Now with added video!
Securing a partnership with the likes of Netflix and Amazon might be the golden-ticket for the telcos, but no-one should forget they have as much negotiating power as the OTTs.
For the telcos, convergence is an oasis of profit in the barren desert of the connectivity industry. As traditional means of generating cash are either destroyed (SMS and voice tariffs) or increasingly squeezed (CAPEX investments for 5G), many telcos are searching for differentiation to charge more and prove they can add value beyond the utilitised connectivity column. Content is a very popular route for many to take.
Aside from attempting to create content platforms, more telcos are seeking third-party relationships to move into the aggregator business model. This is a very sensible approach to business, the telcos can add a lot of value to the OTTs and securing a partnership with one of the more prominent streaming players is a key cog to their own ambitions. However, despite the desperation of the telcos, they should consider themselves on equal terms to the OTTs.
“Every telco is fighting to become an aggregator, but there is also a battle between the streaming OTTs to gain visibility,” said Paolo Pescatore of PP Foresight.
As Pescatore notes, outside of the two major players in the streaming world (Amazon Prime and Netflix), achieving visibility and scale can be very difficult. This is and will continue to be an incredibly congested field, therefore the relationship between telcos and OTTs could add an edge for any challenger.
Looking at the growth opportunities for the OTTs, there is plenty of cheddar left on the table, though in the developed markets, there are only crumbs left. Take the US for example, here Netflix subscriber growth has slowed, suggesting the glass ceiling for direct customer acquisition has been reached, or will be in the near future. The question is how these final customers can be engaged? Third-party relationships are key here.
At IBC last year, Maria Ferreras, VP of EMEA Business Development at Netflix highlighted that partnerships with telcos were an important cog as the streaming giant continues to evolve. At the time, the discussion was primarily from a billing relationship, though there are plenty of other opportunities.
Partners with their own content platform offer Netflix and Amazon something incredibly important; real-estate. Whoever can secure the most prominent position on the content platform will gain additional visibility and engagement with customers. It is evidence the OTTs are buying into the convergence strategies employed by the telcos, but also the value of the telco relationship with the customer.
Looking around the world, these partnerships are becoming much more common. Netflix has been embedded in the Sky platform in the UK, while Amazon Prime has been integrated into the Virgin Media platform. Mexico’s Totalplay has become the first operator in LATAM to add Amazon Prime to its TV service, while Vodafone Spain has secured partnerships with Netflix, HBO Spain and Amazon Prime.
There are of course numerous ways in which these partnerships can develop. Some are simply billing relationships, allowing the streaming service to be added onto the monthly bill, while some can have the OTT experience embedded into the content platform offered by the partner. What is clear, however, is this is an arms race from the OTTs.
The more partnerships which are in place, the more opportunity there is to engage potential customers and increase subscriptions. These partnerships are not only about securing visibility or accessing billing systems, but also leaning on another brands credibility to engage customers who wouldn’t have been previously accessible.
Interestingly enough, there aren’t many telcos or content providers who have relationships with more than one of the streaming giants. This might be a coincidence, or there might well be a desire from the OTTs to secure exclusivity through the platform of choice, even if it is not made official or public.
The challenge which many will face is going toe-to-toe with Amazon and Netflix. If these partners are securing the best relationships with the telcos, they will gain the most eyeballs on their services. Disney is company which will certainly want to lean on relationships with third-parties, but it will have to move sharpish to ensure it is not shut out.
Although Disney is one of the most prominent brands on the planet, it is almost unknown in the content world. This will present a challenge in two ways. Firstly, cutting through the background noise to educate the user on its offering, and secondly, the billing relationship.
For both of these challenges, third-party relationships with telcos and content platform owners can help. A direct line of communication is already in place, visibility can be offered through apps, billing relationships already exist, and third-parties are looking for partners to help build bundling options.
If Disney is going to be successful in its pursuit of streaming fortunes, it will need more than engaging content. It already has the content, and the ambitions for original content creation do look promising. The challenges will be in terms of securing visibility and credibility in the eyes of the consumer.
Telcos should realise sooner rather than later that they are an equal partner to the OTTs in this context, as they are just as desperate to secure favourable partnerships as the telcos. This is the next battleground in the streaming race; partners mean prizes.
