Posts Tagged ‘technology trends in broadcasting’

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 3 – the 2011 BBS Brand Opinion Leaders League Table

broadcast technology market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Aug 16 2011

This is the sixth 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 broadcast professionals worldwide 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.

In previous articles we wrote about the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table, and the 2011 BBS Net Change in Overall Opinion League Table, which shows how our global sample of broadcast professionals ranked 118 broadcast vendor brands in terms of their overall opinion of these vendors, and also how their opinions have changed over time.

It’s obviously great news for the vendors who are listed in these rankings, and there were quite a few of them.  A total of 43 brands were listed in the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table; and a total of 51 brands were listed in the 2011 BBS Net Change of Brand Opinion League Table.

This post looks at the companies that were listed in both the Overall Opinion and Net Change in Overall Opinion Rankings. In other words, these are the companies whose brands are held in high regard today, and who are perceived to be getting better over time.

Just 30 brands (out of 118) were listed in both sets of rankings, either globally or regionally.

These are shown below.

Please note that these results are shown in alphabetical order, NOT in the order in which they were ranked in the study. 

 

2011 BBS Brand Opinion Leaders League Table:

 

There are a wide variety of companies on this list, including large and small firms; single product and multi-product firms; global and regional players; and audio and video technology providers.

What they have in common is strong brand recognition, and a dynamism that 2011 BBS respondents feel is making them even stronger.

Let’s look specifically at the how these companies and their products were ranked in the 2011 BBS, beginning with products and technology.

As shown in the chart below, these companies make products in 24 of the 26 product categories that we covered in the 2011 BBS.

The top products for brand leaders are split between audio and video – microphones and video editing.

 .

2011 BBS Brand Opinion Leaders League Table — Frequency of Product Categories:

.

So is it possible that brand leadership can be predicted by the type of product that an organization produces? Interestingly this list is split fairly evenly between audio and video companies.  There’s also a healthy mix of hardware versus software.

What about the number of products that a vendor offers. Larger companies offer more products and are consequently used in more places than their smaller counterparts.  Let’s look at the number of product categories that each of these brands produces (as defined by the segmentation used in the 2011 BBS).

The table below shows the number of 2011 BBS product categories produced by each brand.

 .

2011 BBS Brand Opinion Leaders League Table — Number of 2011 BBS Product Categories per Brand:

 .

While there are several brands on this list that appear in many product categories, the vast majority produce only one or two types of products.  Indeed out of the thirty brands in this table, nearly 2/3 appear only once.

Keep in mind that companies who produce only one type of product are not necessarily small.  There are some very large companies on the list above who appear in just one 2011 BBS category.

It turns out that to fully understand what drives brand opinion and brand leadership, one needs to look at the factors that drive and influence these perceptions.  This includes the company’s reputation for things like innovation, reliability, quality, value and great customer service.

We’ll be looking at each of these factors in future articles, so stay tuned.

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.  Finally please note that this study evaluated a total of 118 brands.

 

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.

 

Related Content:

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 2 – the 2011 BBS Net Change in Overall Brand Opinion League Table

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

Where is Money Being Spent in the Broadcast Industry in 2011? The 2011 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Project Index

Tracking Changes in Broadcast Industry Trends — 2011 Versus 2010

Broadcast Industry’s Most Comprehensive Market Study Reveals Top Trends of 2011

More Information About the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey from Devoncroft Partners

.

.

 

Ranking Broadcast Technology Vendors Part 2 – the 2011 BBS Net Change in Overall Brand Opinion League Table

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor Brand Research, market research, Top Broadcast Vendor Brands | Posted by Joe Zaller
Aug 04 2011

This is the fifth 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 broadcast professionals worldwide 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.

In a previous article we wrote about the 2011 BBS Overall Brand Opinion League Table, which shows how our global sample of broadcast professionals ranked 118 broadcast vendor brands in terms of their overall opinion of these vendors.

While it’s great for a vendor to be named to the top 30 for overall opinion, these rankings may be seen as somewhat one-sided because they rely primarily on the positive opinions of respondents. 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.

To achieve this, we first determine whether a respondent has an opinion of a brand, and then ask them how their opinion of that brand has changed over time – i.e. has it improved, declined or stayed the same.

