Posts Tagged ‘Quantel’

IBC 2011 Trends: Cloud, Channel-in-a-Box, 3D

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Sep 30 2011

Note: This article was originally published last week by TVNewsCheck

Technology vendors at IBC answered the broadcasters’ call for efficiency in a variety of ways, including “cloud” oriented product offerings, highly integrated IT-based systems for broadcast playout, and the introduction of new versions of existing systems that are smaller and less featured, but more affordable to broadcasters with limited budgets.

Also on display at the annual tech show, which wrapped up a six-day run in Amsterdam last week and drew more than 50,000 professionals, were technologies aimed at making 3D production more affordable and compatible with standard 2D operations.

Many vendors were touting the advantages of deploying some type of cloud-based or service-oriented architecture (SOA) applications such as capturing, producing, processing and distributing video and audio as digital files.

Cloud services are drawing attention because broadcasters are being challenged to support an ever-increasing number of distribution platforms. The breadth and rapidly changing nature of the multi-screen environment makes it difficult for even large broadcasters to deploy the appropriate hardware and software solutions in an affordable and timely manner. Thus, broadcasters are now increasingly willing to contemplate outsourcing some of these functions to cloud-based technologies and services.

Many vendors at IBC demonstrated technologies to address some of the fundamental concerns that broadcasters have about cloud-based architectures, notably content security, access to content, collaboration, bandwidth and workflow continuity.

Avid, Chyron, Grass Valley, Panasonic, Sony, Quantel and Vizrt showed their own methods for deploying “media-friendly” SOAs that provide a common interface and pre-authorized access to a wide variety of production tools from every staff member’s desktop.

In addition, the Advanced Media Workflow Association, the European Broadcasting Union and SMPTE came together to develop a standard for configuring an SOA that would allow each manufacturer’s equipment to talk to each other. The effort stems from the vendors’ realization that — due to R&D cost efficiencies — their next-generation products will be predominantly software based and operate best in this type of networked environment.

SOAs also help broadcasters produce and distribute content much more efficiently and allow staff to collaborate even though they may be in separate locations.

Many of these IT-centric concepts are not new ideas, but are now becoming attractive to the video production and broadcasting communities, looking to do more with the same resources. Industry connectivity to Internet protocol (IP) infrastructures has matured and newer consumer-industry file transfer technologies — like IP, HDMI and Apple/Intel’s Thunderbolt — offer benefits for broadcasters that were not apparent before.

Another significant hub of IT-oriented activity at the IBC was in the area of IT-based playout or, as it is more commonly known, channel in a box. These systems offer the promise of dramatically reducing the cost of broadcast playout by enabling users to migrate to off-the-shelf IT hardware running software that integrates, automates and replaces much of the traditional broadcast master control infrastructure.

Technology in this area had matured significantly over the past 6-12 months, and is now are under serious consideration by a number of large and small broadcasters around the world. Miranda Technologies, which became the de facto leader in this emerging field when it acquired the OmniBus Systems’ iTX platform last year, showed the latest advances in its IT-based playout offerings.

Other notable players in this space include traditional broadcast suppliers such as Snell and Evertz, as well as smaller specialized players like Playbox and VSN. Significantly, other large technology vendors are rumored to be readying competing systems that will be introduced in time for the annual NAB Show in April 2012.

In addition to the increasing drive for increased efficiencies, many IBC attendees were gearing up for the high-profile sporting and political events of 2012. In some cases, that means 3D. While the technology has yet to even be considered by local broadcasters in the U.S., a variety of live sports production companies across Europe are already producing events like soccer and rugby in 3D or are anticipating that they will by the time of the Olympics in London.

The games will be the first in 3D, with many events, including the opening and closing ceremonies, produced in the format. Panasonic will be supplying large quantities of 3D cameras and other gear.

Avatar director and 3D pioneer James Cameron put in appearances at several places at the IBC, promoting his new company, The Cameron/Pace Group, and urging industry professionals to pursue and help develop new tools for producing 2D and 3D content simultaneously.

According to Cameron, it’s the only way to stimulate the market to develop much-need original 3D content, and, in turn, spur 3D TV set sales. Previously, the cost of producing 3D has been prohibitive for everyone but a fortunate few who are being sponsored by TV set manufacturers.

“We’re on a relentless path to grow the 3D business,” said Cameron, at the Grass Valley IBC press conference. “We’ve been in the 3D game for 12 years now. We are so excited about what’s happening right now [with 3D] but it’s a little bit daunting staying ahead of the rapid rate of technology change, so we have to have powerful alliances with people that are major players in broadcast who will be able to fulfill this future and supply the kind of quality 3D that people enjoy.”

