Description
Product Category: Broadband
Media
Price: $995.00
Release Date: 2008 Q3
Author: Mugs Buckley
Pages: 64
Figures: 20
Tables: 5
TDG Member Download
Download the Market dBrief,™ The Business Dynamics of PayTV Versus Internet TV.
Summary
As
the audience of web video viewers continues to multiply, the prospects for
video-related online advertising becomes more legitimate.
And online video programmers are taking notice, striving to deliver a
TV-like experience featuring high-value, prime-time linear video content but
enhanced by what TDG calls quantum
capabilities – that is, non-linear, on-demand, device-agnostic
“anytime/anywhere” access in which the user exercises vast control over the
experience. While early in the game,
combining these new technological capabilities with existing advertising acumen
has proven more difficult than many predicted.
This report (a) analyzes the drivers and inhibitors impacting the online video
marketplace,
(b) evaluates the various forms of online video-related
advertising, (c) offers recommendations as to which type of advertising is best
suited for specific types of online video content (e.g., user-generated or
professional content), and (d) offers forecasts regarding online video
ad-related revenue for the next five years.
Key Questions Answered in the
Report
- What are the different forms of online video-related advertisements?
- Which forms of online video advertising are best suited for specific types of online video content (whether user generated or professional video?
- How will these forms of advertising evolve over the next few years?
- Which type of advertising will generate the most revenue over the next five years and why?
- How will online video advertising mirror TV video advertising? How will it differ?
- What are the keys to building a successful online TV business, either as a programmer or aggregator?
- How will successful online TV businesses differ from traditional PayTV models?
- What bottlenecks will online TV programmers have to face when it comes to acquiring top-quality content?
- Why will UGV continue to struggle as an ad-based model?
- When is the right time to enter the online TV programming marketplace?
From the Report
Today’s PayTV
Operators
(that is, cable,
satellite, and more recently telcoTV providers) all have a similar model for
generating revenue: they offer television content, highspeed Internet service,
and (in some cases) phone service (residential or mobile) to subscribers in
exchange for a monthly subscription fee. For the television delivery part of
their business, PayTV Operators purchase distribution rights from
TV Programmers to broadcast these programs for linear or on-demand delivery to
subscribers. The exact terms of the license are negotiated between the PayTV
Operator and the Cable Networks
who, in most cases, receive a per-subscriber fee in
exchange for granting the PayTV Operator certain distribution rights. The
subscriber pays the Operator and in turn, the Operator pays the Programmer. This
is pretty much how it has worked for decades, resulting in a well-established
value chain and virtual monopolies for the various PayTV Operators.
This
long-standing paradigm of linear TV delivery is now changing; the value chain is
beginning to unravel.
Today’s PayTV
Operators – whether they admit it or not – now face a competitor which threatens
the very roots of their revenue structure; a competitor with a very different
business model, one no longer dependent on monthly subscription fees.
The culprit?
Internet-based
video distributed directly to the TV (a.k.a. Broadband TV or BB-TV), a model
whose economics are becoming more attractive each and every day.
Signs of
this impending change are numerous:
-
New, more
formidable Internet-based video aggregators, producers, and distributors are
popping up at a steady rate.
Though
once confined to fledgling no-name start-ups offering older, low-value video
content, today’s online video players feature the top names in media offering
the latest in movies and TV programming;
-
The
majority, if not all, of these BB-TV players rely on advertising as their
revenue generator, not monthly subscription fees; and
-
An online
TV distributor rarely relies on the PayTV Operator for distribution but instead
bypasses these gatekeepers by going directly to the consumer over an open
broadband connection (which is most often owned and managed, ironically, by the
PayTV Operator).
A number of
technological improvements are responsible for making this model particularly
attractive, the most notable innovations being in video compression,
improvements in last-mile bandwidth, and more cost-effective digital storage.
In combination, these advances have helped stimulate the online video
market and, consequently, empower new competitors to enter the video value
chain, the barriers to which are at the lowest they’ve been in decades.
Several
contextual factors are also helping to fuel the online video market, including:
-
Major
shifts in TV advertising dollars to online buys (just follow the dollars);
-
The
changing demographics of the linear television audience – more of the 18-to-34
audience is being lost to “on demand” experiences, whether on the TV or PC;
-
The ability
of viewers to control their video experience in ways never before conceived;
dictating when, where, and on what device they want to view their video (versus
having a programmer determine this for them); and
-
The rapid
influx of viewer-created online video.
Consumers
have long enjoyed continuous technical advancements that have improved their TV
viewing experiences (e.g., the shift from black-and-white to color display, and
the expansion in choice afforded by the introduction of cable PayTV offerings).
Despite significant improvements in the quality of TV viewing – or
perhaps because of them – consumers have given operators and programmers
exclusive control over which content is viewed and when.
With the
introduction of the Digital Video Recorder (DVR), however, the traditional
relationship between programmer and consumer – that is, receiving “free” content
in exchange for advertising – has been disrupted by the DVR’s ability to
fast-forward through unwanted programming and commercials, on demand.
Consumers can now watch the programs they want on their schedule and
without advertisements.