When compared to the previously published ranking of overall opinions of brands, this methodology provides a more comprehensive picture of how a brand is perceived because it shows both the positive and negative opinions of each brand.

Sometimes these results highlight some interesting perceptions about brands.  Take for example the chart below, which is from our 2009 study.

 

 

 

In this case the brand that was top for “got better” was also top for “got worse.”

Given these results, it is perhaps more useful to find 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 ut 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 study.

.

2011 BBS Net Chage in Overall Opinion League Table:

 

A total of 51 broadcast technology vendor brands are included in this table, illustrating the geographic variation of opinion.

In terms of frequency of appearance in this table:

 

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

 

  • 10 brands appear three times

 

  • 9 brands appear two times

 

  • 19 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 Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table: 

  • Adobe, Aja Video, Apple, Blackmagic Design, Canon, Cisco, Genelec, Omneon, Panasonic, Riedel, Sennheiser, Sony, Tektronix

.

Brands appearing three times in the 2011 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table: 

  • Ateme,  Evertz, EVS, Harmonic, Net Insight, Rhozet, Rohde & Schwarz, Ross Video, Shure, Vizrt

.

Brands appearing two times in the 2011 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table: 

  • AKG, Digital Rapids, Dolby, Ensemble,  Front Porch Digital, Lawo, Telestream, TVIPS, Wohler

.

 

Brands appearing once in the 2011 BBS Net Change of Overall Opinion League Table: 

  • AmberFin, Audio-Technica ,Avid, Fujinon, Grass Valley, Harris, Inlet Technologies, Linear, Linear Acoustic, Miranda, MSA Focus,
    Nevion, Playbox, PubliTronic, Schoeps, Screen Service, Solid State Logic, Telecast, Yamaha

..

.

 

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

 

 

This frequency analysis chart shows that there are some interesting geographic variations in the data. Here’s a closer look at how brands appeared by geography:

 

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

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

  • Digital Rapids, Ensemble, EVS, Front Porch Digital, Lawo, Net Insight, Telestream, T-VIPS

.

 

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

The following 18 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:

  • AmberFin, Audio-Technica, Avid, Fujinon, Grass Valley, Inlet Technologies, Linear, Linear Acoustic, Miranda, MSA Focus, Nevion, Playbox, PubliTronic, Schoeps, Screen Service, Solid State Logic, Telecast, Yamaha

 .

 

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

  • AmberFin, Fujinon, Inlet Technologies, Linear Acoustic, Nevion, PubliTronic, Screen Service

 .

 

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

  • Avid, Grass Valey, Harris, Miranda, MSA Focus, Playbox, Schoeps, Yamaha

 .

 

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

  • Audio-Technica, Linear, Solid State Logic, Telecast, Wohler

.

.

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.  Finally please note that this study evaluated a total of 118 brands.

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.

.

 

Related Content:

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

Where is Money Being Spent in the Broadcast Industry in 2011? The 2011 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Project Index

Tracking Changes in Broadcast Industry Trends — 2011 Versus 2010

Broadcast Industry’s Most Comprehensive Market Study Reveals Top Trends of 2011

More Information About the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey from Devoncroft Partners

.

.

© Devoncroft Partners 2009 – 2011. All Rights Reserved.

.

.

 

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.

 .

.

Yet Another NAB 2011 Trend – Broadcast Vendor M&A

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast Vendor M&A | Posted by Joe Zaller
Jul 05 2011

In the aftermath of what many vendors reported was a very successful NAB show, there appears to be an enhanced feeling of optimism in the broadcast industry, something that has been lacking for the past several years.

The global economy is seemingly healthier, the financial performance of both broadcasters and technology vendors has improved, and digital media is a hot topic across many industries as companies roll out plans to bring video and audio content to a growing number of platforms and devices.

Against this backdrop, one noticeable trend at the 2011 NAB show was increased speculation about broadcast vendor M&A and consolidation, fueled in part by investment bankers and private equity (PE) firms who were significantly more visible this year than in any NAB show in recent memory.

It is perhaps not surprising that there is an increased interest in industry M&A. Video and audio technologies have become strategic to many companies outside of the traditional broadcast business, so bankers and PE firms are looking to find companies that might add value to a larger enterprise or a portfolio of companies.

