iWorld
TVOD & consumer behavior: What do viewers really want?
Mumbai: The consumption landscape in media is evolving drastically. Streaming services have driven about a revolution when it comes to media consumption. It is a thing of the past that viewers were bound to linear television schedules. Today, the list of different models for delivering digital content ranges from TVOD (Transactional Video on Demand), SVOD (Subscription Video on Demand), AVOD (Advertising-based Video on Demand), and HVOD (Hybrid Video on Demand). Each mode has its upsides and downsides, but the thing one must ask is: what do viewers prefer as they choose to opt for one model over another?
Let us take a closer look at how TVOD has changed consumer behavior and what sets it apart from SVOD, AVOD, and HVOD with a focus on understanding what drives viewers towards one platform and service model as opposed to another.
Transactional Video on Demand (TVOD)
TVOD is one where viewers pay for one piece of content. Instead of signing up for an entire service or watching with ads, viewers may be able to pay once for a movie, episode, or series rental or purchase. Platforms that use the TVOD model include iTunes, Google Play Movies, and Amazon Prime Video-where viewers can rent or buy individual titles outside of its subscription offering.
Types:
● EST (Electronic Sell Through) – The customer buys the content, and it belongs to him or her permanently.
● DTR (Download to Rent) – The consumer downloads the content for a specific time period, usually 24-48 hours after which he or she will not be able to avail the content.
Consumer Behaviour and TVOD
The primary attraction of TVOD is flexibility. Consumers can choose only that content in which they are genuinely interested and skip recurring subscription fees or advertisers’ assaults. This is very appealing to those who consume media in a spotty fashion or are mostly interested in new releases, premium content, or films not distributed on subscription platforms.
Benefits of TVOD
1. Exclusivity and premium content for pay: TVOD, as a unit compared with the others, typically carries new releases and premium content that are not found on the other platforms. The consumers who want to keep up with the newest blockbuster films or series will not mind paying.
2. Control and Flexibility: TVOD allows viewers to never have to pay a monthly fee with the firmness that says they can spend their money when and how they choose to. If you watch only one or two movies a month, then this is a cheaper option in comparison to most SVOD services.
3. Ownership: Est makes it possible to allow the user who buys content in TVOD to own content which then allows him/her to access whatever they have bought at any time. That is what increases an appeal to consumers looking to create digital libraries.
4. No Commitment: TVOD does not require contractually long subscriptions. People enjoy the ability to consume content on a transactional basis, not obligated to commit long-term for recurring subscription payment.
The downside of TVOD
TVOD’s drawback is that costs can add up quickly. Several purchases per month can easily escalate into a sum more expensive than an SVOD subscription, especially if the consumer has large viewing appetites. And if one isn’t sure about the quality or appeal of content, the upfront price can be daunting.
TVOD Vs SVOD, AVOD and HVOD
Each of the delivery models attracts a different kind of consumer. Media companies interested in optimizing services understand the nuances in consumer behavior across such models.
SVOD (Subscription Video on Demand)
The SVOD model refers to platforms like Netflix, Hulu, and Disney+ that grant viewers access to their respective catalogs for a fixed monthly or annual fee. During the subscription period, consumers have unlimited access to the catalog.
Consumer Behaviour in SVOD
– Binge-Watching Culture: SVOD made binge-watching trendy, where all the seasons and even the whole catalog can be binge-watched without interruption using SVOD. The advantage of uninterrupted viewing, which users prefer to make a “content buffet.”
– Cost-Efficiency: For frequent viewers of content, SVOD seems cheaper than TVOD. To them, paying a monthly fee for access to thousands of titles is perceived as better value than paying for individual titles using TVOD.
– Loyalty and Engagement: The SVOD focus is on brand loyalty through original programming, exclusive content, and user-friendly interfaces, for they come back with constant updates in the content catalog.
– No Interruptions: Most SVOD services are ad-free and attract those who enjoy an unbroken experience.
The downside of SVOD
The disadvantage of SVOD is content saturation. With this much content, it is easy for viewers to be overloaded or lose interest in any title. More importantly, the popular content may become outdated and removed from the platform, thereby leaving subscribers unhappy with the fact that their favorite shows or movies are no longer available.
