Posts Tagged ‘market research’

What Broadcast Technology Vendors Most Want to Change About Their Companies

Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Broadcast technology channel strategy, broadcast technology market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Aug 19 2009

This is the last (for now) in a series of posts about trends that directly impact broadcast technology vendors. 

As part of the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey, I asked approximately 550 broadcast technology hardware and software vendors about where they see sales growth over the next 2-3 years; how they expect to expand their sales networks ; and their go-to-market strategies –  today and in the future.   

Now I am going to look at what, to me anyway, was the most interesting vendor question in the study — i.e. what would broadcast technology vendors most like to improve about their organizations. 

Participating vendors were presented with the following list of eight issues and asked to rank which ones they would most like to change about their business.  

  • Business Development (partnerships)
  • Engineering
  • Internal Communications
  • Marketing
  • Product Management
  • Relationship with customers
  • Relationship with channel partners
  • Sales

 The results are summarized in the chart below, which also provides interesting insight into the difference in attitudes and business approach of vendors of different size.

Question: Which of the following issues would you most like to change about your business?

 

What Vendors Want to Change

When I wrote this question, I figured that most vendors would say they want to improve their product management function and internal communications, because this is what I have been told by many vendors.  However, what I found was that more than half of the respondents said that the thing they most want to change has to do with sales & marketing (marketing, business development and sales). 

What’s interesting to me about these results is that the top three choices are all externally focused, and yet many vendors I’ve spoken with have said that their goal is to improve the competitiveness of their product offering through better product management and engineering. 

I also found it interesting that there are clear differences in the internal priorities of broadcast technology vendors based on their size.

For example, the smallest (1-50 people) and the largest (500+ people) put greater emphasis on partnerships than medium-sized companies, while small companies placed a greater emphasis on sales.   There is also an interesting contrast between small and large companies.  More than half of the respondents from large companies said that the things they’d like to improve are relationship-based, in this case with their partners and customers and distribution channel.   This is probably because as companies grow they (for the most part) have overcome their growing pains and have put into place sufficiently rigorous processes for product management and engineering, and have shifted their emphasis towards relationship selling, whether direct or through third parties.

If you’re a broadcast technology vendor, do you agree with these findings?  If not, what is it that you would like to improve about your business and why?

Tags: , , ,
No Comments »

Comprehensive Research Report Reveals Industry Trends and Highlights Broadcast Technology Vendor Brands — Free Summary Available

Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, broadcast technology market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Aug 17 2009

Although I have mentioned it in many previous posts, I have not yet written specifically about the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), so I thought I’d take the opportunity to do that now.

Published in May 2009, the BBS is one of the largest ever and most comprehensive studies of broadcast technology vendor brands and industry trends (nearly 5,000 people from 110 countries participated in the study). The 2009 BBS provides insight into the perceptions of leading broadcast industry vendor brands by practitioners across the world. It also delivers vendor brand ranking in nine product categories; all of which can be segmented by geography and customer type.

In order to help promote my research I have entered into a partnership with the IABM, the broadcast vendor community’s trade association.  As part of this agreement, the information in report, its data collection and methodology, were reviewed by the IABM prior to publishing. The IABM now promotes Devoncroft research as part of its ongoing Market Research and Intelligence Services.  In return, Devoncroft provides IABM members with a discount when they purchase reports.

I have published two types of reports with the data from the 2009 BBS:

The BBS Global Brand Report provides a comprehensive overview of the market perceptions of a variety of broadcast vendor brands, including a ranking of brands in a series of industry “league tables.” It also provides a large number of “brand scorecards” that look at the perception of each brand segmented by customer type and geography — e.g. broadcasters in EMEA.

Nine separate BBS Product Reports rank vendor brand rankings in individual product categories (automation, cameras, conversion, modular infrastructure, master control switchers, multiviewers, production switchers, routing switchers and video servers)

The reports described above are paid-for products, and I am happy to say that they have been well-received by the industry.  However, I have also published a 26 page summary document that highlights the some of the key findings from the 2009 study, which is available free of charge.  This report provides an overview of industry trends and a listing of the top vendor brands in a variety of categories such as reliability, quality, innovation and customer service.

 It’s pretty interesting reading, and the best part is that it’s free once you register.

You can register for and download the free report here http://bit.ly/2Z125

Tags: , , , ,
No Comments »

Where do broadcast technology vendors see sales growth over next 2-3 years?

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast technology market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jul 30 2009

In previous posts, I’ve looked at technology trends in the broadcast industry from the point of view of both broadcasters and vendors, including how an analysis of broadcast industry technology trends shows that vendors and broadcasters do not always have the same commercial interests.

