Skip to main content

Pay-TV Providers Must Enhance Their VOD Offerings

The shift of video consumption to tablets and smartphones is causing pay-TV service provider requirements for video on demand (VOD) systems to change as vendors struggle to keep up with current generation needs, according to the latest market study by ABI Research.

A case in point, I previously shared my own use case that demonstrated how I discovered that the HBO GO internet video streaming service had significantly more content in their archive than the HBO VOD offering from Time Warner Cable.

ABI belives that equipment and system vendors, such as Arris (now including Motorola Home), SeaChange, Cisco, and Ericsson are expected to lose ground to cloud-oriented companies -- such as thePlatform, Synacor, and KIT Digital (expected to emerge from bankruptcy as Piksel).

VOD vendors will see less than 30 percent growth over the next five years, while content management system (CMS) vendors will capture the market and see nearly 100 percent growth to seize half of the total VOD management markets.

Classic VOD back-office systems are built around delivery to the TV via a set-top box, leveraging a single video format, a managed network, a modest number of business models (free, packaged, and pay per view), and a standalone hierarchical architecture.

"VOD Equipment and system vendors have adapted their systems to work on commoditized IT-grade hardware and are enabling multiscreen IP delivery to sit alongside classic set-top box delivery," said Sam Rosen, practice director at ABI Research.

However, based upon ABI's recent assessment, they have failed to adapt to syndicated workflows.

Video content management systems -- which resemble premium online video platforms (OVPs) -- have been used in a number of high profile pay-TV service provider multi-screen initiatives, including Comcast’s X1 project, Liberty Global’s Horizon architecture, and Telefonica’s new Global Video Platform.

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...