These factors have led to a flurry of recent broadcast industry M&A deals over the past year — and the pace of activity in this area appears to be accelerating. There have already been a large number of deals in 2011, including the Carlyle Group’s acquisition of The Foundry for a reported $120m, Cisco’s purchase of Inlet Technologies for $95m, Technicolor’s disposal of Grass Valley’s broadcast, transmission and head-end businesses in three separate transactions, DG Fastchannel’s acquisition of MIJO for $39.5m, and the ongoing buying spree of broadcast M&A champ Kit Digital, which has acquired more than a dozen companies, culminating in the $79.4m purchase of Ioko that was announced during the 2011 NAB show.

In addition to attracting the attention of investment bankers and PE firms, recent broadcast industry M&A activity (not to mention the healthy valuations achieved by some of the companies mentioned above), has not gone unnoticed by broadcast technology vendors. After weathering a punishing economic climate over the past two years, vendors of all sizes are now taking the time to consider their “strategic options.” Some are eager to sell their companies, while others see an opportunity to acquire other companies and consolidate their leadership position in the market.

Indeed, as shown below our most recent research of senior executives at broadcast technology vendors reveals that while about a third of companies intend to retain their private status, many others expect to be involved in some sort of strategic transaction within the next 2-3 years.

 

 

 

So what’s driving the interest in M&A activity, and what are the difference between the motivations of potential buyers and sellers?

Potential buyers are often looking for scale in the form of product lines and increased access to customers and markets. The motivations of sellers are perhaps more complex. They run the range from wanting to be part of a larger organization to the desire to cash out in a buoyant market.

Let’s examine each perspective.

 

Broadcast Industry M&A: Buyer Motivations

Expansion of a company’s product line is a key driver of M&A. Despite marketing messages to the contrary, no broadcast technology vendor truly offers a complete solution to all needs of broadcasters. Even the most comprehensive product ranges have gaps.

The question facing broadcast technology vendors is what to do about it. Broadcast technology vendors have several choices: funding internal product development, finding a complementary partner, or buying a ready-made solution through M&A. Each choice has positives and negatives associated with it.

We asked senior managers at broadcast technology vendors how they are thinking about filling in the gaps in their product portfolios. The results are shown in the chart below:

 

 

Vendors reported that internally funded product development is the most preferred approach to expanding their product ranges. Finding a complementary company to partner with is also a choice that many vendors are exploring.

Still, more than a quarter of vendors said they intend to use M&A to fill in the gaps in their product portfolios. We asked these vendors to share the motivations for wanting to acquire other companies. As shown below the top drivers for acquiring other companies comes down to a classic make or buy decision.

 

 

 

Senior executives at broadcast technology vendors listed their top two reasons for buying other companies as gaining new technical expertise and filling gaps in their product portfolio. These options apply equally to companies looking to acquire technology in their core markets, as well as those who want to buy their way into new markets.

Vendors also see M&A as a way to increase their market share. This is particularly true for vendors who have established a global sales and distribution, but have gaps in their products. This type of deal is typically a small “bolt-on” acquisition.

A less commonly cited driver is to increase economies of scale. By enlarging the scale of their operations, vendors can create savings through strategic synergies as well as through volume discounts on components and manufacturing services.

 

Broadcast Industry M&A: Seller Motivations

Senior managers of broadcast technology vendors who indicated that their company might be sold or merged over the next 2-3 years were asked for more information about why they feel this might be the case.

 

 

 

The top reasons cited by these managers for selling the company highlight both corporate and personal motivations are at play.

From a corporate point of view, managers want to access the greater resources of a larger company. This is equally valid for a small company selling to a larger company, and the merger of two small companies to create a new larger entity. These economies of scale can enable vendors to compete on a more equal footing with larger rivals.

Given that 70% of vendors who participated in our 2011 broadcast industry market study are privately held, it is not surprising that investor liquidity is also a strong motivator for selling the company to a larger entity. Whether the company is owned by the founders, a large number of shareholders, or venture capitalists, investors are always on the lookout to capitalize on their assets. And why not? Some of the vendors mentioned above were able to achieve a “strategic” valuation for their businesses, dramatically increasing the personal fortunes of company insiders.

