Recommandé
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (19)
Similaire à Liz McMahon Mediatel
Similaire à Liz McMahon Mediatel (20)
Plus de Kantar
Plus de Kantar (20)
Liz McMahon Mediatel
- 1. BROADCAST IN A MULTI PLATFORM WORLD – THE CONSUMER VIEW
- 4. Has the way we watch it fundamentally changed?
- 5. Does VOD cannibalise broadcast?
- 6. What’s the potential for TV VOD?
- 8. TOTAL VIEWING2001-2009 Average minutes viewed per day Source: BARB
- 9. MEDIA WOULD CHOOSE OVER ALL OTHERS Source: Kantar Media futurePROOF 2009 Base: 2,429 aged 12+
- 10. THE MEDIA CURVE: A MEANS TO PREDICT THE FUTURE Mainstream Medium Advanced Millions of people aged 12+ in GB Laggards Leading Edge Source: Kantar Media futurePROOF 2009 Base: 2,429 aged 12+
- 11. TV CONSIDERED EQUALLY IMPORTANT ACROSS ALL THE SEGMENTS BUT DIGITIAL CHANNELS INCREASE RELEVANCE FOR THE MORE ADVANCED Source: Kantar Media futurePROOF 2009 Base: 2,429 aged 12+
- 12. TV CONSIDERED EQUALLY IMPORTANT ACROSS ALL THE SEGMENTS BUT DIGITIAL CHANNELS INCREASE RELEVANCE FOR THE MORE ADVANCED Source: Kantar Media futurePROOF 2009 Base: 2,429 aged 12+
- 13. HAS THE WAY WE WATCH TV CHANGED?
- 14. PVR PENETRATION HAS DRIVEN TIMESHIFT GROWTH PVR GROWTH AND TIMESHIFTED VIEWING (UK) Total minstimeshifted per person per year / PVR Universe (000s) Source: BARB/InfoSys
- 15. PVR USAGE Source: Kantar Media futurePROOF 2009 Base: Used PVR in last 7 days (810)
- 16. HIGHER DVR FUNCTION USAGE FOR MORE TECHNOLOGICALLY ADVANCED GROUPS Source: Kantar Media futurePROOF 2009 Base: Used PVR in last 7 days (810)
- 17. INCREASED FRAGMENTATION 71% agree: “I am more selective about programmes I want to watch nowadays”
- 18. IS VIDEO ON DEMAND CANNIBALISING BROADCAST ?
- 21. BBC One Live iPlayer BBC HD Timeshift Week 1 Repeats GENERATING ADDITIONAL PROGRAMME REACH AUDIENCES TO INDIVIDUAL EPISODES OF Dr WHO 1995-2010 2010 2008 2007 2005 2006 Source: BARB + iPlayer download estimates
- 22. BACK TO THE TELLY – THE POTENTIAL FOR TV VOD
- 23. GIVE THEM TV VOD AND THEY WILL COME…
- 24. ON DEMAND SERVICES – TV VOD MORE WIDELY USED THAN COMPUTER VOD IN VIRGIN HOMES Source: Kantar Media futurePROOF 2009 Base: Virgin (453)
- 25. CATCH-UP IS THE PRIMARY MOTIVATOR... Source: Kantar Media futurePROOF 2009
- 27. 4% 8% 23% 9% 3% Source: Kantar Media futurePROOF 2009
- 28. ON DEMAND: ADVERTISING FUNDED 30% of respondents agree that ‘rather than paying for on-demand TV, I’d prefer to have advertising’
- 30. The introduction of PVRs has changed the way we view – increased timeshift and fragmentation
- 31. Online VOD is popular but there is even greater potential for TV VOD
- 32. Greater fragmentation puts pressure on traditional business models
Notes de l'éditeur
- Will hear today about the multitude of platforms now available to watch TV and the opportunities that presents for content providers, broadcasters and advertisers. Technology has certainly progressed apace in the last few years but to what degree will consumers follow? Before we move onto the debate I’ll share with you some relevant insights from the consumer research that Kantar Media conducts.