At the same press conference, Cameron’s partner (and equally influential 3D pioneer) Vince Pace said, “It’s so critical to the industry that we integrate the solutions and come up with a very clean and determined business plan that makes sense to the industry to increase the amount of 3D productions. So, this business of saying we have fewer cameras or we don’t tell the whole story is going to go away.”

IBC attendance was up slightly this year (4%, according to the IBC, to 50,462), again signaling that broadcasters are spending money — on hardware and T&E. Unlike last year, there were several representatives of all the major U.S. TV networks.

.

.

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 1 – the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table

broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, market research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jul 14 2011

This is the fourth in a series of articles about some of the findings from the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of broadcast industry trends, technology purchasing plans, and benchmarking of broadcast technology vendor brands.  More than 8,000 people in 100+ countries took part in the 2011 BBS, making it the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

 

Each year, as part of the Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), we ask a global sample of  broadcast professionals to rank a variety of technology vendor brands on a wide range of metrics.  We use this information to create a series of reports, which through benchmarking and industry “league tables” enable each vendors to understand its position in the market relative to their the industry as a whole as well as their direct competitors.

This post looks at how our global sample of broadcast professionals ranked 118 different broadcast technology vendors in terms of their overall opinion of these vendors (to see a list of the brands covered in this study, please click here).

Respondents were asked to rank their 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.

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.

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.      

 

 .

2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table

 

 .

A total of 43 broadcast technology vendor brands are included in this table, illustrating the geographic variation of opinion.

In terms of frequency of appearance in this table:

 

  • 19 brands appear four times, meaning they were ranked in the top 30 globally and in each geographic region

 

  • 9 brands appear three times

 

  • 2 brands appear two times

 

  • 13 brands appear one time 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 in the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table: 

  • Adobe, AKG, Apple, beyerdynamic, Canon, Cisco, Dolby, Fujinon, Genelec, Grass Valley, Neumann, Panasonic, Schoeps, Sennheiser, Shure, Solid State Logic (SSL), Sony, Tektronix, Yamaha

 .

Brands appearing three times in the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table: 

  • Aja Video, Avid, Blackmagic Design, Clear-Com, JBL, Rohde & Schwarz, Snell, Studer, Wohler

 .

Brands appearing two times in the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table:

  • Audio-Technica, RTS Intercom Systems

 .

Brands appearing once in the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table:

  • Electro Voice, Evertz, EVS, Harris, Ikegami, Lawo, Mackie, Omneon, Quantel, Riedel, RTW, Telex, Barco

 

 .

.

Frequency Analysis of the Brands in the in the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table:  

In order to provide a better understanding of which brands were most highly 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.

.

Frequency Analysis of Brands in the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table

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

 .

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

Two 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.

  • Audio-Technica (Asia Pacific), RTS Intercom Systems (Americas)

.

 

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

The following 13 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

  • Barco, EVS, Lawo, Quantel, Riedel, RTW

 

 .

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

  • Omneon

 

 .

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

  • Electro-Voice, Evertz, Harris, Ikegami, Mackie, Telex

 

 .

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 2011 BBS.  Also, the charts in this posting measure the responses of all non-vendor participants in the 2011 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 2011 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global study of industry trends, technology purchasing behavior and the opinion of vendor brands.  With more than 8,000 people in 100+ countries participating, the 2011 BBS is the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

Devoncroft Partners has published a variety of reports from 2011 BBS data.  For more information, please get in touch.

 .

.

The 2011 Big Broadcast Survey – Now Available

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, Broadcast technology channel strategy, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Mar 10 2011

After many months of work, I am pleased to announce that the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS) has been completed, and that reports from the study will be published soon.

If you’re not familiar with the BBS, it’s an annual demand-side study of the global broadcast industry. BBS reports help readers improve their strategic decision making, customer engagement, marketing strategy, product planning, and sales execution.

More than 8,000 broadcast professionals in 100+ countries participated in the 2011 BBS, making it by far the largest and most comprehensive market study of the broadcast industry.

Three types of reports are available:

  • The BBS Global Market Report is the broadcast industry’s first global demand-based study of the purchasing habits of technology buyers.  This report examines industry trends, major projects being planned, products being evaluated for purchase, current and future plant infrastructure and operational structure, broadcast technology budgets, and HD upgrade plans for a wide variety of products.