As you might
imagine, this has powerful consequences on the future of advertising
(independent of whether the ads are actually skipped or not).
Three Key Findings
- Though User-Generated Video (UGV) will continue to account for almost
one-half of
online video streams, it will generate less than 5% of video-related ad revenue
during
the next five years.
- Conversely, though the number of professional videos may remain in the shadow
of
UGV, professional content will generate the vast majority of ad-related revenue
during
the next five years.
- Online video-related ad revenue will grow from $590M in 2008 to $9.94B in
2013,
a 17-fold increase in just five years.
Table of Contents
Executive Summary & Key Findings
1.0 Introduction
1.1
What Is (and Is Not) Covered in this Report
1.2
Video-Related Terminology and Definitions
1.3
Online Advertising Terminology and Definitions
2.0 Understanding Traditional and Emerging
TV Models
2.1
“The Times, They are a Changing”
2.2
The Beneficiary? The Viewer
2.3
The Impact of Broadband Video on Ad Spending
2.4
How Will Today’s PayTV Operator Respond?
2.5
The Co-Dependent Operator/Programmer Relationship
2.6
The Big Four on the Move
2.7
The PayTV Operator’s Content Conundrum
2.8
Spoken for, but Available for Experiment
2.9
The Window of Opportunity Opens
3.0 Programming and Advertising for the
Internet TV Audience
3.1
Know Thy User
3.2
Measure Thy User
4.0 Understanding & Selling Web Video
Advertising
4.1
Defining “Digital Video Advertising”
4.2
Linear Video Ads: Pre-, Mid-, and Post-Rolls
4.3
Non-Linear Ads
4.3.1 Overlay Ads
4.3.2 In-Show Sponsorships
4.4
Branded Skins
4.5
Preferred Web Video Ad Formats
4.5.1 Among Marketers
4.5.2 For the Viewer
4.6
Example – Hulu’s Ad Strategy
5.0 Current Activity in the Online TV Space
5.1
Overview
5.2
Case Study: Revision 3
6.0 The Future of Online Video Advertising
– The Next Five Years
6.1
The Challenges of Forecasting Online Video
6.2
Defining Content Categories
6.3
Key Assumptions
6.3.1 Annualizing Stream Counts
6.3.2 Distinguishing Ad-Insertable from “Other” Online Video
Streams
6.3.3 User-Generated Online Video Content
6.3.4 Short-Clip Online Video Content
6.3.5 Long-Form Online Video Content
6.3.6 Number of Ad Units
6.3.7 CPMs
6.3.8 Sell-Thru Rates
7.0 Specific Forecasts
7.1
Online Video Streams thru 2013
7.1.1 Annual Video Stream Forecasts – Total
7.1.2 Annual Video Stream Forecasts – User-Generated Video
(UGV)
7.1.3 Annual Video Stream Forecasts – Professional Online
Content
7.1.4 Streaming Video Content Mix: 2008 thru 2013
7.2
Online Digital Video Advertising Revenue
7.2.1 Annual Digital Video Advertising Revenues: 2008 thru
2013
7.2.2 Annual Digital Video Advertising Revenues – UGV
7.2.3 Annual Digital Video Advertising Revenues – Professional
Content
7.2.4 Video Stream Ad Revenue Mix: 2008 thru 2013
8.0 Reflections and Recommendations
8.1
Entering the Internet TV Programming Market – A Roadmap
8.2
Growing the Market
9.0 Attributions
Table of Figures
Figure 1 IABs’ Conception
of “Digital Video Advertising”
Figure 2 Illustration of Pre-Roll Ad
Figure 3 Illustration of Overlay Ad
Figure 4 Heavy.com’s Web Site
Figure 5 Hulu’s Ad Preference Selection Page
Figure 6 Revision3 Site
Figure 7 Average CPMs among Online Video Content
Categories
Figure 8 Online Video Streams: 2008 thru 2013
Figure 9 UGV Online Video Streams: 2008 thru 2013
Figure 10 Short-Clip Online Video Streams: 2008 thru 2013
Figure 11 Long-Form Online Video Streams: 2008 thru 2013
Figure 12 “Other” Video Streams: 2008 thru 2013
Figure 13 Annual Online Video Streams by Category: 2008 thru
2013
Figure 14 Annual Advertising Revenue for Online Video: 2008
thru 2013
Figure 15 Annual Advertising Revenue for UGV: 2008 thru 2013
Figure 16 Annual Advertising Revenue for Short-Clip Content:
2008 thru 2013
Figure 17 Annual Advertising Revenue for Long-Form Content:
2008 thru 2013
Figure 18 Annual Ad-Related Revenue by Category: 2008 thru
2013
Figure 19 Streams versus Ad Revenue by Content Type – 2008
Figure 20 Streams versus Ad Revenue by Content Type – 2013
List of Tables
Table 1 Total Annual Stream by
Video Category: 2008 thru 2013
Table 2 Total Annual Ad-Related Revenue by Video Category:
2008 thru 2013
Table 3 General Video-Related Terminology and Definitions
Table 4 Basic Advertising Terms and Definitions
Table 5 Online TV Companies, Content Models, Genres, Ads, and
Fees