Bradley Howard's Blog

Views of digital media, innovation, loyalty and business in the real world

TV version 1, 2 and 3

5663134445_729f23ab411
For the last few weeks Mrs H and I have been watching TV programmes almost exclusively using on-demand services. We have BT Vision at home, which includes a comprehensive iPlayer ‘application’ as well as catch-up players for the other channels.

I often refer to catch up players/ on demand television as TV version 3. Version 1 was standard, or linear television… switch the box on to any channel, sit back and watch it.

Version 2 was the invention of the Personal Video Recorder, or PVR. No tapes were required, yet you could instantly record or pause live television. In the US, PVRs took off with Tivo, and in the UK they took off with Sky+.

TV v3 is very different though – you sit down and then choose which programme you want to watch. There’s absolutely no planning involved. There’s also no monetisation... there are no adverts whatsoever.

For the BBC iPlayer this doesn’t make any difference because if you watch a BBC channel there’s no monetisation in the first place. Though watching any other channel such as ITV, Channel 4 or 5, or Discovery – it’s very strange to watch a 44 minute programme in… 44 minutes, without using a DVD.

If you watch the ITV player online (i.e. on a computer), they ‘hard code’ (you can’t skip them or speed them up) advertising breaks into the programme.

Perhaps the audience using the TV to watch catch up programmes is small – which is a real irony in itself.

I think it’s one of the reason why product placement on TV programmes is becoming so important. For the last few years – since TV version 2, we’ve been skipping through ad breaks, and with version 3 we don’t see them at all, so advertising needs to move inside the programme.

On “I’m a Celebrity…” next year, start getting used to the idea of the contestants wearing branded clothes, drinking specific beers in the evening and seeing low flying jumbo jets overhead!

Photo courtesy of cmun_project on Flickr


 
tags:

TV audience figures - the fury continues

497294952_c06a81d93b1
My anger with TV audience figures has just been further inflamed. I've just read that Red or Black lost 1.8 million TV viewers last night. It's big news in the media news at the moment.

1.8 million TV viewers. This is calculated from BARB, which distribute TV set top boxes which analyse TV usage in a few homes around the country. These figures are then extrapolated to the UK population - each set top box represents 5,000 viewers.

So 1.8 million fewer viewers is actually 360 people. 360 people didn't want a TV programme last night, which has commercial repercussions across the industry.

I still can't fathom how such an antiquated system is used to define the UK's £9bn television industry (that figure is from 2005).

I propose that all set top boxes - Virgin, Sky, BT Vision, etc. are required to send viewing stats back to a central location, probably Ofcom and actual figures are used, not extrapolated figures. We could go one step further and require all digital TVs to send usage stats back to Ofcom too.

It is unthinkable that a commercial website operation would not implement an analytics provider as a measuring tool - and have to pay for it themself. Quite how this happens in the TV industry is very strange.

Photo courtesy of Stefan on Flickr


 

Superbrands on BBC

_52783290_superbrands1

Last night on BBC3 (why BBC3??) was the first part of a three part documentary on Superbrands, and why they mean so much to us. Last night’s episode was on Technology, with next week investigating Fashion.

You can watch the Superbrands: Technology version here on iPlayer.

The series is well produced with a Louis Theroux style presenter, Alex Riley, who you can’t tell if he’s mocking his interviewee or being serious.

In case you don’t watch the episode, (and even if you do, I’m not giving too much away), the crux of the episode was “Why are Apple, Google, Microsoft, Facebook and Sony such powerful brands, and Nokia not so powerful? After all, Nokia is still the largest handset manufacturer in the World, and has more handsets out there.

One of the light hearted parts of last night’s programme is that various groups of people were asked to describe these brands as if they were a personality. These groups included primary school children and older children, to people in the street. Facebook was described as “your mate in the pub who knew everything about everyone and bought you a drink as you walked in, but you weren’t sure if your wallet was safe with them.” Microsoft was the “middle aged BMW driver” – not bad for the company who produce the hippest games console.

The programme’s conclusion was about Control:

  • Apple own the entire user journey from turning on your phone to the app, to the advertising on the app.
  • Apparently Sony lose around $200 per PS3 unit because they want to use the highest quality components including a Blu-Ray player which costs almost $100 per unit. Its a small price to pay when it provides a mass market desire to buy Blu-Ray discs, of which Sony has a revenue sharing model.
  • Microsoft was interesting because of its image as an Operating System vendor (yawn, and please look at the recent Windows 7 launch video) and a generally ‘boring’ application stack. Except for Xbox that is, which interestingly has no Microsoft branding near it.

