Posts Tagged ‘geographic variations’

The Top 30 Broadcast Technology Vendor Brands, Ranked by “Overall Opinion,” Globally and Regionally

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
May 24 2010

This is the first in a series of posts about the how the brands of broadcast technology vendors were ranked by respondents to the 2010 Big Broadcast Survey.

.

Each year as part of the Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), I ask respondents to rank broadcast a number of technology vendor brands on a wide range of metrics.  This information is used to create a series of reports, which through benchmarking and industry “league tables” enable these vendors to understand their competitive position in the market.

More than 5,600 people in 120+ countries participated in the 2010 BBS, making this the largest ever and most comprehensive study of the broadcast industry. In addition to measuring a variety of broadcast industry trends, more than 100 vendor brands (in 27 separate product categories) were evaluated by respondents.

This post looks at how broadcast technology vendors were ranked by respondents in terms of their overall opinion of these vendors.   Research participants were asked to rank their “overall opinion” of broadcast technology vendor brands on a scale of 1-10 — with 10 being best in the market, and 1 being worst in the market.

Results are shown in two ways:

  • An overall industry “league table” that shows the 30 highest ranked vendors for the metric “overall opinion.”  The data in this chart is broken out globally and regionally. 
  • An analysis of the “frequency” of appearance in the “overall opinion league table”

 

The top 30 ranked brands for overall opinion are shown below for both the global sample of all respondents as well as for all respondents in each of the geographic regions.  

 

Please note that in all cases, these results are shown in alphabetical order, NOT in the order in which they were ranked by respondents to the survey.         

   

Question: Please rank your overall opinion of the following brands on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best in the market and 1 being the worst.         

  

 

 

Interestingly, a total of 46 broadcast technology vendor brands are included in this table, which demonstrates that there is strong variation in opinion based on geographic segmentation of respondents.  

In terms of frequency of appearance in this table:  

  • 17 brands appear four times, meaning they were ranked in the top 30 globally and in each geographic region. It is possible
  • 9 brands appear three times
  • 5 brands appear two times
  • 15 brands appear once, which demonstrates that some brands are strongest in one geographic area

   

Analysis of the data shows that are some clear market leaders on a global basis, while others are strong on a regional basis.   

A breakdown of how many times each company appears in the ranking shows how many times each brand appears in the chart above.  

Brands appearing four times:  

  • Adobe, AKG, Apple, beyerdynamic, Cisco, Dolby, Genelec, Grass Valley, Neumann, Panasonic, Rohde & Schwarz, Sennheiser, Shure, Solid State Logic, Sony, Studer, Tektronix

   

Brands appearing three times:  

  • Aja Video, AMS-Neve, Harris, Lawo, RED, Salzbrenner Stagetec, Snell, Tandberg, Yamaha

   

Brands appearing two times:  

  • Clear-Com, Electro Voice, Evertz, Ikegami, JBL

   

Brands appearing once:  

  • Audio-Technica, Avid, Barco, Calrec, EVS, HP, Klein + Hummel, Mackie, Omneon, Prism Media, Quantel, Rhozet, Riedel, RTS Intercom Systems, TVIPS

   

 

 

Analysis of the Frequency for Each Brand in the “Overall Opinion” League Table:  

In order to provide a better understanding of which brands were most higly ranked in each geography, the data has been provided in the table below, which shows the global and regional performance for each brand in the top 30 ranking of overall opinion.   

  

The frequency chart shows some interesting geographic variation in the data.  

Appearing in the  top 30 “overall opinion” ranking globally + one region  

Four brands managed to achieve a top 30 ranking in the global overall opinion league table , despite being in the top 30 of only one of the three geographic regions.  

Electro Voice (Americas), Evertz (Americas), Ikegami (Americas), JBL (Americas)  

The following 15 brands did not make the top 30 in the global league table of overall opinion, but they did appear in the top 30 overall opinion ranking in one of the geographic regions:  

 

Appearing in the  top 30 “overall opinion” ranking only in EMEA  

EVS, Klein + Hummel, Prism Media, Rhozet, Riedel, T-VIPS  

   

Appearing in the  top 30 “overall opinion” ranking only in Asia-Pacific  

Audio-Technica, Calrec, HP, Omneon, Quantel  

 

Appearing in the  top 30 “overall opinion” ranking only in the Americas  

Avid, Mackie  

.

Please keep in mind when reviewing this information that all data these charts are presented in alphabetical order, not in the order brands were ranked by respondents to the BBS.  Also, the charts in this posting measure the responses of all 2010 BBS respondents, regardless of their company type, company size, geographic location, job title and budget for broadcast technology products.   