AVOD (Advertising Video on Demand)
AVODs, such as YouTube, Tubi, and Peacock (free tier), are free to consumers but advert-driven. Consumers must watch advertisements to be able to see the content.
Consumer Behavior on AVOD
– Price Sensitivity: AVOD appeals to the price-sensitive customer who is willing to pay in terms of inconvenience of ads for free content access. It appeals to casual viewers, who are less likely to commit than to a paid subscription or one-time TVOD purchase.
– Ad Tolerance: The very first compromise viewers have to make is advertisements along the way. Perhaps viewers who want it to be seamless and continuous would not find AVOD palatable. However, the younger audience – including Gen Z and Millennials – are accustomed to ad-supported content as the case is with YouTube platforms.
– Broad Access: AVOD platforms enjoy a wide, varied library entries, although, less of new releases and premium compared to SVOD or TVOD.
The downside of AVOD
The critical drawback it has is dependency on ads, which can be disturbing for the viewer. For content creators, AVOD may not always prove the most financially rewarding, due to fluctuating ad revenues.
HVOD (Hybrid Video on Demand)
HVOD is a combination model that carries both a subscription model and an ad-supported model. It falls between SVOD and AVOD as it meets the demand for services that charge less for the subscriptions with a monetization of ads to offer premium content to the consumer.
Consumer Behaviour in HVOD
– Middle Ground: The model speaks to a consumer who wants premium content at a lower price but who would be willing to tolerate some ads in order to access it. This model has typically attracted consumers because consumers are seeing it as the best of both worlds, such as lower subscription fees with some inconveniences from ads.
– Personalisation: With most HVOD services offering an ad-free tier at a higher subscription price, it leaves the burden on the consumer’s choice on how they prefer to enjoy the show. This is appealing for those who want to balance cost and convenience in achieving their viewing needs.
However, with this ad-subsidized nature of HVOD platforms, the end-users get frustrated and annoyed to have uninterrupted viewing without having to pay extra for the ad-free view.
What do viewers really want?
The choice among TVOD, SVOD, AVOD, and HVOD majorly depends upon the individual preferences and the modes of preference. Now, let’s take a look at what drives consumer behavior across these models:
1. Convenience: Consumers prefer convenience and accessibility. Consumers seeking to watch all the content at one place without breaks gravitate toward the SVOD platform. For new releases to be watched immediately without making a subscription, consumers are drawn toward TVOD.
2. Cost Sensitivity: Cost-sensitive consumers will gravitate to AVOD for free content availability, no matter the price they have to pay in terms of watching advertisements. Heavy content consumers will benefit more by paying for the SVOD subscription.
3. Personalisation: TVOD and HVOD Provide for a lot more personalization. With TVOD, the viewer can essentially pay for just what they watch while with HVOD subscription terms and ad exposure offer options and an avenue for variation. Personalization has been the new battleground as more competition bids for the users that crave more control over how media is consumed.
4. Ad Tolerance: AVOD as well as HVOD models test out the tolerance for ads. The young viewers will be more likely to accept ads if that content would stream free or at a lower price.
TVOD meets the appetite for premium, flexible content access – mainly, for viewers reluctant to invest in a subscription. On the other hand, SVOD leads in very large libraries and binge-friendly experiences and AVOD, HVOD in cheap content at an ad compromise. All this understanding lets them better serve their audience through content that really resonates with expectations.
iWorld
Cheekatilo shines in the dark with record debut on Prime Video
A crime thriller steps out of the shadows as Telugu storytelling claims centre stage.
MUMBAI: Sometimes, the darkest stories travel the farthest. Prime Video’s latest Telugu original Cheekatilo has done exactly that, clocking a record-breaking launch week and emerging as the most-streamed south original movie on the platform during its debut period.
Premiering worldwide on January 23, the edge-of-the-seat crime suspense trended at the top through its opening weekend and reached viewers across 89 per cent of India’s pin codes, underlining its rare ability to cut across regions, languages and viewing habits. The performance marks a significant milestone for Prime Video’s south originals slate, reflecting the rising national appetite for tightly written, character-driven narratives.
Beyond the numbers, Cheekatilo’s success highlights a broader shift in audience preferences. The strong engagement around the film points to the growing demand for female-led storytelling, with viewers gravitating towards grounded, intense narratives rooted in real-world settings. The film’s national traction reinforces the idea that language is no longer a barrier when the story holds its nerve.
