an iPhone) to bifurcate the TV viewing experience by un-tethering from the set top box and the TV itself. The user was able to manage the full DVR functionality in addition to having a soft remote interface on the iPhone. This provides more value to the phone by making a more integral component in the customer’s lifestyle while providing easier access to TV content. Additionally, there was the ability to use games on the phone that then reflected the results on the TV screen. It was a very rich example of convergent services. In the end, some interactivity may be more popular with singular viewing (my co-watcher may not be interested in my news deeper dive), but should continue to evolve into group watching popularity as other applications are introduced around topic such as group sports.

At Infosys we are continuing to push the envelope in regards to interactive TV applications and TV deployments. Our participation with Microsoft Mediaroom is only a start and our other capabilities are reflected in our recent announcement with Bharti Airtel (http://www.infosys.com/newsroom/press-releases/2008/next-gen-DTH-Service.asp) where we are providing our own intellectual property to accelerate TV deployments. What is your experience with interactive TV?

[As a side note- Kudos to the Microsoft marketing team for doing a brilliant job in Toronto, top notch.]

What is new with online video?

2008-10-14T06:28:45Z

I spend so much time discussing IPTV, I sometimes forget to spend some space blogging on online video. Essentially the truest form of IPTV, online video is a trend on the upswing which is validated by the latest report from ABI Research showing the number of households watching online video doubled from 32% in 2007 to 63% in 2008 (http://www.abiresearch.com/press/1247-Number+of+US+Online+Households+Watching+Broadband+Video+Doubled+In+One+Year).]]> I feel that there are a few forces at work here. First, we are seeing a significant amount of content being made available on the internet and it is being more actively promoted for consumption (e.g. HBO, ESPN, YouTube). Fears of cannibalization are being replaced by audience expansion. Second, long tail or niche content providers are using the internet to cost effectively reach their audience which is helping to drive the total amount of content available. In the past, distribution costs would be too great to utilize TV as a delivery mechanism. Third, online video enables even better advertising options by placing pre-roll or embedded ads on the player itself to truly target consumers. Short clips can use specific ads to match the content more effectively than showing ads in a channel timeslot. Finally, consumer behavior is changing as more people are getting on the internet to view content, it is not such a tweener activity anymore.

However, online video creates a number of issues as well. The first being an interesting conundrum where the bearer of the broadband traffic typically does not benefit from online video consumption. It simply creates a larger burden on the network and the content owners do not have to pay for this additional burden which is the basis for the net neutrality debate in the US (Telco 2.0 blog does a good job dissecting this analysis for the BBC iPlayer http://www.telco2.net/blog/2008/02/bbcs_iplayer_nukes_all_you_can.html). The second issue is discovery of relevant content. Most users will not spend hours scouring for content to watch, but will go directly to destination sites for a specific show or clip they may have missed (NBC’s use of Olympic coverage is a good example http://www.nbcolympics.com/). This is where new entrants such as Videosurf are entering the market to incorporate visual discovery to make searches more relevant than relying on metadata tags put in place by an administrator.

In summary, online video is definitely on the upswing. The key will be to continue to create additional value by the content providers which complements their broadcast offering. The real issue will be the eventual showdown over payment for the infrastructure this video is delivered over. Stay tuned. Any thoughts on this subject?