Interestingly, just six percent of respondents cited difficulty continuing as a stand-alone entity as a reason to sell the company. This implies that if the price is not right, company owners may be happy to continue with the status-quo until a better offer comes along.

 

This article was originally published in the IABM Journal. It is based on the findings from the Devoncroft Partners’ 2011 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), an annual study of global trends, technology purchasing behavior and the opinion of vendor brands in the broadcast industry. More than 8,000 people in 100+ countries participated in the 2011 BBS, making it the largest and most comprehensive market study ever done in the broadcast industry.

Tracking Changes in Broadcast Industry Trends — 2011 Versus 2010

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research, market research, technology trends | Posted by Joe Zaller
Mar 21 2011

This is the second 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.

. 

In a recent post I discussed the 2011 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Trend Index, which shows the most important trends in the broadcast industry for 2011.

The article referenced both the 2009 and 2010 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Trend Index from, and looked at how the rankings of trends have changed over time.  For example, in 2009 the transition to HDTV operations was, by far, the top ranked trend.  However by 2011, the transition to HDTV operations had been overtaken by multi-platform content delivery as the top trend (although the move to HD is clearly still very important).

This post generated a lot of lot of feedback from clients and readers.  Many people said they wanted to more easily see changes to the importance of trends over time, and asked for a single chart that shows year-over-year comparisons.  I’ve done this in the chart below, which shows a comparison of the BBS Broadcast Industry Global Trend Index from 2011 and 2010. 

Please note that I have not included the 2009 Index in this chart because multiple changes were made to the trends in the Index between 2009 and 2010, reducing the ability to make an “apples-to-apples” comparison.  It’s also worth noting that all 14 trends from the 2010 Index were included in the 2011 Index.  However, based industry feedback, we added a 15th trend to the 2011 list – i.e. analog switch-off, which was ranked 11th out 15 in 2011.  The addition of analog switch-off likely “cannibalized” a small percentage of responses from other trends in this year’s ranking. 

.

.

So what changed between 2010 and 2011? 

There are two ways to look at this:

  • changes in overall numerical ranking relative to the previous year
  • changes in overall commercial importance relative to the previous year

 

.

Changes in Numerical Ranking of Broadcast Industry Trends

Let’s start with the overall numerical ranking of trends.  The first column in the table below shows how trends were ranked in 2011. The number in parentheses to the right of each trend shows how it ranked in the 2010 BBS Index. Although there were no changes at the top and bottom of the 2011 Index versus the 2010 Index, almost everything in between changed position relative to the previous year.

.

.

As I wrote previously, the top four trends in the 2011 Global Broadcast Industry Trend Index are the same as last year and the year before:

  • Multi-platform content delivery
  • Transition to HDTV operations
  • File-based / tapeless workflows
  • IP networking and content delivery

.

However, there has been considerable movement in the relative ranking of these four trends over the past several years.  Most significantly, “multi-platform content delivery” has become increasingly important, and is the dominant trend in 2011.   

Several trends were ranked more highly in 2011 than in 2010.  For example video-on-demand moved up from #8 in 2011 from #6 in 2011; while 3DTV moved up from #10 in 2010 to #8 in 2011.

Other trends remained relatively static in terms of their ranking in 2011.  For example: “transition to 3Gbps operations”, “transition to 5.1 channel audio”, “outsourced operations” and “green initiatives” remained the bottom four trends in 2011, as they were in 2010.

.

Changes in Commercial Importance of Broadcast Industry Trends

As well as changes to numerical ranking, there were also year-over-year changes to the perception of commercial importance to each trend.  This is shown in the table below:

.

 

.

For the most part, the trends moved up in the rankings in 2011 also were seen as more important commercially versus the previous year. 

However, it is possible for a trend to move up in the numerical ranking, while moving down in terms commercial importance to respondents, as happened this year with the transition to HDTV operations.  In this case, these changes are likely more of a function of the strong showing for multi-platform content delivery, than a poor showing for the transition to HDTV.

..

Why Tracking Movement of Trends is Important

In the broadcast industry much of the spending on technology is project-based, and those projects all come from somewhere.  Our view is that industry trends drive capital projects, which in turn drive budgets, which in turn drive product purchase.  In other words, what’s commercially important to technology buyers today (i.e. trends) will likely turn into what they are budgeting for tomorrow (i.e. projects).