Half of UK homes now subscribe to TV Streaming services, reveals a new Ofcom report, as the country increasingly opts for video-on-demand.
The precise proportion is 47%, which is lower than some might expect given the apparent ubiquity of Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc, but still a significant jump from 39% just a year earlier. Furthermore, since many people have more than one service, the total number of subscriptions increased by 25%. If this keeps up it won’t be long before nearly all of us spend our evenings consuming copious amounts of VoD.
This is the headline finding from Ofcom’s latest Media Nations Report, which takes a deep look at the country’s media consumption habits. Any parent won’t be at all surprised to hear that younger people far prefer on-demand video over traditional broadcast and, as a result, consumption of the latter is in rapid decline. Thanks to the oldies broadcast telly is still the most popular form of video consumption, but not for long.
“The way we watch TV is changing faster than ever before,” said Yih-Choung Teh, Strategy and Research Group Director at Ofcom. “In the space of seven years, streaming services have grown from nothing to reach nearly half of British homes. But traditional broadcasters still have a vital role to play, producing the kind of brilliant UK programmes that overseas tech giants struggle to match. We want to sustain that content for future generations, so we’re leading a nationwide debate on the future of public service broadcasting.”
The UK state seems to be in a mild panic about the decline in viewership of what it considers to be public service broadcasting, which means any old rubbish that’s publicly-funded. It’s highly debatable how much of the content produced by the BBC provides any kind of public service other than distracting us for a few minutes, but Ofcom seems to still think it’s really important.
This last table is especially illustrative of the current state of play, with younger adults all about YouTube and Netflix. If Ofcom had surveyed teenagers we suspect that bias would have been even more pronounced and as these trends continue the TV license fee is going to become increasingly hard to justify.
Content giant Disney has unveiled what it presumably hopes will be a Netflix-busting bundle of Disney+ ESPN+ and Hulu in the US.
Disney+, the core streaming service for Disney movies and other video content, had previously been announced at a cost of $7 per month. Disney also owns the majority of sports content network ESPN, and general TV content service Hulu, so it’s bundling them together with Disney+ for a grand total monthly cost of $13 – five bucks less then they cost individually and coincidently exactly the same as regular Netflix costs in the US.
“I’m pleased to announce that in the United States, consumers will be able to subscribe to a bundle of Disney+, ESPN+ and ad-supported Hulu for $12.99 a month,” said Disney CEO Bob Iger on the company’s recent earnings call. “The bundle will be available on our November 12 launch date.”
Commentary on this seems to be universally positive, with many observing that it’s very good value for money.
Think of the IP that ESPN + Hulu + Disney offers. That $13 month is, relatively speaking, extremely affordable and a no brainer as a consumer choice. https://t.co/7ayHpVbv22
— Luke Thomas (@lthomasnews) August 6, 2019
“The move throws down the gauntlet to Netflix and other rival services,” said Tech, Media and Telco Analyst Paolo Pescatore. “For sure it is competitively priced and seeks to reduce fragmentation. Initially, it seems that Disney is looking for scale but will need to increase revenue to recoup the significant investment. Consumers have some tough decisions ahead as they can’t sign up to all the streaming services.”
At that price, I can only see this as a loss-leader to capture a significant portion of the streaming market before raising fees incrementally.
And if you think that won’t work, you’ve never been a parent at 7am with toddler screaming about missing his favorite show. https://t.co/nRW1ewspNs
— Cameron Soran (@cameronsoran) August 6, 2019
Netflix has announced it will launch a mobile-only version of its service in an effort to gain traction in one of the worlds’ fastest growing digital economies.
With the international markets looking like the most promising growth opportunities for Netflix in the future, the team will have to adapt the service to context. India is a market which has promised a lot over the last couple of decades, but it is only in recent years the hype could be realised.
For INR 199 per month (roughly $2.80) subscribers will be able to sign-up to mobile-only access to the entire Netflix content library. There might be a few conditions which will frustrate some demanding consumers, but this is a very intelligent move which could prove to be a new means of engagement around the world.