- I’ll look at five questions which will help us understand the opportunities and the challenges:First, given the multitude of different options available to the modern consumer, what’s our relationship with television, have we fallen out of love with telly?The range of devices and technology available to watch TV has changed rapidly over the last decade, how has that affected the way in which we watch?What’s the impact of video on demand? Have the likes of iPlayer, 4OD, Youtube and Seesaw cannibalised broadcast audiences?In advance of the launch of Canvas what’s the potential for TV based Video on demand? To what extent will consumers use it and how will that change the way we watch TV?Finally what type of financial model will we be looking at? Are consumers prepared to pay for TV content? And how?
- So first of all a fundamental question – given the array of different entertainment options available to us both in home and out of home has television been usurped as the centre of our leisure time?
- But how do we feel about TV? Has it been displaced by the shiny new devices now on offer? On our futurePROOF study we ask if you could only have one item or technology what would it be? What we see is that TV, shown here in yellow, features strongly for all ages. However mobiles are considered more indispensable than other media for under 25s. But for the 35+s TV still dominates by some way.So does that suggest that the more technologically enabled we are, the weaker our relationship with TV? As more and more households and indeed consumers get access to new devices will traditional broadcast viewing start to fall away?
- Again from the futurePROOF study we created a curve to represent the range of accessibility, behaviours and attitudes towards technology and emerging media across the population. From this we were able to identify a number of different segments shown here. From the laggards on the left through to the leading edge on the right – those who are happily uploading and downloading content, using sites like Spotify and using their smartphones to their full potential. They were probably first in the queue to get their iPads last week.
- So what we’ve found is that, contrary to the popular belief, technological developments have not yet provedto be the death of broadcast telly we’re still watching in large numbers, for significant amounts of time each day and still value it as part of our lives. Even those with greatest access and confidence with technology still have the same strong relationship with TV.So if we’re watching as much as ever, has the way in which we watch TV changed?
- The big change has been the introduction of PVRs – Sky+, V+ etc. As the PVR universe has grown so timeshifted viewing has grown from an average of 1500 minutes a year back in 2003 to almost 5000 minutes in 2009 – that’s an average across everyone whether with a PVR or not.So yes there has been a significant change in the way we watch TV
- And for those households with a PVR (which we currently estimate to be in excess of 1 in 3) consumers are making good use of the varied functionality. Primarily its to record programmes, leading to that increase in timeshifted viewing. But you can also see significant numbers who use it when watching live TV to pause and rewind.
- The way in which consumers use their PVR does vary by their level of confidence in technology.It is so easy to use that even those we typify as “laggards” on our technology curve are using it in large numbers to record programmes. But they‘re much less likely to change their “live” viewing habits by pausing or rewinding as they watch. The leading edge in the other hand, shown here in yellow, are using the full functionality.
- We know that audiences to broadcast programmes are on the decline as viewer choice increases. Indeed from our study we can see that viewers themselves believe they are becoming more selective in their choice. Audiences may be declining to individual slots but perhaps the quality of viewing and exposure is increasing?
- Lets move onto Video on Demand. How is that changing viewing behaviour and is it eating into broadcast audiences?
- Before we move onto the data just to clarify what we mean by on demand? In many ways the PVR is an enabler of on demand viewing – in that it allows people to record programmes of their choosing and then watch them ‘on demand’. But in terms of “true” video on demand we have two routes firstly Online VOD – iPlayer, YouTube, et al, where the user can sift through catch up, content libraries and so on without having to have actively chosen to record something, then view via computer. We’ve seen significant increases in viewing in this way over the past year.Then we haveTV VOD – using the TV and set top box as an interface, the viewer can get the bulk of benefits as described for online VOD, but on the best screen in the house.So with the ability to download or request programmes isn’t that now eating into broadcast audiences – won’t that mean even greater decline of audiences over time?