Looking at the trend data from the 2011 BBS, monetizing content on multiple platforms is clearly a key objective for broadcast professionals this year.  Yet, as I wrote a few months ago after returning from CES: “On the monetization point, I lost count of the number of times I heard the word “experimentation” during [conference] sessions – particularly from content owners.  In other words, although everyone agrees that multi-platform content delivery is a very important trend, many players have still not figured out the business model.”

There’s a difference between recognizing that a trend is commercially important and having a business plan in place that capitalizes on it.  So while there’s no doubt that generating incremental revenue by delivering a multi-screen experience to consumers is hot topic, business models have to move beyond the experimental in order to drive serious market growth.  Once that happens, multi-platform content delivery will likely become the most important planned project rather than just the most important trend.

.

.

Keep in mind when reading this information that all data in this article measures the responses of all non-vendor participants in the 2011 BBS, regardless of organization type, organization size, job title or geographic location.  Responses of individual organization types or geographic locations may be very different than those shown in this high level overview.  Granular analysis of these results is available as part of the full 2011 BBS Global Market Report. For more information about this report, please contact Devoncroft Partners.

.

.

Related Content:

You can find out about the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey here.

The 2011 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Trend Index is here.

The 2010 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Trend Index is here.

The 2009 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Trend Index is here.

.

.

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.

.

.

©Devoncroft Partners 2009-2011

 .

.

Broadcast Industry’s Most Comprehensive Market Study Reveals Top Trends of 2011

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research, market research, technology trends | Posted by Joe Zaller
Mar 16 2011

This is the first 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.

.

The 2011 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Trend Index

Each year, Devoncroft Partners conducts a large scale global study of the broadcast industry called the Big Broadcast Survey (BBS).  More than 8,000 broadcast professionals in 100+ countries participated in the 2011 BBS, making it the most comprehensive study ever done in the broadcast industry.

One of the key outputs from the BBS is the annual BBS Broadcast Industry Global Trend Index. This is a ranking of the broadcast industry trends that are considered by BBS respondents to be the most commercially important to their businesses in any given year.

To create the 2011 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Trend Index, we presented BBS respondents with a list of 15 industry trends and asked them to tell us which one trend they consider to be “most important” to their business, which one trend they consider to be “second most important” to their business, and which other trends (plural) they consider to be “also very important.” 

We then used the responses to this question to create the BBS Broadcast Industry Global Trend Index by applying a weighting based on the commercial importance of each trend. 

Please note that our goal from this question is to help clients gain insight into the business drivers behind the respondent’s answer.  Therefore, we asked this question in the context of commercial importance, rather than “industry buzz” or technology hype.

The table below shows the 2011 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Trend Index.  Please note that this chart measures the responses all non-vendors who participated in the 2011 BBS, regardless of company type, company size, geographic location, job title etc. 

.

.

Similar to results in both the 2009 and 2010, the top four trends in the 2011 Global Broadcast Industry Trend Index are:

  • Multi-platform content delivery
  • Transition to HDTV operations
  • File-based / tapeless workflows
  • IP networking and content delivery

.

However, there has been considerable movement in the relative ranking of these four trends over the past several years.  Most significantly, “multi-platform content delivery” has become increasingly important, and is the dominant trend in 2011.   For comparison:

  • In 2009, the BBS Broadcast Industry Global Trend Index was dominated by the transition to HDTV operations, while multi-platform content delivery was fourth on the list

 

  • In 2010, multi-platform content delivery had become the most important industry trend, narrowly eclipsing file-based / tapeless workflows (which were combined in the 2010 BBS Trend Index) and the transition to HDTV operations

 .

These results show that broadcast professionals continue to focus their efforts on taking advantage of the potential for incremental revenue streams presented by multi-platform content delivery.  Indeed, as the chart above shows multi-platform content delivery was ranked significantly higher than any other trend in our 2011 study.  As video content become ubiquitous, broadcasters and content owners are looking for ways to monetize their assets, and grow their revenue.  Technology vendors are continuing to develop solutions to convert content for optimal performance on any platform, and to run targeted ads alongside that content.