In order to get full value from this data, it is necessary to evaluate these results on a granular basis.  If you would like more information, please contact Devoncroft Partners.

 

.

This article is based on the findings from the 2010 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of industry trends, technology purchasing behavior and the opinion of vendor brands.  With more than 5,600 people in 120+ countries participating, the 2010 version of the BBS is the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

     

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
3 Comments »

Purchase Preferences of Broadcasters, Broken Down by Geography and Organization Size

broadcast industry technology trends, Broadcast technology channel strategy, broadcast technology market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Oct 22 2009

In a previous post I wrote about the IABM’s US market workshops, which I attended last week in San Francisco and New York. During my presentations about the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey, a few people asked for clarification on some data and/or for a cut of the data that is different than what I was showing at the time.

When I got back from the meetings, I extracted this additional information and sent it to the relevant parties. I figured that others might be interested to see this as well, so here it is.

One question was about whether there is significant regional variation in the preference for broadcasters to purchase from a single vendor versus a range of “best-of-breed” suppliers.  A follow-on question was whether there was variation in purchasing preference based on the size of the broadcaster.

My original post on this topic showed that there is a strong preference for buyers to evaluate multiple vendors and select a best of breed solution. You can read this post here: Do broadcast technology buyers prefer to purchase from a single supplier or from “best-of-breed”?

Here’s the chart from this post, which shows that the majority of buyers, regardless of their type, prefer to  evaluate multiple vendors and purchase best-of-breed solutions.

 Q: When purchasing broadcast technology products, do you prefer to buy from a single “one-stop-shop” or select “best-of-breed” solutions from multiple vendors?

Best of breed preferred purchase method

 

The above chart looks at the total market on a global basis, and does not break out the responses for each customer type geographically. 

 I thought it would be interesting to do this for broadcasters, and the results are shown in the chart below, which compares the response of the overall global sample (called “everyone” here), with the responses of all broadcasters and then regional broadcasters — there is some regional variation.

 

Broadcasters -- Best of breed preferred purchase method

The chart above shows that broadcasters have a strong preference to purchase “best-of-breed” solutions, but there are some variations.  Broadcasters in the Americas show a higher preference towards a single supplier versus the average of all broadcasters, while Asian broadcasters show a higher preference towards best-of-breed versus the average.

The next question takes it one level further, and asks whether these preferences hold true for broadcasters of all sizes — i.e. how do broadcasters of different sizes prefer to purchase broadcast technology products and services?  To find out I did another cut of the broadcaster data from the chart above.  In this case I did not look at geography, but at the size of the broadcaster.

The results are shown in the table below:

Broadcasters By Size -- Best of breed preferred purchase method

 

As you can see, the results are fairly consistent, and once again there is an overwhelming preference is to evaluate multiple vendors and choose best of breed solutions. 

You’ll note that there is an extra bar on this chart — the one for US Network Broadcasters.  As an interesting point of comparison,  I have also included these results since I happened to have collected this data during the research.  US networks are some of the industry’s largest customers and they are usually in the largest cities (such as New York) where many vendors have sales offices.  US broadcast networks show the strongest preference towards buying from a single supplier when compared other broadcasters — more than double other large (1000+ employee) broadcasters.

If you’re a broadcast technology vendor, is this consistent with your experience?  Please let me know.

Tags: , , , , ,
1 Comment »

Top Five Improving Brands in Broadcast Technology

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Sep 28 2009

This is the fifth in a series of posts about how the brands of broadcast technology vendors were ranked in a variety of categories in the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), which includes responses from nearly 5,000 people in 110 countries.  (For information about how these results were collected, please see the bottom of this post)*.

Previous posts on this subject have looked at how broadcast technology vendor brands were ranked by BBS respondents in terms of overall opinion, customer service, reliability and innovation. 

These are great metrics, but I also wanted to know which brands are perceived as getting better or getting worse in the global marketplace.  To find out, I presented BBS participants with a list of 25 broadcast technology vendors and asked whether their opinion of the company had “got better,”  “stayed the same” or “got worse” over the past 2-3 years.

Once I had these results was able to calculate the “Net Change in Brand Image” for each company by using the following formula:

GB-GW/# of total respondents = Net Change in Brand Image

In other words, I subtracted the “got worse” number from the “got better” number for each company (ignoring the “stayed the same” number), and then converted this into a percentage of the total for each vendor.

