Skip to main content

How to Add Value in the Connected Lifestyle

The boundary lines between the TV, PC, and mobile screens are blurring with increased broadband and 3G penetration, according to the latest market study by In-Stat.

Service providers are being challenged from all sides for influence over the consumer and the content they consume, the high-tech market research firm says. The challenge for network service providers is how to add value in the connected lifestyle.

"One answer is the introduction of multi-screen video services," says Keith Nissen, the In-Stat analyst who worked on the study.

For instance, consumers could view NBC's videos of the recent Olympic Games on TV, PC, or mobile devices using existing network services.

Another alternative is converged multi-screen services that offer consumers the same capabilities, along with value-added, next-generation features and functions that make the service device independent.

Their research covers consumer behavior and preferences regarding multi-screen video services. It identifies how U.S. consumers are using the different screens and the frequency that applications or activities are used.

The research also identifies multi-screen service requirements, evaluates the demand for content-only multi-screen services, and quantifies the added value that converged multi-screen services provide. It assesses the market for PC-TV two-screen services, and PC-mobile two-screen services.

In-Stat's market study found the following:

- Within five years, there is the potential for 11 million TV-PC service subscribers and nearly 16 million converged PC-mobile service subscribers in the U.S. market.

- Based on consumer surveys, In-Stat has concluded that TV-PC two-screen video services are best offered as content-only multi-screen services, with a common, web-based portal for content identification, sampling, selection, and purchasing.

Popular posts from this blog

Bold Broadband Policy: Yes We Can, America

Try to imagine this scenario, that General Motors and Ford were given exclusive franchises to build America's interstate highway system, and also all the highways that connect local communities. Now imagine that, based upon a financial crisis, these troubled companies decided to convert all "their" local arteries into toll-roads -- they then use incremental toll fees to severely limit all travel to and from small businesses. Why? This handicapping process reduced the need to invest in building better new roads, or repairing the dilapidated ones. But, wouldn't that short-sighted decision have a detrimental impact on the overall national economy? It's a moot point -- pure fantasy -- you say. The U.S. political leadership would never knowingly risk the nation's social and economic future on the financial viability of a restrictive duopoly. Or, would they? The 21st century Global Networked Economy travels across essential broadband infrastructure. The forced intro...