This panel brought together a number of multiplatform players from varied fields including representatives from Intigral, MBC, ONE CONNXT, Newtec, iMediaCo, The Apex Group and Minerva. Interestingly, all of them work within different parts of the chain and were, therefore, able to shed light on various elements of the multiplatform experience. The discussion was moderated […]
This panel brought together a number of multiplatform players from varied fields including representatives from Intigral, MBC, ONE CONNXT, Newtec, iMediaCo, The Apex Group and Minerva. Interestingly, all of them work within different parts of the chain and were, therefore, able to shed light on various elements of the multiplatform experience. The discussion was moderated by Dolbys regional director for the Middle East, Tarif Sayed.
Some of the key elements of this discussion centered around what standards to adopt, the cost element in delivering content across multiple platforms, the importance of content, the need to monetise it and more importantly, making the right content available on the right device.
To a query on what standards dominated the scene today, Juan Jose of Intigral began by stating that the market has witnessed the emergence of three dominant platforms the Apple world, the Microsoft world and the Android world. However, he stated that the user experience will be fulfilling only if they can move between different platforms and devices seamlessly. He called MPEG Dash a strong and bold movement that seemed to be moving towards this goal.
Alan Constant, who helped launch a hybrid set top box for ART in Jordan three years ago, and who has advocated the use of one platform by all broadcasters for several years, expressed scepticism about ever seeing one definititive standard in the region but agreed that MPEG-Dash was a step in the right direction.
Simon Pryor of Newtec stated that the use of new technologies did not see the death of linear TV as many had predicted. Instead, increasingly we see the co-existence of several different models and as a result, he foresees HbbTV as the driving standard on the delivery side.
The cost factor seemed to rule the discussion, whether it dealt with costs associated with delivering content to mulitple platforms; generating revenue from delivering content to a second screen or monetising content.
Paul Dingwitz, CTO of ONE CONNXT, a US-based media solutions provider said the aim is invariably to achieve a cost-effective delivery solution while maintaining quality and deliverability to all of the different platforms.
Marco Bonomi of Minerva Networks agreed that cost was the number one variable.
When it comes to multiple standards and the way of delivering video, that usually has an impact on cost especially on the headend side. We often suggest lowering the different number of standards that you are using to deliver video at least at the beginning of the deployment and from our side, we try to embed a player into any application that we deliver to multiple devices in order to support that specific standard. We see that vis-à-vis traditional TV and IPTV markets, the impact of cost on OTT is really huge.
He said there was a need for more hosted models to deliver services in more cost effective ways.
Alex Giannikoulis, CEO of The Apex Group at this point chipped in that Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) offered one of the easiest ways to deliver the content to multiple platforms.
The debate went on to content and which content was the perfect fit for different platforms. Juan Jose pointed out that some devices were ideal for gaming content, while news could be consumed on all types of generic devices. He called for a segmented approach on the content side, the packaging side as well as the delivery side.
Nick Barratt pointed out that MBCs Shahid.net was a very successful platform and served as a catch-up service during Ramadan. However, he pointed out that there was an increasing need to monetise the content that was running on other platforms.
Id like to be able create a true second screen experience from which I can make money. An Ipsos study done in the US said 24% people were surfing on the iPad when watching TV. I want to take that 24% and make money out of them.
He went on to add that rather than offer the same content on both the TV and the iPad, broadcasters should be able to extend the user experience on the second screen. Extended interactivity was one value-add he proposed.
Dingwitz agreed that the second screen should be able to embed the user in that experience.
Pryor from Newtec added that eventually, a combination of services including providing the interactivity, locking in the linear channels and providing the multiplatform environment will ring in the dollars.
Another important topic centered around the availability of analytics with the move to a digital environment. Alex Giannikoulis said this meant producing content based on demand.
The panellists were asked what additional services they would offer if they could. Suggestions included more interactive services and auto learning applications that pick up the preferences of the viewer and make recommendations.
The panel drew to a close with a question that the next discussion was ready to answer the relation between telcos and broadcasters.