Yet Nokia only own the handset. They are a hardware manufacturer. A non-exciting consumable manufacturer.

The programme was highly entertaining however I can’t say I learned anything new from it, except the Xbox-has-no-Microsoft-branding and the scientific (via MRI scan) similarity with brand loyalty and religion.

Thinking of other superbrands with similar levels of Control, Visa is another great example. It’s a Superbrand in the Control category because as soon as you pay for an item in a supermarket with your card, or online, you have regular reinforcement of the brand. The logo on your card, to Verified-by-Visa (I’m not saying V-B-V is a good thing) if you’re shopping online. And Visa has similar levels of Control of the successful technology superbrands because they understand spending data across retailers, which virtually no one else has. Actually, Akamai has probably more data about consumer behaviour, but is a B2B brand rather than a Superbrand.

I'm looking forward to next week with Superbrands: Fashion.


 

Defending the licence fee

542826344_53a7842f711

Photo courtesy of Marco Bernardini on Flickr

The public (and press) are too quick to criticise the BBC for the licence fee. I've said before that I think we get fantastic return on investment for our £150 a year - with top quality radio, TV and Internet content.

This week though, I got another pleasant surprise from the BBC. Despite having a two year old flat screen TV without the latest Internet-apps capability, I pressed the red button whilst watching one of the BBC channels because I saw 'iPlayer' on the red button prompt.

And there it was - iPlayer. On my TV.

So I browsed around and started watching something from iPlayer on the TV. Completely on demand, with pass and play functionality - everything you get from the website equivalent.

The impressive-ness of the experience was that iPlayer was streaming content over the Internet on to my TV without me realising that the TV could do it!

Quality is OK - although Mrs H didn't find it a problem, I could see that the bandwidth needs to be increased to give a TV-quality experience.

So a round of applause to the BBC for once again delivering something beyond expectation. A special commendation should go to Panasonic of course for also delivering beyond expectation! And both for doing it without increasing the cost.


 

iPlayer downtime last night

Bbc-iplayer-logo

Last night I sat down with the wife to watch Top Gear. We realised we hadn't recorded it, so we went to iPlayer to watch it. Unfortunately iPlayer was down last night, presenting a rather humble and plain looking '403 Error'.

We look after some rather large sites at Endava, and I can only imagine what the poor techies at the BBC were going through last night - undoubtedly trying to roll back the latest code or environment changes, or work out where the extra traffic was coming from (simultaneously trying to work out what to do with it).

At times like that, I think that I think differently to other users - I start feeling sorry for the service provider (and specifically, the individuals there) rather than a 'typical' consumer complaining about where the service has gone.

The infamous England goal during the World Cup was the same - as soon as the advert on ITV HD came on during matchplay, my stomach curled up and I thought "someone feels really bad for this" - despite me missing out on the England goal at the time... although I must add that the conspiracy theorist in me questions whether it was a publicity stunt or not.

A client (who came from a traditional TV background) once said to me that the difference between the web and TV is that TV never goes down. With iPlayer on my TV at home - is that still really true?


 

2.5 times as many people in the US watch soccer than golf

Some interesting facts and figures from SportBusiness this morning:

Sports network ESPN said the USA's 1-1 draw with England in its opening game of the World Cup was the most-watched game for a national soccer team since 1994.

The match, shown on ABC, averaged 13 million viewers and attracted the biggest US audience for any game at the tournament in South Africa so far, according to Bloomberg. [1]

Compare this to golf, with:

The first round of this year's US Masters golf tournament drew the biggest audience for a golf event in US cable television history last Thursday as Tiger Woods returned to the sport after nearly five months.

Bloomberg reports that an average 4.94 million viewers watched on ESPN, beating the previous record of 4.76 million for the 2008 US Open playoff between Woods and Rocco Mediate. [2]

 

One would have thought that golf is a far bigger sport in the US than 'soccer', but apparently not - these figures show that 2.5 times as many people in the US watch soccer than golf.

 

Sources: 

[1] http://www.sportbusiness.com/news/177724/espn-usa-england-most-watched-soccer-game-since-1994

[2] http://www.sportbusiness.com/news/174892/first-round-of-masters-breaks-us-viewing-record

 


 

Back from holiday and thanks to Sky

Apologies for no posts over the last couple of weeks - I took a much-overdue holiday over the Easter break.

Once I arrived back to the office, I had the almost standard 500 emails-whilst-on-holiday. Why is Outlook so rubbish at collating emails properly by conversation? I hoped that Google Wave would make Microsoft wake up and try to improve Outlook for the first time in 10 years, and judging by the marketing fluff on the Outlook 2010 page, it might become a reality.