But there is more to the story than just multi-platform content delivery. For the third year in a row, the transition to HDTV operations ranks as one of the top trends in the broadcast industry.  It’s likely that HDTV upgrades will continue to be one of the major drivers of project-based spending as broadcasters around the world continue with plans to transition their operations to HDTV.  We provide significant coverage of the global move to HDTV in the 2011 BBS Global Market Report.  This includes a breakdown of where broadcasters are in their transition to HD, and a look at the upgrade plans for more than a dozen product categories. We’ll also be publishing more information here about project-based spending and the HD transition in future articles.

Operational efficiencies (through file-based / tapeless workflows) remain a significant macro driver in 2011, as broadcasters continue to deploy new workflows.  The increasing importance of file-based technologies has implications for the broadcast industry in terms of both workflows and product procurement.  Our previous research shows that broadcasters are moving to file-based workflows not only to achieve greater speed and efficiencies, but also to reduce cost.  During the recession, technology budgets were typically prioritized towards solutions that add revenue and/or reduce cost.  Now that the industry is recovering from the downturn, it’s likely that the way technology is purchased will remain focused on these commercial priorities.

Several trends were ranked more highly in 2011 than in 2010.  For example video-on-demand moved up from #8 in 2011 to#6 in 2011; while 3DTV moved up from #10 in 2010 to #8 in 2011.

Other trends remained relatively static in terms of their ranking in 2011.  For example: “transition to 3Gbps operations”, “transition to 5.1 channel audio”, “outsourced operations” and “green initiatives” remained the bottom four trends in 2011, as they were in 2010.

It’s worth mentioning that in order to show year-over-year movement, all trends from the 2010 BBS were included in the 2011 BBS.  However, based on industry feedback, we added a 15th trend to the 2011 list – i.e. analog switch-off, which was ranked 11th out of 15 in 2011.  The addition of analog switch-off likely “cannibalized” a small percentage of responses from other trends in this year’s ranking. 

.

Keep in mind when reading this information that all data in this article measures the responses of all non-vendor participants in the 2011 BBS, regardless of organization type, organization size, job title or geographic location.  Responses of individual organization types or geographic locations may be very different.  Granular analysis of these results is available as part of the full 2011 BBS Global Market Report. For more information about this report, please contact Devoncroft Partners.

.

.

Related Content:

You can find information about the 2011 Big Broadcast Survey here.

The 2010 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Trend Index is here.

The 2009 BBS Broadcast Industry Global Trend Index is here.

.

.

.

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.

.

 

What are the Commercial Drivers for the Global Move to File-Based Operations in the Broadcast Industry?

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, broadcast technology market research, market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Dec 13 2010

This is the second in a series of occasional articles about the commercial drivers behind some of the most important trends in the broadcast industry.  The first article in this series discussed the commercial drivers for the global move to HDTV operations.

As part of the 2010 Big Broadcast Survey (BBS), we asked a global sample of more than 5,600 broadcast professionals about the most important trends in the broadcast industry.  Respondents were presented with a series of industry trends, and asked to indicate which one was the most commercially important to their business over the next few years.

The move to file-based workflows ranked number two on this list. 

In order to understand why, we asked a series of questions to those respondents who said the transition to file-based workflows is the one trend that is most commercially important to their business. These included why the move to file-based operations is important to them, which vendors they feel are best positioned to provide solutions to their needs, and what obstacles they think might prevent them from achieving their goals.

As shown in the chart below, the top reason cited by 2010 BBS respondents for the commercial importance of moving to file-based operations is to increase speed and efficiency in the production process.

.

The only notable exception to this was respondents from pay-TV operators, who see the move to file-based operations as a way to deliver more channels and services without a significant increase in cost.

Other reasons cited include:

  • Enabling multi-platform content distribution and monetization
  • Reduce headcount and therefore cost
  • To take advantage of lower cost / generic IT technology
  • To deliver more channels / services with significantly increasing cost
  • To eliminate errors

.

Top Vendors for File-Based Transition

As a follow-up, respondents were asked which vendor is best suited to help them make the transition to file-based operations.  The ten vendors mentioned most often were: Sony, Avid, Apple, Panasonic, No One Vendor, Grass Valley, Harris, EVS, JVC and Omneon.

 .

.

 

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.

.