Prime Video India director and head of originals Nikhil Madhok said the response to Cheekatilo reflects the momentum of South Originals and the increasing resonance of bold, genre-driven stories. He noted that the film’s gripping narrative and performances kept audiences hooked from start to finish, strengthening Prime Video’s positioning as a destination for distinctive storytelling with cultural authenticity.
Directed by Sharan Kopishetty and produced by D. Suresh Babu under the Suresh Productions banner, Cheekatilo is written by Chandra Pemmaraju and Kopishetty. The film stars Sobhita Dhulipala as Sandhya, alongside Viswadev Rachakonda, with Chaitanya Visalakshmi, Esha Chawla, Jhansi, Aamani and Vadlamani Srinivas in pivotal roles.
Set against the urban pulse of Hyderabad, the film adds another strong chapter to Prime Video’s expanding catalogue of south originals. With its launch-week dominance and widespread reach, Cheekatilo proves that when storytelling hits the right note, even the darkest tales can command the brightest spotlight.
Gaming
Checkmate Goes Digital as Chess Joins Esports Nations Cup 2026
From boards to bytes, chess readies for a nation-first showdown in Riyadh.
MUMBAI: When pawns meet power plays, the game changes. Chess, the world’s oldest mind sport, is officially stepping deeper into the digital arena after the Esports World Cup Foundation confirmed it as one of 16 titles at the inaugural Esports Nations Cup 2026, set to unfold in Riyadh from 2 to 29 November.
For a game synonymous with quiet halls and ticking clocks, this is a bold move. Chess at ENC 2026 promises scale, spectacle and serious competition, fielding an unprecedented 128 players and opening the board to fresh talent and underrepresented nations as the sport’s esports evolution gathers pace.
The chess competition will run from November 2 to November 8, culminating in a playoff final. The opening phase features 128 players split into 16 round-robin groups of eight, with the top four from each group advancing.
That leaves 64 players battling it out in a single-elimination playoff bracket. Early rounds will be best-of-two, while the quarterfinals onward step up to best-of-four encounters. Deadlocks will be settled via Armageddon tie-breakers, and all matches will be played in a Rapid 10+0 format, designed for speed, tension and drama.
National pride is front and centre. Of the 128 slots, 64 players will receive direct invitations based on Champions Chess Tour rankings, limited to one per nation. Another 56 players will qualify through regional online qualifiers, while eight wildcard spots round out the field.
Qualifiers will be hosted by Chess.com across seven regions, including Middle East + India + Central Asia, with two qualifier windows in June 2026. Each country can field a maximum of two players, ensuring both depth and diversity across the draw.
Chess already tasted esports stardom at the 2025 Esports World Cup, where 20 nations were represented and the intensity surprised even purists. The event ended with Magnus Carlsen lifting the title for Team Liquid, sealing chess’s credentials as a natural fit for high-stakes digital competition.
India’s top-ranked player Arjun Erigaisi called the experience “unlike any chess tournament I’ve played before”, adding that the energy of the esports stage is drawing new audiences into the game.
For commentators and fans alike, the shift to a nation-based format raises the stakes. Chessbase India co-founder Sagar Shah likened the moment to the excitement of the Chess Olympiad, while grandmaster and broadcaster Tania Sachdev said the national format adds “pride, pressure and passion” that pulls viewers in deeper.
From silent calculation to roaring crowds, chess at the Esports Nations Cup 2026 is less about moving pieces and more about moving perceptions. Checkmate, it seems, has gone fully digital.
iWorld
Paid panic: how paid posts sparked a child-safety scare in Delhi and Mumbai
A wave of panic swept through Delhi and Mumbai over the past week as viral social media posts claimed a sudden spike in missing and kidnapped children. The alarm bells proved false. Both cities’ police forces issued categorical denials, pointing fingers at paid promotion and rumour-mongering designed to create public hysteria. The twist: fingers are now pointing at Yash Raj Films, accused of orchestrating the scare as guerrilla marketing for Mardaani 3, its upcoming vigilante thriller about child trafficking.
