Hi there,
This is a travel blog for Oulu UAS team heading towards Streaming Media Europe Conference 2009, London, UK. We´re sending three attendees to this event for updating which are leading trends in business and technology related to content delivery over the Internet.
Moderator:
Christophe Lenaerts, Founder & CEO, Telemak Panel:
Cedric Gegout, CTO, Streamezzo
Guillaume Gerard, Senior Director, Helix EMEA, RealNetworks
Mr. Otto Schmidbauer, Director Video Solutions EMEA, Dialogic Corporation
It was agreed by the panel that the emergence of phones with big screens and higher usability has perhaps only opened the possibility to make Mobile TV finally profitable. The unlimited-data-plan-owning smart phone crowd is seen as a rather purchase-happy people that is easier to monetize than any mobile target audience so far.
The consumption time and length of consumed video has increased in parallel with the increase of the usability on smart phones. And the currently popular native rich media clients pre-installed or as apps on the phone are seen as a higher stimulant for usage than web-based services, as the former offers unified user experience and re-accessibility.
Technically, Rate adaptation is especially important and beneficial for mobile TV. And the hype towards that technology will surely benefit mobile video the most. The two standard delivery methods to mobile as of today are RTSP and HTTP. HTTP delivery is obviously the buzz at the moment, with major players endorsing the technology, like Apple supporting only HTTP delivery on the ever popular iPhone. Also firewalls and modems don't block the traffic as it often happens with RTSP.
HTTP has its own disadvantages of course, it does e.g. not perform as well for high-scale live distribution. The best-practice strategy seems to be HTTP segmenting, transforming RTSP streams to HTTP "streams" as late and close to the HTTP-only user as possible.
The problem of unsatisfied network operators has been a centric topic here as well. The rise of HTTP has taken the operators out of the equation, the video traffic is not distinguishable. Hence the strong push to the SIP-based IMS from the Telcos' side. Seeming mainly an instrument for operators to regain control over the data traffic, I asked about the benefits for users, service- and content-providers. The reply was that unification of billing and the possibility of data-service roaming would offer value to those parties. We'll see. I am concerned for example how that would effect non-commercial content like user generated content under creative commons license. Could IMS bring back the notion of restriction from of the old CompuServe-days? Anyways, IMS seems not to be undisputed and its emergence is essentially seen only as a long-term solution even by its proponents.
Looking at the mid-term, DVB-H seems to be a bit abandoned today. Alternatively there are other IP-based initiatives like MBMS (Multimedia Broadcast / Multicast Services) pushed by e.g. Sony Ericsson that try to implement multicast and broadcast across mobile networks to reduce bandwidth and cost to solve the bandwidth-problem in the short run. But we have not seen wide adoption of the technology in the last years. The most important thing to get to a solution is probably that the Telcos get their business sorted out.
The CDN Market Grows Up: Here Come the Telcos:
10:30-11:30
Moderator:
Dom Robinson, CEO, Global-Mix, UK
Panellists:
Andres Jordan, VP, Innovation, International Carrier Sales and Solutions, Deutsche Telekom North America, USA
Anna Mossberg, Vice President & Head of Product & Business Management, TeliaSonera International Carrier, Sweden
Joe Trainor, Senior Director of Content Services, European Markets Group, Level3 Communications, UK
Grégoire Villan, CDN Solutions and Market Manager - Europe, Tata Communications, France
In the past year we´ve seen additional telcos like Deutsche Telekom, TeliaSonera, Tata and many others enter the CDN market.
Big Picture: Googles recent offers for brightcove increased interest and activity in the CDN space of course. Still Google is always mentioned to be 'special' and it is always another case.
In the beginning there was discussion about if we should add 'video platforms' to the telcos CDN focus today and is the move in to the CDN space a defensive one or are these a part of a wider move into the sector? In general, it´s quite difficult to create platform that fits all. Telcos have some of the building blocks (i.e. CDNs now) but according to at least Anna Mossberg, they may not (won't) be the whole ecosystem. The move in to the CDN space is probably not the defensive move or a move 'because we can do' but more like service to the customers. Tata andl Level3 are active in the CDN space over the past 3-4 yrs. We heard that BT have announced their intentions to try to enter in near future.
Next we have some discussion which focuses on Telcos abilities to provide effective CDN service. One threath could be that Telcos are not big enough to guarantee effectiveness in this scale. Actually nobody takes the ball directly as it is. It is about what you choose... investments, acquisitions or not to provide own CDN spaces. Panel lays focus on next: Content Awareness!!!
Customers are extremely qualified about what they are buying. According to the panellists, providers like Google does not have telcos experience to manage 'network' 24/7. Telcos have been taken care of managed networks years and years.
