Mobile TV Market (2) the Subtle Role of Telecom Operators

"Killing time" is the core for the development of mobile TV.

---

[+] Consumers are spending less time watching TV day by day.

Being optimistic about the mobile TV market, chip makers, cell phone manufacturers, telecom operators, media operators and value-added content providers have been making preparations in advance. However, is mobile TV really what consumers want? An unspoken doubt is: will anyone really watch TV on the go?

First of all, a trend is crystal clear. Consumers are spending less time watching TV through TV sets. Statistics show that at least in mainland China and Taiwan, the number of people surfing Internet after 8 p.m. at night are increasing steadily, so is the time spent.

Each person has only limited hours in a day. As more and more people choose to spend their off hours in front of computer screens, the TV audience group would diminish. IPTV has not been successful, largely because it is still trying to bring people back in front of TV screens, ignoring the fact that nowadays people hardly watch TV anymore.

The correct way to attract today's TV audience is to move audio or TV programs onto the screen of computers and cell phones. However, the decrease of the time for watching TV and the increase for using computers do not mean that the hours spent on watching cell phone screens would increase.

Here we have two questions to think about: 1) Consumers' hours on the go are fixed (on their way to work/home, or weekend outdoor trips, etc.), so what are their requirements for TV programs during those hours? 2) Is it possible to stimulate the enthusiasm of consumers for mobile TV even in room?

Will consumers buy if we successfully address the user experience challenges for watching video programs on 3G cell phones, and enable press-and-play, fast and effective channel switching and easy, simple billing?

[+] "Killing time" is the core for the development of mobile TV.

Product managers of mobile TV programs might have been racking their brains for clues about consumer requirements. The fact is they don't have to. What consumers want is just to kill time. It would be so boring at bus or subway stations that consumers would like to have something to watch; they may just want to snatch a little rest during busy office hours to steal a look at the cell phone, or they want to take a look at some important news.

Killing time, by all means, is the most critical application of mobile TV. There's no need for complicated interaction programs. Previously, 3G cell phone-base audio/video programs were so troublesome to operate that the "interaction" eventually turned "killing time" into "killed by time".

"Killing time" is also the key to mobile TV billing. One simple question: how much are you willing to pay for killing time? Currently in Taiwan, cable TV bills are about NTD 600 per month. How much, then, is reasonable for mobile TV? 200? Or 100?

DVB-H-based mobile TV offers one-way broadcasted digital programs, which, in theory, don't have to be received only with cell phones. Special terminal devices would be developed in the future for receiving such wireless digital programs. And there might be USB terminals for computers, too.

If digital TV itself is offered for free, there's no need to bother with which terminal device to use (ideally, of course, it's more convenient to be built in cell phones). In view of the current situation, however, monthly billing modes such as those adopted by the cable TV sector will be considered by operators. Therefore, integrating the fee into cell phone bills seems to be a natural choice.

If so, telecom operators would be put into a very subtle position. They might have nothing to do with mobile TV program provider, or become just a billing solution provider for the later, or even play a role similar to cable TV system operators.

[+] The subtle position of telecom operators in the mobile TV industry

In the first case, where telecom operators have nothing to do with digital TV content providers. TV-enabling cell phones bought by consumers (or other terminal devices) will be able to receive TV programs by design. If the programs need charges, consumers can make payment to TV program provider directly to get user IDs.

To get a simpler picture, just imagine binding a cell phone with a digital TV terminal. Each device functions independently without the interference of the other. If TV program providers want to charge the users, they could choose a number of channels, but would have to print and send the bills themselves.

Program providers can also choose to cooperate with telecom operators, if they do not want such troubles. That leads us to the second case: fee collection through cell phone bills. A more deep cooperation model could make interactive programs together with mobile operators and enable real-time program balloting through GPRS.

Trouble, however, is at door. There would be numerous program providers and TV channels. Say, there might be 5, and a consumer could choose to pay one for the program he watches, but he would not be able to afford all 5 if he wants to watch them all.

Generally speaking, that is not good news to the mobile TV sector. The real solution to maximize the interest of program providers is to build a single platform to enable free switching of channels. Yes, there are always competitions. However, if competitions lead to obstacles for consumers, that's no good to anyone.

More over, consumers have been accustomed to the monthly billing mode of one package for watching over 100 channels, which will not change in a short time. Therefore, a player capable of integrating all programs, which is similar to a cable TV system operator, is highly expected. Who will assume this role? It seems to be telecom operators.

That turns out to be the third case. However, everybody wants to dominate. The TV industry does not want their channels to be controlled by others, while the telecom industry will not give up the opportunity of entering the media market. Ironically, the fate of this scenario depends on whether mobile TV is fee-based or not. (
2007/11/25 - By Digitalwall.com - Way to
China Internet/Telecom )

---

- Read More

Prev : Mobile TV Market (1) Cell Phone plus TV, the Dream of Everybody


Next : Mobile TV Market (3) Terminal Manufacturers & Content Providers

---

- Today in History

Mobile TV Market (2) the Subtle Role of Telecom Operators - 2007/11/25

Great Future of Wireless Broadband (3) Scarce Resources - 2006/11/26

Google's Choice (2) Lessons for the Software Giant - 2005/11/20

VoIP (1) It's a Fool Not to Make Telecom Money - 2004/11/28

Mobile TV Market (1) Cell Phone plus TV, the Dream of Everybody

Press a button and the programs are popping up on your screen, with high fidelity and no worry for the cost of data transmission.