The episode lays bare a darker truth about India’s social media ecosystem. With smartphone penetration soaring and screen time at record highs, paid promotion tools have become weapons of mass hysteria. A few thousand rupees can boost a post to millions of eyeballs within hours. When that post plays on primal fears like child safety, verification becomes an afterthought. Users share first, question later. The result: manufactured crises that feel real until authorities scramble to debunk them.
Delhi Police took to Instagram 23 hours ago with a blunt message: “After following a few leads, we discovered that the hype around the surge in missing girls in Delhi is being pushed through paid promotion. Creating panic for monetary gains won’t be tolerated, and we’ll take strict action against such individuals.” The post, captioned “Facts matter, Fear doesn’t”, made clear the force’s irritation at being dragged into what it views as a manufactured crisis.
Mumbai Police followed suit, issuing a statement denying claims of kidnappings. “Certain social media handles are misrepresenting data and indulging in rumour-mongering regarding cases of missing and kidnapped children. We categorically deny these claims,” the force wrote. It added that FIRs were being registered against those “deliberately spreading false information and creating public panic.”
The misinformation spread with startling effectiveness. Popular Instagram and Twitter accounts, some with hundreds of thousands of followers, shared alarming statistics and anecdotal reports of vanished children, tagging police handles and demanding action. The posts gained traction quickly, amplified by concerned parents and activists. Only when both police forces traced the origin of the claims did the facade crumble: many of the viral posts were boosted through paid promotion, a telltale sign of coordinated astroturfing rather than organic concern.
Enter Yash Raj Films, the 50-year-old production house behind the Mardaani franchise. The series, starring Rani Mukerji as a no-nonsense cop battling human trafficking rings, has built its brand on gritty, socially conscious thrillers. Mardaani 3 is in production, and online chatter swiftly connected the dots between the missing persons panic and the film’s subject matter. Accusations flew: had YRF seeded fake stories to drum up buzz for its vigilante cop sequel?
YRF issued a furious rebuttal. “Yash Raj Films is a 50-year-old company founded on the core principles of being highly ethical and transparent,” a spokesperson said. “We strongly deny the accusations floating on social media that Mardaani 3’s promotional campaign has deliberately sensationalised a sensitive issue like this and we have immense trust in our authorities that they will share all facts and truths in due course of time.”
The denial is categorical, but scepticism lingers. Guerrilla marketing, viral hoaxes masquerading as public service announcements, manipulated data: these are not unheard of in Bollywood’s playbook, though rarely deployed on such a sensitive issue. Child safety is a third rail; exploiting it for box office returns crosses a line even by the industry’s elastic ethical standards.
Yet the evidence tying YRF directly to the posts remains circumstantial. No smoking gun links the production house to the paid promotions flagged by police. What is clear is that someone paid to amplify posts about missing children at precisely the moment a film about missing children was in the public eye. Whether that someone was a rogue marketing agency, an overzealous publicist, or a bad actor with no YRF connection remains murky.
The fallout is reputational. YRF, which has cultivated a family-friendly, socially responsible image across five decades, now finds itself defending against accusations of weaponising child safety fears. The Mardaani franchise, built on the premise of protecting the vulnerable, risks being tarred as exploitative. Rani Mukerji, the face of the series, has yet to comment.
For Delhi and Mumbai police, the episode is a reminder of social media’s double-edged sword. The platforms amplify genuine crises but also manufacture fake ones with alarming ease. Paid promotion tools, designed to help legitimate businesses reach audiences, can just as easily turbocharge hoaxes. Distinguishing signal from noise requires resources and speed that overstretched forces often lack.
India’s social media consumption has exploded. The average urban user now spends over four hours daily on platforms, doom-scrolling through an endless feed of news, gossip and outrage. Algorithms prioritise engagement over accuracy, pushing emotionally charged content to the top. A post about missing children triggers immediate shares; a dry police denial struggles for traction. By the time fact-checkers mobilise, the lie has circled the country thrice.
Paid promotion supercharges this dynamic. For as little as Rs2,000, anyone can boost a post to lakhs of users, targeting specific demographics and geographies. The tools are legitimate, used daily by small businesses and political campaigns. But in the wrong hands, they become misinformation missiles. A fabricated crisis about child kidnappings, amplified by paid reach, looks indistinguishable from organic concern. Users see friends sharing it, assume it must be true, and hit repost. The cascade is self-reinforcing.