What becomes to the regulatory issues Telcos may not face anti-competitive issues hence regulation is something Telcos have in their every-day market.
Good content is available in many places/services - there is no 'available only here service'. Naturally which is regarded as good depends on who and where you are. Panelists discussed also about different deliverable technologies i.e. multicast. Availability - to get the content to the customer - seemed to be the most important thing. Also interactivity is important.
Everybody says all the time: We're on the learning curve...
CDN is the one building block of the whole service but not the only one from Telcos perspective.
Using Quality of Experience (QoE) instead of Quality of Service (QoS). Services/networks should work 24/7 as expected.
Online Video Publishing Platforms
11:45 - 12:30 Moderator: Jose Castillo, President, thinkjose, USA
Panellists:
Stephen Clee, Managing Director, Datapresenter, UK
Daniel Daboczy, CEO, Dabber.tv, Sweden
Raghav Gupta, VP, Business Development EMEA, Brightcove, USA
Sean Knapp, Co-Founder & CTO, Ooyala, USA
Dr. Michal Tsur, President & Co-Founder, Kaltura, Israel
Jeroen Wijering, CTO, Bits on the Run, The Netherlands
Panel members are all involved with the online video distribution platform business. The introduction reveals that one of the panelists (Michal Trus from Kaltura, Israel) has open source business model. Video publishing market is very fragmented today as we all know. Question about paying models: the video publishing platforms has to support every possible paying method available. Ooyala's Knapp pointed out that they believe in mobile payment.
Building up a video publishing platform is definitely something more than just building a video player: it also requires archive, platform/CMS, server and so on. There are many new solutions coming up during next years. Rate adaptation has been desired feature for many years which hasn't succeeded until yet, maybe. Content user's opinions are driving the technology development to the right direction.
Alex's question for the panel: How much demand do you see from your customers to live streaming as opposed to VoD?
Live streaming is supported for almost every platform, and the demand of it is growing all the time. One panelist even specialises on live streaming. The monetization models are regarded as rather primitive still. But live streaming is regarded as an absolute requirement from customers. In general providers are getting more and more questions about live streaming. Everybodys interested in it.
To a question of existing video consumption profiles panelists declared that there is a profile for high video consmuption and another one for poor consumption. Companies are now trying to 'activate' the profile in between these.
Why Are We Doing This? Developing an ROI Model for Streaming Corporate Communications
13:45-14:30
Moderator:
Jake Ward, Broadcast Services Director, BroadView, UK
Panellists:
Louise Farrow, Head of Marketing Promotions, ACCA, UK
Niall O´Malley, Group Account Director, immediate future, UK
This session provided a look at how companies should be plannign to measure the success of their streaming media activities as well as how they can utilize aspects of social media to help extend the reach of their communications.
In general, if content consumption should be interactive the live streaming it´s the only alternative.
One example was BT Web Seminar Programme for the SMEs. BT had an approach of audience driven discussion programme - not a sales pitch - with independent guest and opinions. In this case
ROI was based on four key factors:
*Perception - average opinion change of +1.2 on a scale of 1 to 10
*Viewership - 35000 minutes of content viewed up to Augut this year
*Customer - customer interactivity extremely high 63%
*Leads - direct sales leads fed into existing BT sales process
Another example which deserves a short introduction was immediate future's SONY Rolly campaign based on the influence and efficiency of social media.
The company created promotial videos which were delivered via social media as a good example of viral marketing: "Influence the influencers" and videos were reproduced by the communities. They also were motivators for many user generated ones as our example above. The spirit of this movement is that the creators are the most efficient targets to prioritise in an influencer relations programme as they start conversations. Here are the steps of community involvement:
Moderator:
Sarah Platt, Co-Founder/Sales & Marketing Director, Kinura Web Video, UK
Panellists:
Andy Bell, Chief Creative Officer, Mint Digital, UK
Caroline Bottomley, Director, Radar Music Videos, UK
Alex Morrison, Managing Director, Cogapp; Director, Noostar, UK
Dr. Martin Zimper, Head of CAST, Zurich University of Arts, Switzerland
Thursdays last session covers e.g. question: What can we learn from the way that creative businessess, artists and educators use the online video? Session looked at the importance of digital archives for creative and educational projects, creative approaches to content production as well as collaborative projects and out of the ordinary strategies that use streaming video. Streaming video is used to create new narratives and deliver cross-platform events in the virtual and real world.