- Lets take an example, an old favourite, regenerated this season – Dr Who. If we look at viewing figures for this over the past few years we start to see the impact of changes in viewing behaviour.
- Here looking at viewing figures since the seriesrelaunched back in 2005 Over each of the first 4 years of its relaunched entity the vast majority viewed live but with additional audience through timeshift (in blue) and repeats (in green).Timeshift starts to grow in 2008 as PVRs take off and we can see the introduction of viewing via iplayer. Then for 2010 we start also to register HD viewing.So taking this as an example it seems that VOD doesnt cannibalise but adds to the audience numbers. The increased options available can add to final audience numbers but they take longer to build which in turn has an impact on how broadcasters assess audience size and quality.
- So what’s the future for VOD? ?What impact will video on demand service have once they are readily available on the TV set
- In the UK we have an interesting subgroup who have had Video On Demand available via their TV for some time – those in Virgin Media homes. And as a sizeable group they’re readily identifiable on the research that we do. And what’s really interesting is that they show quite different viewing patterns as a result of the service they have available. This could well be strongly indicative of what’s to come with the launch of services such as Canvas.As a start we know that in households with TV on demand available, viewing on demand is more than double online viewing.Consumers generally have an innate understanding of the benefits, its not difficult to grasp. From our work last year we found that awareness of TV Video on demand is almost universal – 95%. And when you think about it of course its an attractive option, easy to use and on the best screen in the house.
- So lets just take those living in Virgin homes on our futurePROOF survey. This is used in the last 7 days – first of all high numbers using any of those on demand services – 38% had used iPlayer via the TV. And while online use is still there, its significantly lower than via the TV
- And why do viewers make use of Video on Demand. With Online VOD, catch up is nearly twice as important as a motivator than anything else.For TV VOD, it’s more balanced. Catch-up is the most important motivator, but it’s not so much head and shoulders above the others. TV VODs advantages are that it is available in the best spot, on the best screen in the house. So its less about catching up and more reflective of general viewing habits. There’s certainly an indication that it may be a means for viewers to discover new programmes – 10% say that they use it to watch programmes they’ve heard others talking about.
- So to finish up, with all this lovely content spread across platform and with the options to watch on demand, how are we going to get people to pay?
- We asked consumers about their willingness to pay directly for content across a variety of media. Whilst we don’t go into detail whether it’s via paywalls, subscriptions or micropayments we can provide some insight at the topline level of the demand (or more likely resistance) to paying for content across different media. Again of course consumers would always prefer not to pay so no doubt some of these figures are somewhat lower than we might see in reality but the comparisons across media are interesting.We found that TV had the highest level of willingness to accept paid channels/content perhaps not surprising given that its a well established principle and there are an abundance of pay-tv options in that market. Whereas when we asked about paying for newspaper content online the figure was considerably lower.
- On the other hand we also identified a group who would prefer to support on demand TV through advertising than to pay direct – more along the lines of the Hulu model. They represent 30% of the population.So to generate revenue we need to look at a range of options in order to recognise those varied views and propensity to pay. It seems likely that blended business models which encompass both subscription and paid for content and advertising funded options will be the way forward.
- To sum up TV is no less popular than it ever was, but the way it is consumed is changing. We’ve seen a growth in timeshifted viewing and greater consumer selectivity.We know that online VOD has taken off over the course of the last year but there’s clearly even greater potential once it moves to TV.Increased fragmentation, timeshift and the move to new platforms has put pressure on traditional business modelsSo we need to explore new avenues to pay for content on TV. From what we’ve seen from consumers while some will be prepared to pay directly, others will put up greater resistance and be more open to advertising . Clearly we’ll need to explore new avenues for revenue both advertising and subscription based and recognise that audiences will have a mix of attitudes and propensity to accept. Different broadcasters will need strategies to cover them all.