 

  • BBS Global Brand Reports are available for more than 100 broadcast technology vendors.  These reports provide deep insight into how each company is perceived by the market, along with comprehensive benchmarking of broadcast technology vendors on a wide variety of metrics, through a series of league table rankings

 

  • Twenty-six separate 2011 BBS Product Reports provide detailed vendor brand ranking for individual product categories. These reports enable users to benchmark their brand directly against specific competitors through a detailed understanding of the opinions of technology buyers who purchase, specify or use each product type.  

.

If you would like information about these reports and how they can help your business, please get in touch.

In addition to these paid-for reports, we will also be publishing highlights from the study on the Devoncroft website.  These articles will be posted on a semi-regular basis, so please check back often.   

You’ll also be seeing information from the 2011 BBS in a wide variety of other industry websites and trade magazines.

The tables below show the product categories and broadcast technology vendor brands covered in the 2011 BBS.

..

 Product Categories Covered in the 2011 BBS:

.

.

Broadcast Technology Brands Covered in the 2011 BBS:

.

.

 

The Top 30 Improving Vendor Brands in Broadcast Technology, Ranked Globally and Regionally

broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jun 07 2010

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

Each year as part of the Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), a global sample of broadcast professionals are asked to rank their opinion of 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.

Recently, I discussed how respondents to the 2010 BBS ranked The Top 30 Broadcast Technology Vendor Brands by Overall Opinion, Ranked, Globally and Regionally

Appearing in the top 30 of an overall opinion poll is obviously a good place for any vendor to be, but this only scratches the surface of how the market views a brand. 

While indicative of the market’s view, these overall opinion rankings are presented as a snapshot in time.  They also provide a somewhat one-sided view of how brands are regarded because they take only positive perceptions into account.  In order to get a better understanding of how broadcast technology vendor brands are perceived, it is necessary to look at both the positive and negative opinions of brands, and to take into account how these opinions have changed over time. 

One way to do this is to ask people who have an opinion of a brand, how their opinion of that brand has changed over time – i.e. has it improved, declined or stayed the same. 

When you do this, you can get some interesting results.  It turns out that some brands are more polarizing than others, with different respondents having very different opinions.  For example, here’s a chart from the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey. 

 

Notice that in the above table, the company that was ranked #1 for “got better” also ranked #1 for got worse.

Given these results, it is perhaps more useful to calculate the Net Change in Overall Opinion for each brand, which is calculated by using the following formula:

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

In other words, the percentage of respondents who said a brand “got worse” is subtracted from the percentage of respondents who said their opinion of a brand had “got better” (ignoring the “stayed the same” number).

This takes into account both the positive and negative perceptions of brands, along with how these opinions have changed over time.  It also presents a more balanced view of which brands are getting better and which are getting worse in the minds of market participants. 

Because some brands are polarizing (as seen in the example above), it’s possible 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 30 on just the “got better” score were not included in the global or regional top 30 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 30 list because these negative scores were cancelled out by even higher “got better” scores. 

In order to arrive at the Net Change in Overall Opinion, research participants were asked whether their opinion of various brands had “got better”, “got worse” or “stayed the same” over the past 2-3 years.

The results of this enquiry are shown below in two ways:

  • An overall industry “league table” that shows the 30 highest ranked vendors for the metric “Net Change of Overall Opinion.”  The data in this chart is broken out globally and regionally. 

 

  • An analysis of the “frequency” of appearance in the “Net Change of Overall Opinion” league table.”

 

The top 30 ranked brands for Net Change of 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.  

 

 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: Has your opinion of the following brands improved or declined over the past 2 years in relation to the broadcast technology products / services they provide?

Interestingly, a total of 65 broadcast technology vendor brands are included in this table, demonstrating the strong variation in opinion change based on geographic segmentation of respondents.

In terms of frequency of appearance in this table:

  • 3 brands appear four times, meaning they were ranked in the top 30 globally and in each geographic region. It is possible
  • 10 brands appear three times
  • 26 brands appear two times
  • 26 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:

  • Barco, IBM, Ikegami

 

Brands appearing three times:

  • Avid, Chyron, For-A, JBL, JVC, Mackie, Motorola, Siemens, Telex, Yamaha

 

Brands appearing two times:

  • AKG, Audio-Technica, Axon, Dayang, Dolby, Echolab, Electro Voice, EMC, EVS, Fujitsu, Grass Valley, Harmonic, Harris, Klein + Hummel, Orad, Pesa, Pharos, Quantel, RTS Intercom Systems, SeaChange, Shure, Snell, Solid State Logic, Sundance, Tandberg / Ericsson, Tektronix

 

Brands appearing once:

  • Accenture, AMS-Neve, beyerdynamic, Dalet, Evertz, Focal, HP, KRK Systems, Leader Instrument, Marshall Electronics, Miranda, Net Insight, Neumann, Omneon, Omnibus, Pilat, Pixel Power, Quantum, Rohde & Schwarz, Ross Video, S4M, Screen Service, Sintecmedia, Utah Scientific, Vizrt, Wheatstone

 

.