The broader pattern is troubling. Misinformation thrives on emotional triggers: fear for children, distrust of institutions, calls to action. A viral post claiming kidnappings demands immediate sharing; verifying it feels like wasted time when lives might be at stake. By the time authorities debunk the claims, the damage is done. Panic has spread, trust in institutions has eroded, and the original purveyors of the hoax have vanished into the digital ether.
This is the new normal. Every week brings a fresh panic: contaminated food, imminent disasters, communal violence rumours. Most prove baseless. Yet each one finds traction because social media rewards speed over truth. The infrastructure designed to connect people now excels at frightening them. Platforms profit from the chaos; advertisers pay for eyeballs regardless of whether the content is fact or fiction. The incentives are perverse, and there is no fix in sight.
Whether YRF is guilty or merely collateral damage in a misinformation campaign will depend on what authorities uncover in their investigations. The production house insists it has “immense trust” that police will reveal the truth. If that truth exonerates YRF, the studio will still carry the stain of association. If it implicates them, Mardaani 3 will enter cinemas under a cloud that no amount of box office success can dispel.
For now, the message from both police forces is unambiguous: there is no surge in missing children, the panic was engineered, and those responsible will face consequences. Parents can exhale. Social media users might want to pause before hitting share. And Bollywood’s marketers, ethical or otherwise, have been put on notice: weaponising fear for profit will not go unpunished.
A wave of panic swept through Delhi and Mumbai over the past week as viral social media posts claimed a sudden spike in missing and kidnapped children. The alarm bells proved false. Both cities’ police forces issued categorical denials, pointing fingers at paid promotion and rumour-mongering designed to create public hysteria. The twist: fingers are now pointing at Yash Raj Films, accused of orchestrating the scare as guerrilla marketing for Mardaani 3, its upcoming vigilante thriller about child trafficking.
The episode lays bare a darker truth about India’s social media ecosystem. With smartphone penetration soaring and screen time at record highs, paid promotion tools have become weapons of mass hysteria. A few thousand rupees can boost a post to millions of eyeballs within hours. When that post plays on primal fears like child safety, verification becomes an afterthought. Users share first, question later. The result: manufactured crises that feel real until authorities scramble to debunk them.
Delhi Police took to Instagram 23 hours ago with a blunt message: “After following a few leads, we discovered that the hype around the surge in missing girls in Delhi is being pushed through paid promotion. Creating panic for monetary gains won’t be tolerated, and we’ll take strict action against such individuals.” The post, captioned “Facts matter, Fear doesn’t”, made clear the force’s irritation at being dragged into what it views as a manufactured crisis.
Mumbai Police followed suit, issuing a statement denying claims of kidnappings. “Certain social media handles are misrepresenting data and indulging in rumour-mongering regarding cases of missing and kidnapped children. We categorically deny these claims,” the force wrote. It added that FIRs were being registered against those “deliberately spreading false information and creating public panic.”
The misinformation spread with startling effectiveness. Popular Instagram and Twitter accounts, some with hundreds of thousands of followers, shared alarming statistics and anecdotal reports of vanished children, tagging police handles and demanding action. The posts gained traction quickly, amplified by concerned parents and activists. Only when both police forces traced the origin of the claims did the facade crumble: many of the viral posts were boosted through paid promotion, a telltale sign of coordinated astroturfing rather than organic concern.
Enter Yash Raj Films, the 50-year-old production house behind the Mardaani franchise. The series, starring Rani Mukerji as a no-nonsense cop battling human trafficking rings, has built its brand on gritty, socially conscious thrillers. Mardaani 3 is in production, and online chatter swiftly connected the dots between the missing persons panic and the film’s subject matter. Accusations flew: had YRF seeded fake stories to drum up buzz for its vigilante cop sequel?
YRF issued a furious rebuttal. “Yash Raj Films is a 50-year-old company founded on the core principles of being highly ethical and transparent,” a spokesperson said. “We strongly deny the accusations floating on social media that Mardaani 3’s promotional campaign has deliberately sensationalised a sensitive issue like this and we have immense trust in our authorities that they will share all facts and truths in due course of time.”