Broadcast Technology Vendors Predict Strong Increase in Software Revenue

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast industry trends, Broadcast technology channel strategy, broadcast technology market research | Posted by Joe Zaller
Nov 01 2010

When I recently saw the headline “Solving the TV Station Hardware Dilemma” on the Broadcast Engineering website, I stopped to read.

Although the article turned out to be about integrated playout (a.k.a. channel-in-a-box) automation servers rather than a debate about hardware versus software in a broadcast facility, it got me thinking about the shift in broadcasting towards IT-oriented technologies, and what vendors are doing about this market transition.

Our research has found that the move to IT-based operations is one of the broadcast industry’s most important technology trends. This will obviously have a major impact on the broadcast technology vendor community. 

Some commentators like boutique investment bank Silverwood Partners say that there is a diminishing hardware opportunity and that value is migrating to software-based products.  So what are broadcast technology vendors doing to change their product ranges and business models?

To better understand these issues we asked the nearly 800 broadcast technology vendors who responded to the 2010 Big Broadcast Survey, about the make-up of their current and future product portfolio.  Vendors were asked to break down the sources of their revenue by product hardware, software, maintenance, and service. 

Here’s what we found:

.

Current Sources of Vendor Revenue – Product Mix

.

Hardware products represent the largest percentage of vendor revenue, with more than 80% of respondents indicating that hardware sales represents greater than 20% of revenue, and 31% reporting that hardware products represent more than 80% of revenue.

While more than half of vendors reported that software represents a significant portion of their revenues, only 6% identified software as representing more than 80% of their sales.

Maintenance and service revenues represent a small part of the overall vendor revenue stream today.

But what are vendors projecting for the make-up of their future revenue?

.

Future Sources of Vendor Revenue – Product Mix

Vendors were also asked to predict how their revenue by product mix would change over the next several years.

More than half of vendors report that they expect sales of hardware products to stay the same or increase over the next several years, while 20% expect hardware product sales to decline over the same period.

.

 .

Vendors expect to see large growth in software sales, with 76% of vendors predicting sales of software products will increase over the next 2-3 years.  Included in this number are an impressive 51% of vendors who expect software product sales to increase by more than 10%.

Vendors are also clearly looking towards maintenance and service revenues to expend their businesses.  Whereas the previous chart shows that today’s revenue from these sources is not huge, vendors are almost all anticipating that maintenance and service income will stay the same or increase over the next several years. 47% of vendors predict that maintenance revenue will increase, and 48% of vendors predict that customer service revenues will increase during this period.   

.

Projected Future Vendor Hardware / Software Revenue – by Company Type

To better understand these responses, it’s helpful to profile the research participants according to the type of company they represent.

In the charts below, I have broken out the responses to the projected product mix question based on whether the respondent works for a company that provides primarily hardware products, primarily software products, or has a mixture of both.  In this case “primarily” is defined as more than 70% of a company’s revenue.  Responses for the average of all vendor responses are also shown for the sake of comparison with charts above.

.

Hardware Sales

Firstly, let’s look at what vendors predict will happen to their hardware sales.  The chart below shows that 20% of respondents expect hardware product sales to decline over the next few years, while more than half expect hardware product revenue to stay the same or increase over the same period.

.

 

.

However, there is a clear difference between those vendors who currently produce primarily hardware products versus those who currently produce primarily software products.

73% of respondents from companies who primarily sell hardware products think that their hardware revenue will grow over the next few years.  Conversely, just 39% of respondents from software-oriented companies think their hardware revenue will increase.

.

Software Sales:

What about revenue from software products? The chart below shows how vendors project their software sales will change over the next 2-3 years.

.

Virtually all vendor respondents predict that their revenue from software will increase over the next few years.  Just 5% of respondents believe that software revenue will decline during this timeframe.

67% of vendors respondents whose company sells primarily hardware products predict that their sales from software products will increase over the next few years, while 86% of respondents from software-oriented vendors believe their software revenue will grow.

These results show that while hardware product sales are not going away any time soon, technology suppliers are responding to market demand for software-oriented products.  Although this analysis does not attempt to put a value on or quantify the percentage of future software sales, it appears that vendors are gearing up to provide more software solutions in the belief that this will help drive revenue growth.

.

.

 

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.

.

.