Evaluating the change in brand image in this way takes into account both the positive and negative perceptions of brands.  It turns out that some brands are more polarizing than others – meaning that a strong “got better” response might be cancelled out by a strong “got worse” response.  As a result some companies who were rated in the top five on just the “got better” score were not included in the global or regional top five because their high “got worse” score dragged down their overall result.  At the same time, a few of the companies with high “got worse” scores still made the top 5 list because these negative scores were cancelled out by even higher “got better” scores.

The table below summarizes the results by showing the vendors who were ranked in the top five for “net change in brand image.”  In order to show geographic variation, these results are presented globally as well as regionally.

 

Please note that in all cases, these brands are shown in alphabetical order, NOT in the order of their ranking in the study.

 

Top Five Net Improving Broadcast Technology Vendor Brands, Globally and Regionally

  

Net Change in Brand Image

 

Like most other measures, the top five spots on a global basis were taken by large and/or well-established players.  However, there are some interesting regional trends that are worth further investigation.

Several companies achieved a top five spot in one or more of the regions, but were not ranked in the top five on a global basis.  These include Harris, Miranda Technologies, Quantel and Snell & Wilcox.  Harris and Miranda were ranked in the top five in two regions.  The following chart shows a breakdown of companies that achieved a top five ranking on a regional basis, but were not ranked in the top five on a global basis.

Achieved Top Five in One or More Regions, but not Globally

Company EMEA AMERICAS ASIA-PAC
Harris

 

X

X
Miranda

X

X

 
Quantel

 

 

X
Snell & Wilcox

X

 

 

 

When considering the companies that placed in the top five on a global basis, it’s interesting to note that no single company placed in the top 5 in all three geographic regions.  Four of the global top 5 placed in the top 5 in two regions, while one vendor – Omneon – achieved a top 5 position in just one region, but still achieved a top 5 position on a global basis.  

Here’s a breakdown of where each of the top five global companies achieved a top five spot on a regional basis:

Where Global Top Five Also Achieved Top 5 Position Regionally

Company EMEA AMERICAS ASIA-PAC
Evertz

X

X

 
EVS

X

 

X
Omneon

X

 

 
Sony

 

X

X
Thomson / Grass Valley

 

X

X

 

Sony and Thomson / Grass Valley had similar profiles, scoring in the top 5 in both Asia-Pacific and the Americas.  EVS was in the top five on EMEA and Asia-Pac; and Evertz was in the top five in EMEA and the Americas.  Omneon’s strong regional showing in EMEA (presumably combined with scores just outside of the top five in other regions), was enough to put it in the top five globally.

The net change in brand image provides good insight into how brands are perceived by the market, but it needs to be taken in the context of a variety of other measures as well, since a high score in this category is the result of many factors.  Indeed the companies in the top five in “net change in brand image” also achieved high marks in other categories. For example, EVS scored very well in the customer service category (the only company to be in the top five in all geographic regions), and was also ranked in the top five for innovation on a global basis, along with both Sony and Thomson / Grass Valley.   

A top 5 score in the “Net Change in Brand Image” category, on a regional or global basis is an important achievement for any brand.  The companies in this group are perceived by the market in a vey positive light.  Whether they are perceived as a consistent performer who is doing things right, and getting better; or as a dynamic up and coming company, this measure facilitates a deeper understanding of the industry brand leaders.

 

* Respondents to the BBS were asked to rank their opinion of twenty-five broadcast technology vendor brands in a variety of categories including awareness; overall opinion; change of opinion; recommendation; and a variety of brand attributes and brand drivers.  The responses were then aggregated into a series of industry “league tables” that rank each broadcast technology vendor brand against the metrics mentioned above. You can download a free 26 page summary of some of the key findings of this study here.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
1 Comment »

Sales Expansion Plans for Broadcast Technology Vendors

broadcast industry technology trends, Broadcast technology channel strategy, broadcast technology market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Aug 03 2009

I recently started a series of posts about trends that are specific to broadcast technology vendors.  I started by looking at where broadcast technology vendors see the most sales growth coming from over the next 2-3 years.  My research shows that the majority of vendors think that China will be the fastest growing region in the next 2-3 years, an average of 20%, and this view is held by vendors across the world.

Now I am going to look at what vendors are actually planning to do in terms of their global sales coverage — with their own direct sales force.

As part of the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey, I asked approximately 550 broadcast technology vendors about where they operate their own offices today and where they plan to open their own offices in the future.