“Our members in India watch more on their mobiles than members anywhere else in the world and they love to download our shows and films,” said Ajay Arora, Director of Product Innovation at Netflix. “We believe this new plan will make Netflix even more accessible and better suit people who like to watch on their smartphones and tablets – both on the go and at home.”
Looking at context, India is a country which is going through a delayed digital revolution. It might have been hyped as the holy grail for digital companies in the past, but it is only since the introduction of Reliance Jio two years ago that the digital revolution gained traction. Jio severely undercut rivals on price, democratising the consumption of data for the masses. Adoption of digital has been rapid and is sustaining the gains.
According to the Ericsson Mobility Report released last month, Indians consume more data than any other nation. Data usage per smartphone at an average of 9.8 GB per month, which is expected to almost double to 18 GB by 2024. The introduction of Jio and its disruptive data tariffs are pinned down as the catalyst, with the telco forcing rivals to drastically alter their offerings to consumers.
From an entertainment perspective, Netflix has pointed to a FICCI-EY 2019 report which suggest Indian consumers spend 30% of their phone time, and 70% of data allocations on entertainment. This is a trend worth paying attention to and it might come as a surprise few have capitalised on it to date, aside from Jio of course.
There are a few conditions to be aware of however. For INR 199, resolution will be limited to SD 480 pixels, only 100 titles will be downloadable to start with and Netflix will prevent any casting to TVs. This will frustrate a few consumers, but the price is a reasonable trade-off for such limitations.
In terms of the potential, this is a very good strategy from Netflix, which has had to explore new initiatives to gain traction outside of its domestic market. The international markets represent the greatest opportunity for growth in the future, the US currently accounts for roughly 48% of current revenues, though it will have to appreciate a cookie cutter approach to expansion will not sustain the growth investors are seeking. These investors are already a bit irked with recent figures, share price has declined 15% since the financial results last week, though this should provide fuel for optimism.
The Netflix team has suggested it has no plans to introduce such an offer to other markets just yet, though success might change this. Although we see Netflix subscriptions as on the cheap side in the developed markets, the same perception will not exist everywhere. This could certainly be an option to double-down on growth in developing markets around the world.
Netflix blames price increases and an under-performing content slate for poor performance in the second quarter of 2019.
Revenues and profits might be up, but these are two metrics which have never seemingly bothered Netflix shareholders that much. What seems to be bothering the twitchy investors is tepid subscriber growth and increased competition in the streaming segment; ultimately these will both lead to the revenue and profitability metrics, but the point is to cast an eye on the horizon not today.
And it appears some investors do not share the same optimism as the Netflix management team as share price slumps 11% in overnight trading.
“… as you can see over the past 3 years, sometimes we’re forecast high,” CEO Reed Hastings said during the earnings call. “Sometimes we forecast low. This is one where we forecasted high. There was no one thing.
“And if I think about three years ago, we were also light, and we never really were confident of the explanation. Then, we were $2 billion in quarterly revenue. Now, we’re going $5 billion. And so, it’s easy to over-interpret the quarter membership adds, which are a bit noisy. So, for the most part, we’re just executing forward and trying to do the best forecast we can.”
Subscription numbers are of course all important for what effectively is a single revenue stream business model, and the numbers aren’t the most flattering. 2.7 million net additions compared to the 5 million which were forecast at the beginning of the quarter, including a net loss of 130,000 in the US. When you consider the US currently accounts for roughly 48% of total revenues, this becomes an issue.
Hastings is playing his hand exactly as you would expect. In the early years, Netflix told investors not to worry about the money as subscriber gains are going through the roof; the money would come eventually. Now, Hastings and co. are telling investors not to worry about subscribers because the money is rolling in.
What is worth noting is that one bad forecast, one dip in subscribers, does not engulf Netflix in flames. Its not ideal, but as long as it doesn’t become a trend there shouldn’t be much to worry about.
Understanding why is of course critical however should Netflix want to rebound to the 7 million subscription gains it is promising over the next three months.
Firstly, price increases have not landed well with the subscribers according to CFO Spencer Neumann. The biggest churn rates across the world were in the markets where Netflix had announced price increases, the US for example, though strong performance in Q1 and a poor content slate over Q2 were also factors which contributed to the numbers.
Neumann suggests the first quarter of 2019 was particularly strong, perhaps pulling forward subscriptions and emptying the sales funnel for the second quarter, while the team has suggested the content slate was not as attractive as previous periods. This should change in the future however as the business moves from a licensing model to one which is more governed by original content.
Over the next couple of years, certain companies are going to start pulling back content from the Netflix catalogue, Disney and WarnerMedia/AT&T are prime examples. Not only will this decrease the variety of content on the platform, removing some fan favourites as well, but it will also strengthen the opposition.
Netflix has not blamed competition for the poor performance this quarter, suggesting there has been not material change to the competitive landscape just yet, though some shareholders might be getting a bit worried. Netflix is facing some difficulties at the moment, while bigger disruptions are on the horizon with Disney and AT&T readying their own streaming services.
What is also worth noting is content; Netflix is the market leader in the streaming market and is in the strongest position to deal with increased competition. There of course will be some difficult conversations to be had in the future, but this is still a business heading in the right direction.
Total revenue for the quarter was $4.9 billion, up 26% year-on-year, while the management team is forecasting $5.2 billion for the next three months, a 31% year-on-year jump. Globally, paid memberships increased to 151.5 million, while there were more than 7 million free trials across the second quarter.
On the pricing front, although this might have a slight negative impact on churn and subscription gains in the short-term, collecting additional revenue each month is only going to be a positive in the long-term. Netflix is still very affordable for the majority.
Looking forward, the team has suggested the first couple of weeks of the current quarter has demonstrated an acceleration in subscriptions, while churn is returning the levels experienced prior to the price increase. And while it might seem internet TV is taking over the world, there is still plenty of room for growth according to the team, both in terms of the linear/streaming dynamic and the opportunity on mobile.
Another factor to consider is the spend which is being allocated to original and localised content; few in the industry can compete with the Netflix numbers in this column. And as content becomes more fragmented through the various streaming platforms, the more original content Netflix produces, the more attractive is becomes as a service to consumers.
Netflix is still in a very strong position, but it is not going to have the same free-reigning dominance as it has experienced over the last few years. A diluted content library, price hikes and increased fragmentation will have a say in the fate of the business, but it is still in the strongest position of this increasingly competitive segment.
Netflix started as a platform where old-series could be relived, but now with rivals aiming to replicate the success of the streaming giant, the content world is becoming increasingly fragmented.
The big question which remains is how big is the consumers appetite for content? How many streaming subscriptions are users willing to tolerate?
The news which hit the headlines this morning concerned Hulu. Disney has come to an agreement to purchase Comcast’s stake in the streaming service, for at least $5.8 billion, in a divorce proceeding which will take five years. This transaction follows the confirmation AT&T sold its 10% stake in Hulu to Disney last month.
Disney consolidating control of Hulu is not much of a surprise to those in the industry, but fan favourites disappearing from the various different streaming services might shock a few consumers.
AT&T has also confirmed it will be pulling WarnerMedia content, such as Friends and ER, from rival’s platforms. The Office, one of the most popular titles on Netflix, will be pulled by owner NBCUniversal. The series, and other NBCUniversal content, will also be pulled from Hulu in favour of parent-company Comcast’s streaming service which will launch next year. Disney will also be pulling its headline content, the Marvel movie franchise for example, back behind its own paywall. Amazon Prime has its own exclusive originals, and YouTube has ambitions with this model as well.
Over the next 12-18 months, content will be pulled back away from the licensing deals to reside only on the owners streaming platform. Users will find the content world which they have come to love is quickly going to change. Some might have presumed the cord-cutting era was one of openness, a stark contrast to one of exclusivity in traditional premium media, but it does seem to be heading back that direction.
It is perfectly reasonable to understand why this is being done. These are assets which need to be monetized, and the subscription model is clearly being favoured over the licensing one. WarnerMedia, 21st Century Fox, AT&T, Comcast and Disney might have had an interest in the licensing model in by-gone years, but following the consolidation buzz, it has become increasingly popular to create another streaming service to add into the mix.
The issue which may appear on the horizon is the fragmented nature of the streaming world; consumers wallets are only so thick, how many streaming services can the market handle?