Analysis of overall opinion by region:

The table below 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, which is highlighted below.

 

Only Global

Interestingly a the following 13 appear in the top 30 Net Change in Overall Opinion for the global sample, but not in any of the regions. 

  • Accenture, AMS-Neve, Focal, KRK Systems, Leader, Net Insight, Omnibus, Pilat Media, Pixel Power, Quantum, Sintecmedia Utah Scientific, Wheatstone

There a number of possible explanations for this.  For example these companies may have fared well in each of the regions, but not well enough to make the top 30.  However when all responses are aggregated, there positive data propels these brands to the top 30 on a global basis.  It is also possible that these brands scored well on a regional basis, but that the regional sample was insufficient to be included in the regional rankings.

 

All regions, but not global

Interestingly, for four brands the converse of the above also occurred – i.e. these brands made the top 30 list for Net Change of Overall Opinion in each of the three regions, but not in the global sample.

  • Avid, For-A, JBL, Yamaha

Again this is due to a variety of factors including the aggregate strength of certain brands, coupled with sample sizes.

 

Global + one region

Nine brands managed to achieve a top 30 ranking in the global Net Change in Overall Opinion league table, despite being in the top 30 of only one of the three geographic regions.

  • Dayang, Echolab, Electrovoice, Fujitsu, JVC, Motorola, Pesa, Quantel, Sundance

 

 

 

Regional Variation

The following 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:

 

Only EMEA

Beyerdynamic, Dalet, Neumann, S4M,

 

Only Asia

Evertz, HP, Miranda, Omneon, Rohde & Schwarz, Ross Video, Screen Service

 

Only Americas

Marshall Eelctronics, Vizrt

.

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 2010 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.

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.

     

2010 Syndicated Broadcast Technology Market Research Now Available

broadcast technology market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Mar 05 2010

Reports from the 2010 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), conducted by Devoncroft Partners, are now available for purchase.

The 2010 BBS is the largest ever and most comprehensive market study of the broadcast industry. More than 5,600 broadcast professionals in 120+ countries participated in the project.

Reports derived from BBS data deliver insight into the opinions and attitudes of key technology buyers including broadcasters, playout centers, cable/satellite/ IPTV operators, radio stations, recording studios and more. This includes industry trends; purchase intent and buying behavior; major project plans; products being evaluated for purchase.

2010 BBS reports also provides detailed opinions of 148 broadcast technology vendor brands in 27 separate product categories (see below for details)

For more information about the available reports and their contents, please follow this link.

 

Product Categories Covered in 2010 BBS reports:

 

Vendor Brands Covered in 2010 BBS reports:

How Broadcasters of Different Sizes Rank Vendors for Quality

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Nov 09 2009

This is the fourth in a series of articles about findings from the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS)* that shows how a global sample of more than 1,000 broadcasters of different sizes ranked broadcast technology vendors on a variety of metricsFor information about how these results were collected, please see the bottom of this post**.

Previously I’ve discussed how broadcasters of different sizes ranked broadcast technology vendors for innovation, reliability and great customer service. Today I am going to look at how this group ranked vendors for “quality.” 

The table below shows the top 5 brands in the broadcast technology vendor league table for quality, as ranked by broadcasters, broken down by organization size.  For the sake of comparison, I have also provided the global ranking (responses of all 4,000+ respondents from all organization types) as well as the ranking for all broadcasters (regardless of size or location).

 

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

  

Question: How would you rate [Brand X] on the following attribute [Quality] where 1 = very poor and 10 = best in the market? 

 

   Quality by broadcaster by org size

Once again this chart makes for very interesting reading.  Here are a few quick thoughts on these findings:

 

* There are a total of 8 vendors in this list.  This makes quality the most concentrated and least varied of the metrics I’ve explored

 

* When you compare the four metrics I studied (quality, reliability, innovation and great customer service) broken down by broadcasters of different sizes, a total of 11 vendors made the list for “innovation;” 9 vendors made the list for “reliability;” and 12 vendors made the list for “great customer service.”