 

Question: Which statement best captures your company’s direct sales situation in each region? Vendor Office Plans

 

Europe and North America lead the way in terms of the current location of vendor offices, with China close behind. 

China, which was ranked #1 by vendors in terms of potential growth over the next 2-3 years, ranks last in terms of where vendors plan to open new offices.  Instead it is that Middle East and Asia-Pac regions that are predicted to see the most vendor activity, in terms of office expansion, over the next 2-3 years.

So why are the same vendors who predict that their strongest growth will be in China not rushing to establish offices there? Possibly many vendors will use an office in Asia-Pac (e.g. Singapore or Hong Kong) as a base of activity for the entire region and will sell into China from there.  Also, China is an expensive place to operate with a dedicated staff, so perhaps smaller vendors are opting for a regional approach, which involves using established dealers, distributors and systems integrators to reach the Chinese market.

It is the Middle East region that is predicted to have the highest percentage of new vendor offices over the next 2-3 years.  As this market continues to grow, driven by the creation of government supported Media Cities, there is no doubt that the region will see increased spending in the area of broadcasting technology, and many vendors see this as the next logical step in their global expansion.

Tags: , , ,
Comments Closed

Brand Schizophrenia? Regional/customer variations in perception of broadcast vendor brands

Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jul 09 2009

Last week at the IABM’s market workshop meeting in the UK, I presented an overview of  the Big Broadcast Survey.  During the presentation, I talked about how there is dramatic variation in the perception of broadcast industry vendor brands, based on factors such as geography and customer type. 

I used an example of how the perception of one company whose brand I studied is very different based on who you ask, and where the people you ask are located.   A number of people contacted me after the presentation to discuss this topic, so I am posting the charts from this part of the presentation here.  

I didn’t name the company during the IABM presentation, and I am not going to name it here.  The reason for showing this is not to single out one vendor (believe me, there are plenty of similar examples).  Instead, it’s to highlight the fact that brands may be perceived very differently in different parts of the world.  The broadcast industry, like many B2B markets, is global and vendors (large and small) need to be aware of the regional differences.

Keep in mind that when looking at these charts, they all show the perception of the same company’s brand — just from different perspectives. 

 

Let’s start by looking at how this company is perceived by broadcasters.  

I surveyed more than 1000 broadcasters about a variety of topics, including their perception of vendor brands.  The resulting broadcast industry brand status “league table” is shown below, with the company in question highlighted in red.

 

Regional Variations -- broadcasters

 

 

So what do broadcasters think of this company?

As you can see, this brand:

  • is very well regarded by broadcasters in the Americas
  • falls to the middle of the pack with broadcasters in EMEA
  • is not held in a particularly high regard by broadcasters in Asia

 

 

Next, let’s look at how a different group of respondents, systems integrators, view this company based on the same criteria. 

Here are the results:

Regional Variations -- systems integrators

 

SIs are an important partner for any broadcast technology vendor, and in some cases their opinion of a company can mean the difference between winning and losing a lucrative deal.

To sum up this one: 

  • SIs in the Americas like this company a LOT.
  • SIs in EMEA regard it as being in the middle of the pack
  • SIs in Asia appear to not think much of this company

 

 

Finally, let’s move away from brand status, and look at a key brand driver, customer service.  Rather than look at customer service from the perspective of a specific customer category, I’ve summarized the rankings on a regional basis. 

Once again — as shown below — this company is perceived very differently in different parts of the world.  They rank #2 in one region and #11 in a different region.

Regional Variations -- customer service

So what’s the take-away from this?

Vendors need to understand that the perception of their brand is one of the things that can drive their business, so they need to pay attention to the way they are perceived.

If you’re interested in reading more about this, be sure to download the free summary report from the Big Broadcast Survey.  It’s 26 pages long and gives a good overview of some of the broadcast industry’s leading brands, broken down regionally. 

Tags: , , , , , ,
1 Comment »

What geographic region is the leader today in broadcast technology? What about tomorrow?

market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jun 25 2009

Have you ever wondered which parts of the world have the most advanced broadcast technology?  To find out what people in different parts of the world think about this, I asked the following question as part of the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey (almost 5,000 people in 110 countries participated):

“Which territory is currently the technology leader, and which will be the leader in 3 years?”

  • North America
  • Europe
  • Asia-Pac
  • China
  • Middle East
  • Latin America
  • Africa

 

Not surprisingly, it turns out that opinions about this question differ widely based on the geographic location of the respondent.  But for me, the results become more interesting when you look at how the respondents in each of the regions mentioned in the question view themselves in relation to the rest of the world.