Devoncroft Digest – Week Ending May 14th 2010. Earnings Season Continues

broadcast industry technology trends, broadcast technology market research, Broadcast technology vendor financials | Posted by Joe Zaller
May 16 2010

Earnings season continues with good numbers from broadcasters, and mixed results from vendors.

Broadcaster Earnings Continue to Rise

Broadcasting & Cable reported that Gray Television reported first quarter revenues of $70.5 million, up 15% from the revenue it announced in the first quarter of last year. Gray said the number exceeded its initial expectations.

B&C also reported that Scripps saw its revenues rise 11% y/y. The company is also forecasting strong results for its second quarter.

US Satellite broadcaster Dish Networks was in the news several times last week.  It posted its Q1 results at the beginning of the week, which showed revenues rise by 5 percent, but net income fall by 26 percent.  The company also said it was prepared to shut down its DVR service if it loses its protracted patent battle with DVR pioneer Tivo. But then on Friday a US federal appeals court said the case between Dish and Tivo. This sent Tivo shares down by more than 40%.

 

 

Broadcast Technology Vendor News

EVS Reports 5th Consecutive Growth Quarter, Disappoints Analysts

Broadcast server and storage vendor EVS reported its Q1FY10 numbers this week.  According to the company’s press release to company reported its 5th quarter in a row of growth.  However both the revenue and profit were below the expectations of analysts, and the company’s stock price fell by 10% to a 10 month low following the announcement.  A Reuter’s article quotes analyst Nico Melsens of KBC as saying “the order book was okay, first quarter sales were okay, but the gross margin was below consensus forecast.”                        

Harmonic Holds Analyst Day, Discusses Omneon Deal

Following the release of its earnings last week, Harmonic held meeting for analyst day during which the company’s CEO and CFO presented an overview of the company’s business to equity analysts. One of the topics of interest was the company’s recent acquisition of broadcast server and storage vendor Omneon.   You can listen to a reply of the analyst presentation here.  Information on the Omneon deal is presented at the 21.5 minute mark, as well as in the Q&A. 

Sony Expects to Return to Profit

According to an article in the Wall Street Journal, Sony says expects to return to profit this fiscal year after two straight years in the red, as painful restructuring measures give way to an improved outlook for its troubled television and video game units. Sony said its restructuring is finally paying and that it expects its television business, which has lost money six years in a row, to return to profitability, boosted by 3-D TVs which it hopes will drive new interest and slow the price declines that eat into profits.

Vizrt CEO Passes Away

TVB Europe reported the sad news that Vizrt CEO, Bjarne Berg, has passed away suddenly at the age of 59.   

New CMO at Chyron

Broadcast graphics vendor Chyron announced that it has hired a new VP and CMO.   Bonnie Barclay comes from The Branding Iron, LLC – an Atlanta-based television and branding company.  She has also worked at Scripps, Cox, and Belo.

 

 

Market Research Note of the Week:

Purchasing Preferences of Broadcast Technology Buyers – “Best-of-Breed” or “One-Stop-Shop?

How do buyers of broadcast technology products prefer to purchase: using a best-of-breed approach (evaluating products from multiple vendors) or a one-stop shop where one vendor provides a complete solution?

To find out, we canvassed the opinions of several thousand broadcast professionals around the world as part of the 2010 Big Broadcast Survey.

There are a huge number of vendors in the broadcast technology space, and the industry’s vendor community is fragmented. Major international trade exhibitions such as NAB and IBC often have between 1000 and 1500 exhibitors at their shows.

On the one hand are the many vendors who are relatively small and specialize in one or two product types. There are also a small number of large international vendors who produce dozens of product types. There are obvious advantages that come with the scale that large companies have achieved, but small companies often argue that their more nimble, focused approach results in superior products.

This has led to an ongoing debate within the broadcast industry about whether it’s better to buy so-called best-of-breed solutions from a variety of suppliers or go to one large company and buy everything from a single vendor.

There are pros and cons to each approach. Dealing with a number of companies may indeed enable buyers to assemble a best-of-breed system, but this approach may introduce interoperability issues and potential finger pointing between vendors if things go wrong. Dealing with a large one-stop shop gives buyers the peace of mind that interoperability issues have been solved, that there is one phone number to call if things go wrong and that there will be no finger pointing.

To see the results of this research, including a chart with a breakdown of different types of buyers, click here.