 

* What makes the appearance of these vendors interesting is where they appear in the charts (what size of broadcaster), and in which other metrics were they also ranked highly by broadcasters of different sizes.

 

* All the vendors in this chart are large and / or well established.  This was not necessarily the case with the other metrics where there was a much broader range of vendors listed.

 

* Two of these eight vendors in the top 5 quality rankings – EVS and Sony – appear in all six categories in the chart above.  These two vendors appear very consistently in the top five rankings for all the attributes I have broken out by organizational size. 

 

* The other vendors appeared in to top five rankings for quality as follows (in alphabetical order): Evertz (2), Harris (4), Omneon (2), Quantel (1), Snell & Wilcox (4), and Thomson GVG (5). 

 

* Thomson / Grass Valley makes an appearance somewhere in the top five of all the metrics in this series of posts (quality, reliability, innovation and great customer service).  In the case of quality they appear in all categories except one — the mid-sized broadcasters with 501-1,000 employees.

 

* Harris makes the top five quality list for the global sample (all respondents, regardless of company type), and the sample of all broadcasters (regardless of size or location).  When the broadcast sample is broken down by size, Harris appears twice – in the 50-100 employee category and 501-1,000 employee categories. In addition to quality, Harris appears in the top five rankings in two of the other three categories, reliability and great customer service, but not innovation.

 

* Omneon appears in the top five quality list for the two categories of mid sized broadcasters (101-500 and 501-1000 employees).  Like Harris, Omneon appears in three of the four metrics covered in this series of posts.  In addition to quality, Omneon appears in the top five ranking for both innovation and reliability (both in the 501-1000 employee category), but are absent from the top five rankings for great customer service.

 

* Evertz in appears in the top five quality list for small (50-100 employees) and medium (101-500 employees) broadcasters, but not in the lists of larger broadcasters.  This is fairly consistent with the other findings about Evertz.  The company makes an appearance somewhere in top 5 list for all the metrics (quality, reliability, innovation and great customer service), but it seems that Evertz typically appeals to the small and mid-sized broadcasters.  The exception is “great customer service” where Evertz made the top 5 list in the 501-1,000 employee category.  However the company did not make the top 5 list for large broadcasters (1,001-10,000 employees) in any category.

 

* The opposite is true of Snell & Wilcox.  S&W made an appearance in the top 5 list of each metric, but only in the large broadcaster categories (501-1,000 employees and 1,001-10,000 employees). 

 

* Another vendor to appear in the top five for only the largest broadcasters (1,001-10,000 employees) is Quantel.  In addition to this appearance for quality, Quantel also made the top five ranking for innovation among the largest broadcasters (1,000-10,000 employees).

 

* Finally, it’s worth pointing out that Axon is similar to S&W and Quantel.  Although Axon does not appear in the top 5 list for quality, the company shows a similar pattern to S&W and Quantel because for all categories where Axon does make an appearance (in the reliability and great customer service charts), it was only in the large broadcaster categories.

 

 

 

 

 

* The annual Big Broadcast Survey (BBS) is the largest ever and most comprehensive studies of broadcast technology vendor brands and industry trends.  The BBS provides insight into market trends and the perceptions of leading broadcast industry vendor brands by practitioners across the world.  It also delivers vendor brand ranking in a variety of product categories; all of which can be segmented by geography and customer type.

 

** 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 such as innovation, reliability, quality and great customer service.  The responses were then aggregated into a series of industry “league tables” that rank each broadcast technology vendor brand against the metrics mentioned above.

How Broadcasters of Different Sizes Rank Innovation of Broadcast Technology Vendors

broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Oct 08 2009

I have recently been writing about how various broadcast technology vendor brands were ranked in the 2009 Big Broadcast Survey  (BBS)* on measures such as innovation, customer service, reliability and overall opinion.

For the most part, when I have discussed these results in previous posts I show the opinions of the all 4,000+ of BBS respondents, broken down globally and regionally in order to highlight geographic variation in opinions.

Of course this global list includes a wide variety of customer types such as broadcasters, systems integrators, cable/satellite/IPTV operators, government etc.  As a result, one of the questions I am frequently asked is how a particular brand was ranked by a single customer type (e.g. broadcaster) or buying group (e.g. multiviewer buyers).

To address this question I decided to look at how one customer type – broadcasters – ranked broadcast technology vendors in one category – innovation.