The definition of “technology leadership” is fairly subjective, so when asking this question, I left the interpretation to each respondent.   The broadcast technology landscape varies from region to region, and the deployment of new (advanced) technology is driven by a wide variety of factors.  These could include governmental policy (e.g. analog switch-off), competition (from both broadcasters and vendors), new delivery platforms, new content monetization techniques, and of course a constant stream of new products and innovations. 

Asking which region is the leader today is one thing, but asking broadcast industry insiders to predict which region will be the leader in three years is another matter, and the responses may surprise some people — indeed, respondents from virtually every region of the world expect their own leadership to decrease over the next three years from where it is today! 

I found that North America is the geographical region which is considered by many to be the technology leader today.  However, respondents from every region (including those in North America) expect this lead to decrease over the next three years. 

Many respondents expect to see Asia, and China in particular, emerging as a strong challenger for technology leadership, with EMEA widely expected to lose ground.  Interestingly, respondents in Asia-Pacific do not share this view to the same extent, believing the North America and EMEA will remain dominant in terms of technology leadership.

The following charts show how respondents from each region answered this question. 

 

The view from Europe, Middle East and Africa 

 
Which territory is currently the technology leader, and which will be the leader in 3 years? Responses from EMEA
Respondents in EMEA believe that the current technology leaders (North America and Europe) will be challenged by China in the next three years. In particular, North America’s dominance of the industry is felt to be under threat.

 

 

  The view from North America (USA and Canada) 

Question: Which territory is currently the technology leader, and which will be the leader in 3 years? -- Response from North America

 

North American see themselves as the current technology leaders, and expect this to continue unto the future, albeit by a decreasing percentage.  Like other regions, North Americans see China as an emerging technology leader.

 

 

The view from Latin America 

Question: Which territory is currently the technology leader, and which will be the leader in 3 years? -- Response from Latin America

 Latin American participants see North America as today’s technology leader, but expect it to be eclipsed by Asia over the next several years.

 

 

The view from Asia Pacific (including Australia and New Zealand) 

Who is technology leader -- response from Asia Pacific

Respondents from Asia see North America and Europe virtually swapping places in terms of technology leadership over the next several years.  These respondents also expect China to increase in prominence, even as their own decreases.

 

 

The view from China

 Question: Which territory is currently the technology leader, and which will be the leader in 3 years? - Responses from China

Chinese respondents see North America as today’s technology, and expect this to continue into the future.  Unlike other regions, Chinese repsondents se their own prominence decreasing slightly over time.
 
 
So that’s what the world thinks.  What do you think?

 

 

 

Tags: , , , , , ,
1 Comment »

The broadcaster’s view of technology trends

market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jun 23 2009

I’ve recently been looking at how broadcast technology trends vary by geographic region, based on the research data from the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey. The examples I have shown previously look at the differences in technology trends based solely on geography. 

Now it’s time to get a bit more granular and look at how just broadcasters view these technology trends, and whether there are regional variations in their opinions.   Approximately 1,400 broadcasters participated in the study.  Each was presented with a list of 15 industry trends and asked to choose the three trends from the list (ranking them 1-3) that they feel will have the most significant impact on the way they do business over the next 2-3 years.  The chart below shows their responses, which are weighted based on how they were ranked by the respondents.  If a trend was ranked most important, its weight=3; if a trend was ranked #2, its weight=2; and if a trend was ranked #3, it is weight=1.  

 

The broadcaster's view of industry trends by region

The broadcaster's view of industry trends by region

 

In general it appears that broadcasters around the world are roughly aligned in terms of overall opinion of technology trends, but there are a few regional variations. 

Just as with the overall market, the transition to HDTV and tapeless workflows are the top trends for broadcasters, followed by multiplatform delivery and file-based workflows.  Interestingly, broadcasters in EMEA rank the move to file-based workflows higher than their counterparts in the Americas and Asia, while ranking multi-platform content delivery lower.

Otherwise, it is broadcasters in Asia  who vary from their counterparts in the Americas and EMEA. 

For example, broadcasters in Asia rank the following trends differently than their counterparts in the Americas and EMEA (although some of these are still at the low end of the range):

* IP content delivery (lower)

* automated worflows higher (higher)

* 3DTV (higher)

* Set-top box PVR (higher)

* Network PVR (higher)

 

Once again, some of the trends that we often read about in the trade press — e.g. the transition to 3Gbps and 3DTV — are relatively far down the list of business priorities for broadcasters (#9 and #11 respectively), which implies that broadcasters are continuing to move to HDTV operations while striving for efficiency in their operations rather than pursuing new technology. 