*Video on your pocket is obviously the trend for next few years. There are naturally limitations such as battery life but still.(Alex Morrison, Cogapp and Noostar)
*We're on treshold: from the written word in a paper as the most important - to moving images as most important. This has, obviously, an influence to the current business models (Martin Zimper)
UGC is very famous but the trend is that there is more desirable need for professional content. That can be proven simply by analyzing YouTube statistics for example. The statistic data shows that the most viewed clips are created by professionals with, naturally some exceptions such as Bunny Animation with it's 1.7M views or Pork and Beans with its 19M views.
Moderator:
Martin Sutherland, Director, European Sales, Vantrix Panel:
Pierre-Yves Le Berre, VP Business Development
AneviaMr James A Neufeld, Product Specialist, never.no
Jim Taylor, Chief Technologist, Sonic Solutions International Digital Media Alliance (IDMA)
The panel discussion touched on topics that relate to multi-channel distribution, or "Three Screen Convergence" how it was called.
There was talk about three sides that are involved in the distribution: Content provider, technology provider and bandwidth provider. Another (perhaps golden) triangle there.
DRM seems to be a big issue for video service implementations nowadays, that is of course especially true for the three-screen case, as missing standardisation makes multi-channel distribution especially expensive. DECE (Digital Entertainment Content Ecosystem) is an initiative that tries to achieve an ecosystem based on a common DRM standard, compared to the ecosystem around formats like DVD. Read about it this Digital Beat blog entry.
Using different but synchronized representations of the same content for the different target devices is seen as good practice. Concentrating on the strengths of the different devices this can make the devices complementary and stimulate even viewing the content on several devices simultaneously. Secondary devices like mobile are preferred for interaction and community-building around the content shown on the big screen.
The requirement of a convergent software platform that makes it easy to synchronize all the screens was brought up. It was agreed that the technology is actually there as of today, but problems are missing business models, low adaption and especially lack of standardisation (which would reduce cost vastly). So currently the convergence is more on the network level and in the possibility to synchronize the content between the screens on an application level. The next step has to be format standardisation, but it was agreed that as of now a format war coming up is unavoidable, that of course will hinder market growth in the a couple of years to come.
One general problem was brought up by Mr. Le Berre: Telcos are generally having a problem with any of the video or high-bandwidth phenomena in the sense that they see themselves as the losers in the equation, having to build up their bandwidth without making money with that. Interesting in conjunction with the unwillingness to embrace Multicasting. As a Telco employee Mr. Le Berre wants to see IMS as the next step towards convergence giving the ISPs control over the different content types, so that video, gaming or voice-over-ip traffic can be charged at different(higher) rates than the rest of the data traffic.
Moderator:
Tony Ballardie, R&D Director, Global-MIX Panel:
Michael Cooper, Head of Global Banking & Financial Markets Product Technology, BT Global Services Andreas Heidoetting, Global Head of Webcast Technology, Markets Division, Thomson Reuters Jonathan Rackowe, Managing Director / CEO, NetVue Greg Shepherd, Distinguished Engineer, Cisco
The panel discussion gave an interesting overview of how Multicast is used in production nowadays. Still the session was not heavily frequented, perhaps an indicator for the awareness around this topic?
Multicast specially in video delivery has the ability to significantly reduce bandwidth requirements for large-scale live-broadcasts and thus offers a solution to possible bandwidth problems imposed by high-bandwidth video streaming. The UDP-based Multicast offers superior delivery performance, but has some disadvantages in network-level reliability and control about the distribution to every single endpoint.
The already aged multicast standard has so far been largely overlooked, even though modern multicast routing protocols like PIM (Protocol Independent Multicast), it is possible to route multicast traffic between networks and hence over the internet. The great lack of multicast on the global internet is also caused by the conflict of business interests especially with ISPs. The classic unicast-based billing models might not hold up when a customer tunnels only one multicast through the ISPs network instead of hundreds of unicasts.
The internal networks of large corporations still seem to be the main places where multicast is deployed. E.g. it was said in the CDN session earlier today, most CDNs do use multicast internally. Another interesting example brought up is the widespread use of multicast in CCTV to distribute the surveillance camera data to the viewing points.
In my opinion it would be up to the ISPs to make a proper business model around multicasting that works for everyone. In the end it's them who are moaning about their bandwidth problems. Of course there are other ways of solving the problems Peer-to-Peer delivery of video would reduce bandwidth usage due to node proximity, a thing that is anticipated my e.g. Adobe. But we can be sure that the ISPs won't like that one either, as it takes them out of the business equation even more.
Technically, Rate adaptation is especially important and beneficial for mobile TV. And the hype towards that technology will surely benefit mobile video the most. The two standard delivery methods to mobile as of today are RTSP and HTTP. HTTP delivery is obviously the buzz at the moment, with major players endorsing the technology, like Apple supporting only HTTP delivery on the ever popular iPhone. Also firewalls and modems don't block the traffic as it often happens with RTSP.