The test over the next couple of months, or years, will be the quality of original programming. Netflix grew its original audience through a library of shows other content companies were ignoring, but today’s mission is completely different; original and local content is driving the agenda.
The question is whether other providers will be able to provide the same quality? With subscription revenue being spread thinner across multiple providers, will there be enough money flowing into the coffers to fuel the creation of this content? Will the pressures of increased competition decrease overall quality?
Today it is very easy to find the best and deepest range of content available. You might have to subscribe to more than one service, but at the moment consumers are able to afford it. Tomorrow might be a different case. The more streaming services in the market and the more fragmented the content, the more decisions consumers will have to made. Having 4/5 services is probably unreasonable. And we’re only talking about quality of experience, the mess of different discovery engines is another topic.
The question which remains is whether the economics of a fragmented content segment can support the original content dream which has been promised to consumers, or whether the old-world of low-quality, low-budget, limited and repetitive content returns. Soon enough Disney+ will launch, as will Comcast’s streaming service, to add to Hulu, Netflix, DirecTV, Amazon Prime, YouTube’s premium service, and any others which might be in the mix.
Content will become fragmented, thinner on the platforms, before consumers wallets become strained. How long the budget for content will last in this scenario remains to be seen as executives look to cut corners and increase profitability. It’s hard to see how current trends are going to benefit consumers.
A new report from UK analyst firm Re-Think has painted a gloomy picture for those attempting to muscle into Netflix’s dominance in the streaming world.
With the likes of AT&T, Disney and Comcast all attempting to diversify revenues, the riches being raked in by Netflix in the entertainment streaming market must look very tempting, though the rewards will not come easily. This is not to say there is not room for new services, the price point creates an opportunity for multiple service providers in a single household, but Re-Think is predicting Netflix will continue to hoover up profits.
“Despite moves by major studio conglomerates come 2024 Netflix will remain the dominant force in streaming, earning more streaming revenue than the big three put together,” the report states. “Its market share will dilute from 63% last year to 52% by 2024, but our forecasts show that Netflix cannot be shifted from the number one spot.”
Despite going through years of dredge, swallowing the ‘reward’ of being a loss leader in an emerging market, Netflix shareholders are beginning to see the breaking dawn. During the last earnings call, CEO Reed Hastings proudly told shareholders revenues had grown 35% to $16 billion across 2018, with operating profits almost doubling to $1.6 billion. The business finished with 139 million paying memberships, up 29 million across the year.
139 million might sound like an incredible number already, but then you have to consider whether this is just the beginning. International subscriptions, outside of the US market, accounted for approximately 63% of the total offering plenty of headroom for growth. The team is forecasting an additional 9 million additional subscriptions over Q1 alone.
This is the challenge which the upstarts are facing. Not only is this a company which is sitting very comfortably in the number one spot, but it has momentum which it is doubling down on. At IBC last year, Maria Ferreras, VP of EMEA Business Development at Netflix pointed towards partnerships with telcos (carrier billing), more original and local content, as well as launching in new markets to continue the growth.
During the results call, Hastings confirmed these plans were scaling up. The relationships with local partners were working well, and the team were searching for more, while more investment was being directed towards content. Investments over the last twelve months totalled $7.5 billion, and this number will only grow. It probably won’t be on the same trajectory as previous years, but the number of big-budget titles are visibly increasing on the platform.
“The extraordinary success of Netflix has got it lined up in the sights of the big studios and content houses and the big question now is how well it will stand up to that assault on multiple fronts,” the report states.
Hulu is an established platform, as is Amazon Prime, but with Disney entering the market with an impressive portfolio, while Comcast is pushing forward, and AT&T will soon start making waves with its $85 billion acquisition of Time Warner. There is a lot of competition emerging on the horizon, but these the upstarts have a lot of distractions.
Over the next couple of months, we see two developments which will worth keeping an eye on in this space. Firstly, the protection of traditional TV services and also the consumer appetite for AVoD services, streaming with advertising.
Advertising is clearly big business. In the UK, you only have to look at the success of Sky as the leader in the premium content space as an example. Like the social media giants, Sky has created a sophisticated advertising platform, AdSmart, allowing advertisers to drive engagement through hyper-targeted campaigns. This model continues to work with Sky, but perhaps it is living on borrowed time.