 

Here’s the full list of technology trends from the study, in the order that they were ranked by the broadcasters:

  Broadcasters — Asia Broadcasters — Americas Broadcasters — EMEA
1 Transition to HDTV Transition to HDTV Transition to HDTV
2 Tapeless workflows Tapeless workflows Tapeless workflows
3 Automated workflows Multi-platform delivery File-based workflows
4 Multi-platform delivery File-based workflows Multi-platform delivery
5 File-based workflows IP content delivery IP content delivery
6 IP content delivery Automated workflows Automated workflows
7 Advanced encoding techniques (e.g. h.264) Advanced encoding techniques (e.g. h.264) Advanced encoding techniques (e.g. h.264)
8 Video on Demand Video on Demand Video on Demand
9 Transition to 3Gbps (1080p) Transition to 3Gbps (1080p) Transition to 3Gbps (1080p)
10 3D TV On-line advertising On-line advertising
11 Set-top box PVR/DVR 3D TV 3D TV
12 On-line advertising 4K production 2K production
13 Network DVR Set-top box PVR/DVR 4K production
14 4K production 2K production Set-top box PVR/DVR
15 2K production Network DVR Network DVR

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
1 Comment »

Regional Variation in Broadcast technology Trends — HDTV Still Top Trend

market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jun 22 2009

In a previous post about broadcast  industry trends, I looked at at a ranking of top trends in the broadcast industry and made the comment that there  is considerable variation in response when you segment data by geography and customer type.  One of the really interesting things about the data in the 2009 BBS is that is can be sliced and diced in many ways, thereby providing insight through granular analysis. 

Here’s an example of how trends can vary by geographic region:

2009 BBS trends -- regional variations

 This chart shows responses to the same question as the previous post — i.e.  “please choose from this list the top three trends that will most affect the way your company does business over the next 2-3 years” — from the point of view of people in different geographies.  Once again, a simple weighting formula was used to generate these rankings — if  a technology was ranked 1st (weight=3), 2nd (weight=2) or 3rd(weight=1).  This was done to illustrate the relative importance of  each technology trend to the respondent.  The trends in this chart are then expressed as a percentage of the total weighted votes.  As you can see, there are some interesting differences between the views of respondents in the Americas, EMEA and Asia.

While the transition to HDTV is still the top trend for all three geographies, there are differences in how important this trend is to the businesses of the respondents.  In the Americas, the transition to HDTV scores 23.79%; in EMEA is scores 21.92% and in Asia is scores 17.36%.  There are similar difference in the scores of the “file-based workflows” question.  This trend appears significantly more important to Europeans than it is to Americas and especially to respondents in Asia.

 A couple more observations:

  • Transition to HD and tapeless workflows are the top two trends in all three regions — despite the variations in importance of these trends relative to one another
  • Some of the trends that are in the news these days — e.g. transition to 3Gbps and 3DTV did not score particularly high.  Perhaps the reason we read about these trends in trade publications is that this vendors want to push the next new thing, while their customers want to complete the transition (to HD or tapeless for example) that they are in the middle of now, rather than worrying about the next new thing.
  • A few of the more “advanced” trends (multi-platform content delivery, 3D TV) scored higher in Asia than they did in the Americas or EMEA

Here’s the full list of the 15 trends from the study, ranked in order for each region.

       EMEA Americas Asia
1      Transition to HDTV Transition to HDTV Transition to HDTV
2      Tapeless Workflows Tapeless workflows Tapeless Workflows
3      File-based workflows IP content delivery Multi-platform content delivery
4      IP content delivery File-based workflows IP content delivery
5      Multi-platform content delivery Multi-platform content delivery Automated workflows
6      Automated workflows Video on Demand Advanced encoding techniques
7      Advanced encoding techniques Automated workflows Video on Demand
8      Video on Demand Advanced encoding techniques 3D TV
9      Transition to 3Gbps Transition to 3Gbps File-based workflows
10     On-line advertising On-line advertising Transition to 3Gbps
11     2K production 3D TV Set-top box PVR/DVR
12     4K production 2K production 2K production
13     Set-top box PVR/DVR 4K production On-line advertising
14     3D TV Set-top box PVR/DVR Network DVR
15     Network DVR Network DVR 4K production 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
3 Comments »

%d bloggers like this: