L'impacte de la televisió per Internet en el panorama audiovisual - X sessió de les Jornades Tecnològiques, Consell de l'Audiovisual de Catalunya ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
www.analysysmason.com
X sessió de les Jornades Tecnològiques, Consell de l’Audiovisual de Catalunya
L’impacte de la televisió per Internet en
el panorama audiovisual
9 February 2018 • Lluís Borrell
2010296-532
Contents
IBC presentation on the impact of IP on broadcasting
What this means for the industry
2010296-53Contents 3
IBC presentation on the impact of IP on broadcasting
What this means for the industry
2010296-53IBC presentation on the impact of IP on broadcasting – Agenda 4
Is IP really having an impact on broadcasting?
Key questions Complex framework and dynamics
Policy and
What do we mean regulation
1 by broadcasting?
Is IP really having
Supply an impact on
Demand
2 What is IP changing? factors broadcasting? factors
What will the Investors
3 impact be?
Key: Focus of this presentation
2010296-531 What do we mean by broadcasting? The evolving perimeter 5
EU’s “broadcasting” as TV, VoD or both revenue streams?
CAGR of the EU professional TV
Broadcasting
and VoD market, 2011 to 2015
€6bn
(-0.3%)
Aggregation AVoD
Scheduling VOD
EUR3 bn (+37%)
Distrib-
ution SVoD
TV
Produc- Narrow to EUR3 bn (+45%)
EUR91 bn
tion wider Plat- (+2%) Physical video
definition forms EUR5 bn (–10%)
Cinema
Rights EUR7 bn (+3%)
Retail
Viewing Branded content
UGC Note: not to scale
Broadcasting in the form of technical distribution (narrow scope)
is only a small proportion of total revenue (wider scope)
2010296-53
Source: EAO Yearbook 2015 (2014 data)2 What is IP changing? – Demand dynamics 6
IP supports consumers’ consumption of total TV and VoD
minutes, but it changes the mix
In the UK, TV/VoD consumption is rising (except for those aged 55+)
CAGR of average minutes/day by
Films
viewing type, UK, 2014–16
20%
News Sport
10%
CAGR
0% Entertainment
-10%
-20%
Recorded and on-demand drive
consumption growth in all segments
Total Live TV Recorded or on demand
2010296-53
Source: Ofcom CMR 2014, 2015 and 20162 What is IP changing? – Demand dynamics 7
IP reduces the role of TV sets for accessing TV/VOD,
especially for those aged 10–34
Proliferation of devices for Viewing time by device & age group:
TV and VoD consumption USA (12/2016)
34% 37% 21%
Smart TV TV via 57%
TV via
console streamer 66% 79%
43% 63%
Tablet Adult 18+ 18–34 35–49 50+
TV set Connected TV, PC, tablet
and smartphone
PC/laptop Smartphone TV via STB
Spain (2016)
19%
47% 36%
57% 70% 62%
81%
53% 65%
TV 43% 29% 39%
10–15 16–24 25–34 35–49 50–64 65+
2010296-53 Sources: Nielsen (USA), CNMC (Spain) TV set PC, tablet and smartphone2 What is IP changing? – Supply dynamics 8
IP allows new media players with larger reference markets to
compete on VoD and increasingly TV (live streaming)
2010296-53 Sources: EAO Yearbook, EAO Advertising, E-commerce Europe, Statista, ETNO, Analysys Mason DataHub3 What will the impact be? 9
Live TV over OTT will accelerate the impact as a proportion
of total TV and VoD revenue
Scale of impact ▪ Fully convergent live and
in terms of revenue on-demand TV, and VoD
2016–2017 OTT (fixed and mobile)
TV OTT players
revenue Films Sport
launch attractive
(EUR91 bn) live TV services
2007–2009
News
OTT players ▪ Live TV social media Entertainment
launch VoD- ▪ Live DTT over OTT
focused services plus cloud DVR
▪ Live pay-TV OTT
▪ Retail DTT STB w. OTT catch-up
Video ▪ Catch-up TV
revenue ▪ Live video OTT
▪ Live and VoD on the go
(EUR11 bn) ▪ S-VoD and T-VoD OTT
2007 2017 2027
IP has already had a major impact on physical video –
2010296-53 VoD overtook its revenue in less than 10 years3 What will the impact be? 10
IP brings complexity and opportunities for a segmented
broadcasting market where different offers will co-exist
A fragmented approach to a fully converged TV and VOD offer
Broadcasters hope to maintain
Operators seem to favour Operators offer skinny
prominence in a fragmented world with a
all-in-one 4P and 5P packages to protect their
horizontal proposition and policy
bundles (e.g. Movistar) current position and gain new
regulation (e.g. PSBs)
market (e.g. Now TV)
Sport
Some broadcasters Films Entertainment
take OTT unbundling Content players favour OTT
unless they are paid standalone TV channels or
News even standalone TV
for (e.g. Discovery
Channel) programmes if they are
premium/attractive
New players focus on a unified user interface (e.g. Disney)
and experience to create consumer value
(e.g. Amazon, Molotov)
Winners/losers will be determined by consumer preferences and by the
2010296-53 evolution of supply-side agreements,
What will the impact be? but one size does not fit all!3 What will the impact be? 11
Innovation and partnerships will be key in offering attractive
content, flexible pricing and an integrated experience
Content, pricing,
Strong but fragmented demand: integrated experience
DEMAND Consumers eager for attractive new more important than ever
seamless TV and VoD offers
Major developments
announced in 2016 and
Greater alternative commercial 2017 include:
SUPPLY models: traditional, ‘direct to
consumer’ or platform of platforms
▪ Molotov TV
▪ YouTube TV
▪ Amazon Channels
IP-only and hybrid models are
DISTRIBUTION likely to prevail: live TV over OTT ▪ Disney direct-to-
technology is available and scalable consumer service
▪ iFlix live TV
2010296-53Contents 12
IBC presentation on the impact of IP on broadcasting
What this means for the industry