The denial is categorical, but scepticism lingers. Guerrilla marketing, viral hoaxes masquerading as public service announcements, manipulated data: these are not unheard of in Bollywood’s playbook, though rarely deployed on such a sensitive issue. Child safety is a third rail; exploiting it for box office returns crosses a line even by the industry’s elastic ethical standards.
Yet the evidence tying YRF directly to the posts remains circumstantial. No smoking gun links the production house to the paid promotions flagged by police. What is clear is that someone paid to amplify posts about missing children at precisely the moment a film about missing children was in the public eye. Whether that someone was a rogue marketing agency, an overzealous publicist, or a bad actor with no YRF connection remains murky.
The fallout is reputational. YRF, which has cultivated a family-friendly, socially responsible image across five decades, now finds itself defending against accusations of weaponising child safety fears. The Mardaani franchise, built on the premise of protecting the vulnerable, risks being tarred as exploitative. Rani Mukerji, the face of the series, has yet to comment.
For Delhi and Mumbai police, the episode is a reminder of social media’s double-edged sword. The platforms amplify genuine crises but also manufacture fake ones with alarming ease. Paid promotion tools, designed to help legitimate businesses reach audiences, can just as easily turbocharge hoaxes. Distinguishing signal from noise requires resources and speed that overstretched forces often lack.
India’s social media consumption has exploded. The average urban user now spends over four hours daily on platforms, doom-scrolling through an endless feed of news, gossip and outrage. Algorithms prioritise engagement over accuracy, pushing emotionally charged content to the top. A post about missing children triggers immediate shares; a dry police denial struggles for traction. By the time fact-checkers mobilise, the lie has circled the country thrice.
Paid promotion supercharges this dynamic. For as little as Rs 2,000, anyone can boost a post to lakhs of users, targeting specific demographics and geographies. The tools are legitimate, used daily by small businesses and political campaigns. But in the wrong hands, they become misinformation missiles. A fabricated crisis about child kidnappings, amplified by paid reach, looks indistinguishable from organic concern. Users see friends sharing it, assume it must be true, and hit repost. The cascade is self-reinforcing.
The broader pattern is troubling. Misinformation thrives on emotional triggers: fear for children, distrust of institutions, calls to action. A viral post claiming kidnappings demands immediate sharing; verifying it feels like wasted time when lives might be at stake. By the time authorities debunk the claims, the damage is done. Panic has spread, trust in institutions has eroded, and the original purveyors of the hoax have vanished into the digital ether.
This is the new normal. Every week brings a fresh panic: contaminated food, imminent disasters, communal violence rumours. Most prove baseless. Yet each one finds traction because social media rewards speed over truth. The infrastructure designed to connect people now excels at frightening them. Platforms profit from the chaos; advertisers pay for eyeballs regardless of whether the content is fact or fiction. The incentives are perverse, and there is no fix in sight.
Whether YRF is guilty or merely collateral damage in a misinformation campaign will depend on what authorities uncover in their investigations. The production house insists it has “immense trust” that police will reveal the truth. If that truth exonerates YRF, the studio will still carry the stain of association. If it implicates them, Mardaani 3 will enter cinemas under a cloud that no amount of box office success can dispel.
For now, the message from both police forces is unambiguous: there is no surge in missing children, the panic was engineered, and those responsible will face consequences. Parents can exhale. Social media users might want to pause before hitting share. And Bollywood’s marketers, ethical or otherwise, have been put on notice: weaponising fear for profit will not go unpunished.
-
News Broadcasting6 days agoMukesh Ambani, Larry Fink come together for CNBC-TV18 exclusive
-
I&B Ministry3 months agoIndia steps up fight against digital piracy
-
iWorld1 week agoNetflix celebrates a decade in India with Shah Rukh Khan-narrated tribute film
-
iWorld3 months agoTips Music turns up the heat with Tamil party anthem Mayangiren
-
MAM3 months agoHoABL soars high with dazzling Nagpur sebut
-
iWorld12 months agoBSNL rings in a revival with Rs 4,969 crore revenue
-
MAM6 days agoNielsen launches co-viewing pilot to sharpen TV measurement
-
Film Production2 weeks agoUFO Moviez rides high on strong Q3 earnings