The Netflix model is the opposite. An upfront payment and the promise of no advertising to break-up shows or movies on the platform. The more people who subscribe to Netflix, or similar platforms, the lower the tolerance for adverts will become. Netflix might be missing a cash generation opportunity, but it also might be irrevocably changing the industry. This will not happen overnight, but it might be the light at the end of the tunnel.
The second point, protecting legacy services, is going to be a tricky one. The likes of Comcast and AT&T will have cash revenues to worry about as they effectively cannibalise themselves in search of the OTT dream. Looking at the revenues on the traditional TV services, Re-Think is forecasting AT&T will decline from $64.7 billion in 2018 to $47.7 billion in 2024, Comcast from $25.8 billion to $20 billion and Disney from $11.5 billion to $9 billion.
Should these companies encourage users to migrate to their streaming alternatives, the decline could be even steeper. This might give the streaming service more opportunity to succeed in an increasingly fragmented market, but investors might get spooked. It’s a catch-22 situation, with one option killing revenues but the other holding back a more future-proofed concept.
The challenges for those trying to break Netflix dominance is not only dealing with the beast’s popularity, but also handling the internal politics of change. This might be much more of a challenge, especially when you consider the traditional culture of the challengers.
Ultimately the feedback here is relatively simple; Netflix is king and don’t expect the usurpers to wobble the throne too much.
Apple is on the verge of announcing something big, but its TV streaming ambitions have been undermined as Netflix dismisses any tie-up with the iLeader.
Speaking at a press event at the streaming giants HQ, CEO Reed Hastings said Netflix would not be partnering with Apple or allowing its content to be hosted on any streaming service it might announce. There are a lot of unknowns about the Apple announcement on March 25, but at least this has been cleared up.
Rumours suggest Apple is going to create a streaming platform which could potentially compete against Netflix, though this is only one facet of the increasingly fragmented content landscape. With Disney and AT&T’s WarnerMedia also set to weigh-in, consumer frustrations are unlikely to be relieved any time soon.
With content becoming increasingly fragmented, a platform which brings everything together could be the winning formula.
“Content aggregation is the holy grail,” said Paolo Pescatore of PP Foresight. “There is too much fragmentation in video/TV; no-one wants to sign up to different services and have numerous apps. It is a disastrous experience.
“Beyond having the right content, the user experience is key. This means getting the content people want in one place, with one bill, universal search and all that jazz. In reality, this is hard to achieve as typically half of a household wants sport and the other half want entertainment, movies and kids shows.
“Netflix has done a great job to date. However, more content and media owners will pull programming off its offering. This represents a significant opportunity for the likes of Apple who has scale and greater resources. There is a role for a small number of players in the future.”
One question which should get a lot of people thinking is what does an effective content aggregator platform look like?
- Single bill
- Single sign-in/authentication
- Integrated content library
- Universal search
- Consistent customer experience
- An excellent recommendation engine
- Buy-in from majority of content owners/creators
However, just because it is easy to set out the conditions for an excellent content aggregator platform, doesn’t mean it will a simple task to figure out. The final point, getting the buy-in from the content owner/creator ecosystem, is where anyone with such grand ambitions will find the biggest issue.
The best effort we have seen so far is Sky in the UK. Why? Because it has somehow managed to convince Netflix to let its content be hosted on the Sky discovery platform not its own.
Some might suggest a disproportionate amount of news in the content world is focused on Netflix, but there is good reason for that; Netflix is the best. Few can compete with the current depth and breath of content, the user experience, marketing clout and foresight of Reed Hastings and his team.
Without Netflix on an aggregator platform, there does seem to be a big hole. One of the issues is Netflix does not like handing across the experience associated with its assets to partners. It knows how to keep its subscribers happy so why would it allow a partner to potentially tarnish this reputation.
This is what has made the Sky partnership all the more impressive. Netflix has allowed its assets to be hosted alongside Sky’s on Sky’s discovery platform, marrying two of the best content libraries available to UK consumers in the same place. This is the sort of partnership which ticks all the criteria listed above.