2010296-53What this means for the industry 13
In practice, “future TV” will depend on stakeholders’
incentives and policy decisions that will vary by country
Operators/ISPs/
Rights owners
platforms
Broadcaster Online platforms/
Future TV:
strategies vendors
broadcast
vs. Government
Advertisers TV over IP and regulators
Key:
Greater incentive to Consumers
=
accelerate the change
2010296-53What this means for the industry 14
Significant growth in TV over IP will have an impact on all
stakeholders – initial thoughts
Rapid transition of video/TV to the Internet must be supported by updated
Regulators/ policy and regulation
policy ▪ EC – AVMS review, portability of TV
makers ▪ BEREC – consultation on premium content and new gatekeepers
Broadcasters and operators must urgently revisit their strategies as cord
cutting accelerates
▪ Pay TV – greatest pressure from VoD players
Players
▪ Advertising – live TV streaming to increase pressure plus a new opportunity
to secure retransmission fees
▪ PSBs – better protected but also must revisit their strategies
Investors are supporting new business models and global players, so
traditional TV players must adapt to TV over IP or face an uncertain future
Investors
Investors
▪ Likely to support global brands’ deals with global distribution
▪ New business models will be well equipped to respond to TV over IP
2010296-53What this means for the industry – regulation and policy 15
The transition of video/TV to the Internet must be supported
by updated policy/regulation, to avoid risk to investments
▪ Other industries – transport disruption “When will IP revenue exceed broadcasting
– New York’s yellow cabs revenue in Europe?”*
100%
Share of respondents
▪ Regulated supply drove prices up (USD1m 100% 93%
Share of respondents
93%
in 2014) 80%
80%
▪ New disruption reduced prices (between 60%
60% 60%
60%
USD150k and USD450k in 2017) 40%
40%
▪ Are current rules appropriate/sustainable? 20%
20%
– Uber in London 0%0% 3%
3%
▪ Transport for London (TfL) stripped Uber of 2020
2020 2025
2025 20302030
its London operating licence Cumulativepercentage
Cumulative percentageofof respondents
respondents
▪ All companies need to “play by the rules” ▪ Lessons – act now to enable a smooth
▪ What should broadcast regulation look like? transition to a digitally dominated video and TV
Are transitional arrangements needed to ecosystem in the not-too-distant future
protect current players?
2010296-53 * Percentage of responses to Analysys Mason’s IBC survey questionWhat this means for the industry – players 16
Operators must urgently revisit their pay-TV strategies as
cord-cutting accelerates
▪ Some markets have had cord cutting in Pay-TV subscriber index
the last two years (1.00 = subscribers as of 1H 2015)
▪ TV/video OTT cord cutting will 1.00
Subscriber index
increasingly erode traditional pay-TV 0.97
revenue 0.96
0.95
▪ Traditional broadcasting cost structures 0.94
0.92
give pay-TV operators little flexibility to 0.90 0.91
maintain profitability amid a decline in Hong Kong and Singapore saw
revenue 0.85 subscriptions fall by up to 4% in
▪ Operators must revisit their pay-TV 2015 and by a further 5% in 2016
strategy and business models from both 0.80
a revenue and cost perspective, 1H 15 2H 15 1H 16 2H 16 1H 17
focusing on OTT
USA France Netherlands
Hong Kong Singapore
2010296-53 Source: Operator financial reports, 2017What this means for the industry – players 17
New TV-over-IP disruptors offer lower prices to consumers
and similar or better revenue to broadcasters
Share of retail spend taken
by distribution platform
$15 60% kept by operator $6.00
pays off cost of D2C*
$11 20% $8.80
platform
goes to Apple and
$11 50% $5.50
D2C platform
Amazon may take
$9 $6.00
33% or less
2010296-53 * Direct to customerWhat this means for the industry – players 18
IP distribution is no longer a barrier to offering video and live
TV to the mass market, with a focus on the commercial target
Broadcast TV Alternative forms of fixed (Wi-Fi) distribution for TV over IP
Broadcast Content to
Multicast Unicast
the edge
Head Video Video Video
end Content server server server
Network
Customer
premises
▪ Mobile subscription video on demand (SVOD) can also be attractive in emerging markets,
particularly where TV and fixed broadband penetration is limited (e.g. Iflix in Indonesia)
– smartphone display replacing more-expensive TVs
– mobile OTT distribution could offer wider and cheaper reception
– zero rating of TV/video traffic manages costs and improves affordability
2010296-53What this means for the industry – investors 19
Investors are forcing traditional TV players to adapt to TV
over IP or face an uncertain future
▪ The valuation multiple for new media players is EV/EBITDA multiple and EV of selected
between 2 and 7 times greater new and traditional media companies
– new models and global scale 1000 50
EV/EBITDA EV traditional
▪ Key value drivers include: multiple distributors
EV/EBITDA multiple
800 40
EV (USD billion)
EV new EV traditional
– integrated user experience media media
600 30
– attractive prices
– attractive mix of local and global content 400 20
– trusted brands
200 10
– OTT distribution
0 0
– data and algorithms
Liberty Global
Sky plc
Facebook
Disney
Amazon
Apple
Vodafone
Verizon
RTL
Mediaset
ITV plc
Movistar
Discovery Com
Telekom
CBS
Google
2010296-53 Source: https://finance.yahoo.com, December 201720 Contact details Lluís Borrell Partner and Global Head Media lluis.borrell@analysysmason.com 2010296-53
You can also read