Back to home life, and at Maison Howard we have BT Vision rather than Sky TV. So when the Barcelona v Arsenal game was only shown on Sky TV, we watched the game via the legal live stream.

How much do you think it costs to watch a pay per view game on the Internet? Bear in mind that the game was the quarter final of the Champions League, and I'm not a Sky subscriber, I thought that £3 was excellent value.

We have a laptop permanently hooked up to the TV, and watched the game in reasonable quality. I would have been willing to pay an extra couple of quid for a higher quality version. BT Vision doesn't cost any monthly fee, the Vision box is excellent (pretty much identical to Sky Plus) and we watch a few pay per view movies each month, plus a couple of pay per view streams from Sky over the Internet, and our TV bill comes to less than £15 a month.

Of course, nothing could change the result of the match and so I won't be paying for any more Champions League this season.


 

The BBC - damned if they do, damned if they don't

I felt sorry for the BBC this morning. For months they have been attacked by MPs and the media for being all too powerful, and were asked to scale back their operations to give commercial organisations a chance to compete.

So they've announced a number of cutbacks including closing a couple of stations, and suddenly they're berated for doing so!

Maybe they should offer BBC 6 and the Asian Channel to commercial organisations to continue running them, rather than simply closing them down. Or maybe that would be interpreted as providing a state funded start up corporation (hmmm.... reminiscent of BT, O2, British Gas, National Grid, etc. etc.)

Last night a number of MPs stepped forward to say that closing BBC 6 was a travesty, and the BBC should leave the station alone. One can only speculate whether these MPs knew the writing was on the wall, and they simply joined the side of the public to scrounge a few more votes later this year.

One of the changes at the BBC that I disagree with is continuing Children's BBC for a further two hours to 9pm. Kids need sleep, and TV (at least in my house) is the enemy of going-to-bed. I would imagine that the daily 7pm 'shutdown' is a signal to thousands of children across the country to get off the sofa and go upstairs to bed.


 
tags:

Talking About a Virtual Revolution

The BBC have been showing a TV documentary over the last few weekends called Virtual Revolution discussing the origins of the Internet, as well as the issues it currently faces (commercialisation, IP & ownership).

I've been quite surprised about how few people in the industry have seen the programme, or even knew anything about it.

It’s presented very well by the natural-born-presenter Dr Aleks Krotoski who judging from her Twitter feed is clearly passionate and proud of the series. Some parts are presented over-simplistically to anyone who has some level of knowledge of the industry, but even then, every few minutes there are some thought provoking comments from the likes of Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos (Amazon), Tim Berners-Lee, Krotski and many others.

Well worth a watch on iPlayer: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/search/?q=The%20Virtual%20Revolution


 

TV Stats, Web Stats and Future Stats

According to BARB, 12.09m people watched Eastenders on Friday 1 January. How does BARB work this out?

"Viewing estimates are obtained from a panel of television owning private homes representing the viewing behaviour of the 26 million TV households within the UK. The panel is selected to be representative of each ITV and BBC region, with pre-determined sample sizes. Each home represents, on average, about 5,000 of the UK population." (Source: http://www.barb.co.uk/about/tvMeasurement?_s=4)

OK. Now imagine we worked out web figures on such a low tech 'sample'. Actually web stats are surprisingly accurate -- products such as Omniture and Google Analytics track every page impression pretty accurately, which means that to a very small percentage, we know exactly how many pages were displayed across a website.

Marketing folks are often surprised how low some web 'traffic' (in TV speak, read 'viewing') figures are. But actually they're very accurate, especially compared to the totally inaccurate method of TV stats.

The next generation of web applications are already posing further problems. Two years ago we pitched to a very well known football club to look into redeveloping their website and other Internet applications, once of which was SecondLife. They specifically asked us to recreate their stadium in SecondLife. During the pitch, our Creative Director boldly stood up (as Creative Directors do) and showed a screenshot on SecondLife of their stadium, already in the virtual world. His point was twofold - 1. there was already an unofficial one which the club could 'buy' from the obviously-bored fan; and 2. he was the only person in the stadium, which had about 45,000 'seats'.

To summarise:

  • TV stats are inaccurate
  • Web stats are accurate at the expense of appearing lower
  • Finally, when brands or Rights Holder start looking at 'concurrent' stats, they're actually much lower than even the web stats.

 

Bradley Howard

Head of Digital Media at Endava, although all the views in this blog are purely mine and not necessarily those of Endava.

 

Subscribe to my RSS feed

 

 

Other ways to find me:
TwitterBuzzLinkedInDelicious