Sky has made an excellent start on the aggregator model, but it needs to continue to add new partnerships, increasing the depth and breadth of its content library to ensure it continues to dominate the premium TV space. Amazon Prime should be a key target.
An interesting development over the next couple of months will be the impact of Disney’s streaming proposition. It will put a dent into Netflix, but how much remains to be seen. Disney does not have the depth or breadth of content Netflix is able to offer, the ‘originals’ and the newly generated local content around the world take it to another level, though Disney will be an excellent partner to have.
We do not want to decide on the Apple streaming proposition until we have had a chance to actually see it but losing Netflix as a potential partner is a significant dent. However, as long as gathers the buy-in from enough partners, creating a proposition which ticks all the criteria we have listed, there is hope for Apple is the services arena.
A report by EY showed 44% of UK households think they get better value from streaming services than from any pay TV operators.
This is one of the key findings from “Zooming in on household viewing habits”, a follow-up deep-dive on the annual survey EY conducted last September, which covered 2,500 UK families. This message from the UK consumers was also corroborated by a separate, US-focused research by Deloitte, where nearly half of all pay TV subscribers said they were dissatisfied with their service, and 70% felt they were getting too little value for their money.
One of the key themes coming out of the deep-dive into the UK family’s media consumption habits is the ascendency of the consumption of content over the Internet, at the expense of pay TVs. Despite that cord-cutting has not yet hit the UK hard, 54% of all families are already spending more time on the Internet than in front of the traditional TV, including two-thirds of young users primarily watch content on streaming platforms.
“It’s no surprise the UK is becoming a nation of streamers, but our research shows just how enthusiastically households have embraced it. Over the next 12-18 months we will see the launch of new streaming services to further sate the UK’s appetite for content,” said Martyn Whistler, Global Lead Media and Entertainment Analyst at EY. “However, reports of the demise of traditional TV seem a little premature. Our research shows their popularity is undiminished, with viewers watching them more now than in previous years.”
Although this could spell even more bad news for the pay TV operators, when the consumers do watch broadcast TV, 51% of households mainly just watch the five traditional “free” channels (if you did not count the £150 TV licence as “pay”), up from 46% in 2017.
In general consumers are much more tolerant towards pay TV carrying ads than streaming services do. But, still, more consumers are also willing to pay for the content they like. For example, Netflix ranked number one on the table of apps by consumer spending, according to App Annie. And the Deloitte report showed that in the US, a consumer would subscribe to up to three on-demand streaming services at the same time. The willingness to pay has even extended to catch-up watching, especially to get rid of the ads, according to the report. 18% surveyed would be happy to pay more to stream ad-free catch-up TV, up from 16% in 2017.
Another trends that stood out in the report is the diversification of content consumption platforms and its problems. A third families stream video on multiple screens, while 62% of the 18-24-year olds do so. Meanwhile, a quarter of all households have found it hard to track the availability of their favourite content across different services, apps and platforms. This number went up to 39% among the 18-24-year olds, which should be more tech-savvy.
These trends combined can have some implications for how content is produced, distributed, and monetised. For example, if consumers will most likely binge watch content on streaming services (e.g. the average Netflix user would stream two hours a day), the idea of “episode”, which has worked on broadcast TV, will be less relevant. Or should a long series be released all at once on a streaming platform, or making it available episode by episode as the conventional TV broadcasting does? How should pay TV services improve not only its users’ account management, but also the content’s ID management, to provide more pleasant experience for cross-platform and cross-device users?
As Praveen Shankar, EY’s Head of Technology, Media and Telecommunications for the UK & Ireland, put it: “Our survey demonstrates that audiences are struggling to keep track of their favourite content across various platforms and they are confused by the choices available to them. Technology, Media and Telecoms (TMT) companies need to move away from programme guides and big budget marketing and build artificial intelligence (AI) enabled recommendation engines to push content. This will improve user experience, reduce costs and maximise assets.”
On-demand video streaming has surely gained more impetus again in the last few days. CanalPlus has just launched its own streaming service Canal+ Séries, and Apple is widely expected to unveil a version of video on-demand service on 25 March at an event on its own campus.