Rather than showing a breakdown by geography, I thought it would be more interesting to show variation by organization size rather then geography.

For information about how these results were collected, please see the bottom of this post**.

The table below shows the top 5 brands in the broadcast technology vendor league table for innovation, as ranked by broadcasters, broken down by organization size.  For the sake of comparison, I have also provided the global ranking (responses of all 4,000+ respondents from all organization types).

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

  

Question: How would you rate [Brand X] on the following attribute [Innovation] where 1 = very poor and 10 = best in the market?

  Innovation -- by Broadcasters by Org Size

 To me, these results are pretty interesting for a number of reasons.  Here are a few quick observations about them:

 

* There are total of 11 vendors on this list, and an interesting distribution of vendors

 

* Sony is the only broadcast technology vendor that ranked in the top 5 in all categories 

 

* Apart from Sony, the breakdown of how often other vendors made the top five, including the global sample,  (in alphabetical order) looks like this: Axon (1), Evertz (3), EVS (3), Miranda (2), Omneon (1), Quantel (1), Snell & Wilcox (4), Thomson / Grass Valley (3), Utah Scientific (1)

 

* Two of the companies that appear in the table above just once (Axon and Quantel) are seen as top five innovators by the largest broadcasters (those with 1,000+ employees)

 

* Two of the companies that appear in the table above just once (Network and Utah Scientific) are seen as top five innovators by the mid-sized broadcasters (those with 101-500 employees)

 

* There is an interesting distribution of vendors that were ranked as top 5 innovators by all broadcasters.  For example both Evertz and Miranda are ranked in the top 5 overall by broadcasters.  However when you look at broadcasters by organization size, Evertz appears in the 501-100 employee category, while Miranda is found in the 501-1000 employee category.

 

So does size matter?  Larger broadcasters probably have significantly greater buying power than their smaller counterparts and a couple of contracts with a large broadcaster can be enormously valuable to a vendor.  Having said that, very large broadcasters are few and far between.  The bulk of broadcasters probably falls into the middle of the size range in terms of employees, and some very successful broadcast technology vendors (in terms of recent revenue growth) such as Evertz, Miranda and Omneon are best regarded by these mid-sized customers, while smaller vendors like Axon and Snell & Wilcox are highly regarded by the largest customers.    Nevertheless it is important for vendors to understand how opinions about them vary among customers of different sizes as they plan their sales strategies.

 

  

 

* The annual Big Broadcast Survey (BBS) is the largest ever and most comprehensive studies of broadcast technology vendor brands and industry trends.  The BBS provides insight into market trends and the perceptions of leading broadcast industry vendor brands by practitioners across the world.  It also delivers vendor brand ranking in a variety of product categories; all of which can be segmented by geography and customer type.

 ** 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 such as innovation, reliability, quality and great customer service.  The responses were then aggregated into a series of industry “league tables” that rank each broadcast technology vendor brand against the metrics mentioned above.

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.

Innovation Rankings for Broadcast Technology Vendors

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Aug 31 2009

I recently started a series of posts about how broadcast technology vendors brands 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.

In a previous post I looked at the reliability rankings of broadcast technology vendors.  Today I’m going to look at how they were ranked for innovation.

The table below shows the top brands in the broadcast technology vendor league table for innovation.  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

  

 Question: How would you rate [Brand X] on the following attribute [Innovation] where 1 = very poor and 10 = best in the market?

GLOBAL EMEA AMERICAS ASIA PACIFIC
EVS

Harris

Snell & Wilcox

Sony

Thomson / Grass Valley

EVS

Quantel

Snell & Wilcox

Sony

Thomson / Grass Valley

Evertz

Harris

Snell & Wilcox

Sony

Thomson / Grass Valley

Evertz

Harris

Snell & Wilcox

Sony

Thomson / Grass Valley

 

As you can see, the mix of the vendors in the top five spots around the world were taken by the industry’s largest vendors, as well as several smaller (though not insignificant),  players including EVS, Snell & Wilcox and Quantel, who produce hardware and software for specialized post production and live production applications.  All the vendors on this list are well established players that make a significant investment into research and development each year.

While there is a great deal of consistency across the regions, it’s internsting to see some geographic variation.  In particular, strong European players (EVS and Quantel) did well in their home market, while Evertz and Harris came out in the top five in both the Americas and Asia-Pacific market.    The other three spots were taken by the same players (Snell & Wilcox, Sony and Thomson / Grass valley) in all regions.

 

* 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.