As part of the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey, I have also studied trends that are specific to broadcast technology vendors.  For example: where do broadcast technology vendors sell products today;  how do they see their geographic sales mix changing over time;  where they plan to open new sales offices in order to capitalize on future growth potential; and what they would like to improve in their organizations by ranking a list of eight potential issues. 

Nearly 550 broadcast technology vendors responded to these questions, and my next couple of posts will look at these findings. To start, let’s look at where vendors think they will see the most sales growth over the next 2-3 years.

I asked vendors to choose the geographic territory where they think will see the most growth over the next 2-3 years.  The results are summarized in the table below:

Question: Which territories do you think will see the most sales growth over the next 2-3 years – in percentage terms?

Vendor Market Growth Expectations

The vast majority of vendors believe that China will be the fastest growing region in the next 2-3 years, an average of 20%.  This view is held by vendors across the world.

Asia-Pacific, Europe and North America are also expected to grow strongly, each by an average of 13-14%.  Although less developed, the Middle East and Latin America are expected to grow by less (an average of 10%).  The least developed region, Africa, is considered to be the territory with the least potential for growth (an average of only 6% in

Asia-Pacific, Europe and North America are also expected to grow strongly, each by an average of 13-14%.  Although less developed, the Middle East and Latin America are expected to grow by less (an average of 10%).  The least developed region, Africa, is considered to be the territory with the least potential for growth (an average of only 6% in the next few years).

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

Tags: , , , , ,
No Comments »

Let the broadcaster beware…. Business interests of broadcasters not always aligned with those of vendors

market research, technology trends | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jul 14 2009

I have written several times about technology trends in the broadcast industry, including a look at how trends vary by geographic region, and what technology trends are most important to broadcasters.   Having done this, I decided to look more deeply at the trends that are the most important to broadcasters, and then compare this to others in the supply chain. What I found is that there are important differences between the business interests of technology suppliers (vendors and SIs) and technology buyers (broadcasters).

To get this data, I presented the nearly 5,000 people who responded to the Big Broadcast Survey (BBS) with a list of 15 industry trends and asked to choose 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. Because this question is about what’s important to the business of the respondents, it reveals much about their motivations. 

The results, which are summarized in the chart below, show that the commercial motivations of those supplying technology (vendors and systems integrators) are not always aligned with technology buyers (broadcasters).

 Question: Please rank in order (1-3) which of the following technology trends are most important to your business, with 1 being most important

Trends -- Broadcasters vs Vendors & SIs

 

Here’s a quick round-up of the differences between what’s important to technology buyers versus technology suppliers:

More Important to Technology Buyers (Broadcasters):

  • Transition to HDTV operations
  • Transition to tapeless workflows
  • Automated workflows
  • File-based workflows
  • Multiplatform delivery

 

More Important to Technology Suppliers (Vendors and Sis):

  • IP content delivery
  • Advanced encoding techniques (e.g. h.264)
  • Video on Demand
  • Transition to 3Gbps operations (1080p)
  • On-line advertising
  • 3D TV
  • Set-top box PVR/DVR
  • 4K production
  • Network DVR
  • 2K production

 

Looking at this, it seems to me that:

  • the trends that are most important to broadcasters are about finishing what they started and making it work in practice (transition to HD), becoming more efficient (tapeless, file-based, automated workflows) and increasing revenues (multi-platform content delivery)
  • the trends that are most important to technology suppliers are about new technology

 

Let’s look at this in another way… The table below depicts this, expressed as the difference between the average for each respondent group and the overall global average.  As you can see there are some major differences between broadcasters and their suppliers, particularly when it comes to transition to HDTV, tapeless workflows, automated workflows and the transition to 3Gbps:

Trend Variation -- between broadcastes and vendors

Broadcasters believe that refining workflows and gaining efficiencies, particularly through digital file management, is very important to their business, whereas vendors and systems integrators place more importance on next generation technologies such as 3Gbps operations.  Similarly broadcasters do not currently view IP content delivery as a stand out issue, whereas vendors and systems integrators believe this is to be the second most important trend influencing their business.

These findings are in-line with what Roger Crumpton of the IABM said at their market workshop recently — i.e. that broadcasters in today’s climate are focusing on completing existing projects (e.g. HDTV transition) and increasingly risk averse when it comes to new technology unless it can make them more efficient in some way (e.g. automated workflows).

So what does all this mean?   If a technology suppliers can more fully understand what’s most important to their customers they will have a better change of success, but only if they listen to what their customer is telling them and adjust their sales approach accordingly.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
2 Comments »

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 »

How do broadcast technology buyers typically purchase — direct from vendors, through an SI or a dealer?