---

[+] Press the button and no program comes on your screen

Watching movies on handsets has been the dream of every telecom operator since the beginning of 3G (of course, they keep telling the consumers through TV ads: "this is what you have been dreaming for"). Fixed line operators, in the meantime, have been doing everything they can to sell IPTV to their customers.

Unfortunately, there have been only a few successes worldwide for those two dreams, which should largely be accredited to their particular geographic or social environments, for example, mobile Internet in Japan, mobile TV in Korea and IPTV in Hong Kong. In other countries or regions? Hardly heard of.

Nevertheless, technological progresses are being made continuously. The development of mobile TV is bringing in a new light of hope into the industry. In fact, "mobile TV" is just a general term, which covers any technology that enables consumers to watch TV on their cell phones.

By that definition, mobile TV has been a reality in CDMA/WCDMA-based 3G cell phones. However, before we go further into the development of the mobile TV sector, we need to take a look at what actually happened to 3G cell phones.

First of all, 3G has 3 major goals: high-speed Internet access, streaming media and video phone. With IP-based Internet access, users cannot get the streaming media movie they want by just pressing a button. Instead, they have to select a set of hierarchical menus.

Throughout the interaction process, users have to send requests and receive responses through the cell phone. A program has to be buffered before being played. This is a sheer difference from our experience with TV, where we get programs by just turning on the TV set. It is this difference that shapes everything.

[+] Billing modes stop consumers

In short, with conventional TV, you get the program as soon as you turn it on, not to mention the fast and effective channel switching through the remote controller. With Internet-based IPTV, you turn it on, but have to wait for a while; you switch a channel, but have to wait for a while; you press the play button, but also have to wait for half a minute. For that reason, IPTV has not been able to replace cable TV, nor has 3G cell phone-based streaming media.

Telecom operators had hoped to graft video phone to movie/TV programs to get better interactive experience (for example, allowing users to watch football games by dialing 123456). However, with the 64K bandwidth and poor transmission quality of video phone (maybe you cannot even see where the ball is), they had to give up.

In addition, there's a billing problem. For decades, telecom operators have been accustomed to billing by minutes or by transmitted data volume, as they say, such billing mode could better reflect their costs (they need to be paid so long as there're data flowing through their telecom equipments). However, consumers are loath to pay. Have you seen anyone who pays his TV bills by minutes?

Monthly billing could be a compromise. However, telecom operators have not been able to introduce total monthly billing packages. For example, they might pack a few programs into one package. However, there are usually many such packages (as each telecom operator would cooperate with a number of content providers). Want to get all the packages? Well, pay for them all!

What's more, the monthly packages only cover the transmission costs of telecom operators. To ensure the reasonable income for content providers, consumers have to pay for contents separately. How could a consumer possibly understand, or withstand so many layers of charges?

Are telecom operators ready to become media companies? It seems not. For example, how about offering completely free mobile TV programs and leaving telecom operators and content providers to earn their bread solely from ads? For telecom operators, that is horrible.

[+] The turmoil of standards

In addition to telecom operators, closely related with the sector are traditional cell phone manufacturers. The global cell phone market has been saturated for years, and the years of fast growth gone. Yet leading cell phone manufacturers are still there and thriving - thanks to continued innovations.

The first innovation might be the camera phone introduced a few years ago, followed by the music phone. New technologies, combined with successful marketing, have triggered tides of changing handsets among consumers. What would be the next innovative application? Obviously, it would be cell phone + TV. And the next? Cell phone + GPS.

Over the years, telecom operators and cell phone manufacturers have learned that consumers favor individual cell phone applications over mobile Internet access. Such applications should be easy and simple, and have nothing to do with Internet accessing.

Now, there are new technologies coming to us. Digital files are transmitted mainly through broadcasting technologies. You will no longer have to wait like you did with 3G or IPTV. Press a button and the programs are popping up on your screen, with high fidelity and no worry for the cost of data transmission.

For the industry, however, the war is just beginning. There are too many standards for using the cell phone as the carrier to play TV programs. While some standards, e.g., DVB-H are derived from the TV industry, others, e.g., MBMS, have their origins in the telecom industry.

TV-derived standards alone have already seen Japanese, Korean, European and Chinese standards, not to mention 3G-based digital TV broadcasting technologies developed by the telecom industry. The turmoil seems to have cast a shadow over the outlook of the sector. (
2007/11/18 - By Digitalwall.com - Way to
China Internet/Telecom )

---

- Read More

Prev : The Next Step for Web 2.0 (3) Collective Will Is the Cornerstone of Everything


Next : Mobile TV Market (2) the Subtle Role of Telecom Operators

---

- Today in History

Mobile TV Market (1) Cell Phone plus TV, the Dream of Everybody - 2007/11/18

Great Future of Wireless Broadband (2) Public WiFi is Not Enough - 2006/11/19

Great Future of Wireless Broadband (1) Living in the WiFi City - 2006/11/12

Google's Choice (1) Lessons for Portals - 2005/11/13

A Word of Advice for Small Online Stores - 2004/11/14