Broadcast technology channel strategy, market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jul 06 2009

It’s a big world and in a global industry like broadcast technology hardware and software, even the largest vendors must rely on a mix of direct and indirect sales channels.  

As part of the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey, I asked technology purchasers how they typically buy broadcast technology hardware and software — direct from a vendor, or through a third-party channel like a systems integrator (SI) or dealer. 

The results are interesting because they highlight that there are some times when it makes more sense for vendors to use a channel than go direct.  They also show that there are some types of buyers who are more used to buying through the channel versus direct.

It turns out that overall, about 2/3 of customers purchase through a third-party supplier (dealer or SI), with the rest buying directly from the vendor.

However, when you break the results down by the type of customer (as I have done in the chart below),  you quickly see that there are differences between the typical purchasing habits of various customer types, and this information has important implications for vendors.

Question: How do you typically purchase broadcast technology products?

how_do_you_typically_purchase

Out of six different customer types, only “cable/satellite/IPTV operators” (companies like DirectTV, Sky, Comcast etc) and  ”cable programmers” (companies like Discovery and HBO) typically buy more than 50% directly from vendors.  Perhaps this is because there are not that many of these customers, and they tend to be large. 

These customers also appear to rely heavily on systems integrators to plan and impliment their projects.   Many of these projects are large end up being “all or nothing” for vendors, so they are clearly paying special attention to these customers, and fighting for the business.

At the other end of the spectrum, customers in post production, government and education typically buy through  a dealer.  There are probably a variety of reasons for this:

  • In post production there are specialized local dealers who have both in-depth knowledge of the market and deep relationships with this (relatively small) customer base.  For many vendors, it makes sense to sell through these dealers rather than pay for a dedicated sales effort.  The downside of this is that it concentrates the power with dealers since they “own” the relationship with the customer base, increasing the risk of substitution.
  • Government is another category that requires strong relationships, and in some cases specialist credentials such security clearance and/or extensive operational experience.  Selling to the government (at least at the national level) can be lucrative for vendors, but it can also take major effort to break into this market.  At the local government level (e.g. every town hall in a country), the market is enormous but very disparate, and therefore often left to local resellers. In aggregate this is a large market, but most vendors are not geared up to go after it direct.
  • Education is arguably the largest market of all — after all there are many more schools than broadcasters and/or town halls — and yet only 20% of these customers typically buy broadcast technology hardware and software direct from vendors.  it’s likely that because of the size, not to mention huge diversity, of this customer base that a specialist dealer with deep relationships at the local level will always be best positioned to win this business.

 

This leave “broadcasters / TV station” customers in the middle of the pack.  There are likely a variety of reasons for this.  For example, this is broad category that encompasses state / national broadcasters as well as local players.  Vendors with limited resources (e.g. just about all of them) who are after large sales will tend to concentrate their efforts on the biggest part of the market (in value terms) and leave the rest to dealers.  Also there are certain regions (like parts of Asia and South America) where the most efficient way to sell (even to the largest broadcasters) is through third party distribution.

I should point out that this question does not ask about the value of product purchased from each category, but if I did I think that it would further highlight the important role of systems integrators and consultants.    As customers look to cut cost they often eliminate technical staff positions, effectively outsourcing their technical design and installation to third party consultants — systems integrators in particular.  SIs were found to play a strong role in all categories — and particularly in those which tend to have large, complex projects.  After all, if a broadcaster is buying a replacement part for an existing system it’s easy to go to a dealer; but if they are building a disaster recovery facility as part of a major strategic initiative, they are likely to go with an SI.

These finding highlight that it’s important for suppliers to tailor their approach to different markets and customer types.  It also demonstrates that the third-party distribution channels are a crucial part of their business, because they account for a significant portion of the market access that all vendors need to survive and thrive.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
2 Comments »

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 »

IABM Partnership Announcement

Uncategorized | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jun 19 2009

While I was finalizing the first version of the Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), I showed it to a number of people to get their feedback.  One of the first was Roger Crumpton, who heads up the IABM and was the driving force behind the excellent IABM Global Market Study, which is published in conjunction with Screen Digest.

I initially approached Roger to get his view on pricing the BBS.  However, when I took him through the study he got excited about its content and suggested that we work together.    Roger told me that the BBS fills a need in the market and provides IABM member companies with unique insight that was previously unavailable.

We decided to create a partnership  – after the IABM conducted due dilligence on the study, its methodology and its findings — whereby the IABM will help to promote the study in exchange for me offering their member companies a 15% discount.  We also agreed to “synchronize” the segmentation of my future reports with the segmentation in the IABM / Screen Digest report.

I am excited about this partnership as I think it can bring benefits to both Devoncroft and the IABM.

Tags: , , , , , ,
1 Comment »