Tag: ARPUs

  • Netflix soars higher and higher  in Q4 2024; FY 2024

    Netflix soars higher and higher in Q4 2024; FY 2024

    MUMBAI: It’s netted a financial performance like never before. Global streamer Netflix concluded 2024 on a high note, achieving significant financial milestones and operational growth. With a focus on re-accelerating revenue, expanding membership, and delivering record-breaking content, the company also outlined its strategic priorities for 2025.

    2024 Financial Performance
    1. Revenue Growth:
    o Total revenue for 2024 reached $39 billion, a 16 per cent increase year-over-year.
    o Growth was supported by strong membership additions and successful content.

    2. Operating Metrics:
    o Operating income surged to $10.4 billion, marking the first time the company surpassed this threshold.
    o Operating margins improved by six points, closing at 27 per cent.

    3. Membership Expansion:
    o Global paid memberships rose to 302 million, with a record annual net addition of 41 million subscribers.

    4. Content Success:
    o Netflix dominated engagement metrics, achieving more viewing hours than its competitors combined.
    o Top content included Squid Game Season 2, Carry-On, and the Jake Paul vs. Mike Tyson fight—the most streamed sporting event ever.

    Q4 2024 Highlights
    1. Quarterly Revenue:
    o Revenue for Q4 increased 16 per cent year-over-year to $10.2 billion, or 19 per cent on a currency-neutral basis.
    2. Net Membership Additions:
    o Added 19 million net paid subscribers, marking the highest quarterly growth in Netflix’s history.
    3. Profitability:
    o Operating income rose by 52 per cent year-over-year to $2.3 billion.
    o Earnings per share (EPS) doubled, reaching $4.27 compared to $2.11 in Q4 2023.
    4. Content Performance:
    o Blockbusters like Squid Game Season 2 and holiday NFL games drove record viewership.

    2025 Strategic Outlook
    Netflix is poised for continued growth, focusing on content innovation, monetization, and global expansion.
    1. Revenue and Profitability:
    o Projected revenue: $43.5-$44.5 billion, reflecting 12 per cent-14 per cent growth.
    o Operating margin forecast: 29 per cent, up from 27 per cent in 2024.
    2. Content Plans:
    o Return of fan-favorites like Stranger Things, Wednesday, and Ginny & Georgia.
    o New live programming, including FIFA Women’s World Cup rights and NFL Christmas Day games.
    o Expansion of gaming, with the successful Squid Game: Unleashed and cloud gaming trials.
    3. Advertising Strategy:
    o The ad-supported tier accounted for 55 per cent of sign-ups in ad-available countries in Q4.
    o Planned rollout of first-party ad-tech in the U.S. by Q2 2025 to enhance targeting and engagement for advertisers.
    4. Free Cash Flow and Debt Management:
    o Expected free cash flow: ~$8 billion.
    o Reduction of $1.8 billion in bonds due in 2025 using proceeds from 2024 debt offerings.

    Netflix Co-CEO Ted Sarandos revealed that the company is eyeing streaming of sports in the near future. (Do we expect some amount of cricket rights competition heating up going forward?  Sarandos said; “Right now, we believe that the live events business is where we really want to be, and sports is a very important part of that, but it is a part of that expansion.”

    The company also unearthed new price points with the standard monthly subscription without advertisements will costing  $17.99, up from $15.49; the Standard monthly package with ads will rising from $6.99 to $7.99; 4K video quality subscriptions will be priced at $24.99 as compared to $22.99 now. This new price will first roll out in north America and will be followed by Europe and Apac later.

    The hope is that the price increase will push customers towards the ad supported tier which will mean higher ARPUs for Netflix. 

  • Airtel Q3 FY22: 5.4% revenue growth QoQ led by ARPU increase

    Airtel Q3 FY22: 5.4% revenue growth QoQ led by ARPU increase

    Mumbai: Telecom major Bharti Airtel on Wednesday announced its third quarter FY 2022 results. The company has posted quarterly revenues of Rs 29,867 crore, up 18.3 per cent year-on-year backed by strong and consistent performance delivery across the portfolio. It reported net income (after exceptional items) of Rs 830 crore.

    The telecom company’s India business saw quarterly revenues of Rs 20,913 crore which was up by 17.9 per cent YoY. Its India customer base stands at ~356 million.

    Its mobile services revenues were up by 19.1 per cent YoY led by an increase in average revenue per user (ARPU). Its mobile ARPUs increased to Rs 163 during the quarter versus Rs 146 in the same quarter previous year. Mobile data consumption increased by 33.8 per cent YoY at a rate of 18.3 Gb per month.

    Additionally, Airtel’s 4G customers increased by three million on a quarter-on-quarter basis to reach 195.5 million and account for 61 per cent of its total base.

    The company’s home business saw 40.4 per cent YoY growth led by strong customer additions. Home business witnessed 341,000 customer net additions in the quarter to reach a total base of 4.16 million. Its Digital TV customer base stood at 18.1 million during the same period. “Digital TV continues to improve its market position with steady revenue and customer base,” said the statement.

    Airtel Business revenues were up by 13.4 per cent YoY backed by strong demand for data portfolio and emerging businesses.

    During the quarter, Google announced that it would invest $1 billion in Airtel as part of its Google for India Digitization Fund. Airtel also announced a joint venture with Hughes Communications to become the largest satellite service operator in India.  

    “We have delivered another quarter of sustained performance across all our business segments,” said Bharti Airtel India and South Asia MD and CEO Gopal Vittal. “Overall sequential revenue growth was at 5.4 per cent and EBITDA margins came in at 49.9 per cent. The recent tariff revision for mobile services has gone down well and we are exiting the quarter with an industry leading ARPU of Rs 163. The full impact of the revised mobile tariffs, however, will be visible in the fourth quarter. Our Enterprise, Homes and Africa business continue to deliver strongly, with steady increase in contribution to the overall mix of the portfolio. Our balance sheet is robust and we are now generating healthy free cash flows. This has enabled us to recently prepay some of our spectrum liabilities to the Government thereby reducing the interest burden.”

    He further stated, “Google’s recent investment is a strong validation of Airtel’s role in being a leading pioneer of India’s digital revolution. Our emerging digital services portfolio across Airtel IQ, AdTech, digital marketplace, Nxtra and digital banking positions us well to build an Airtel of the future.”

  • Vodafone Idea records revenue growth of 2.8 per cent QoQ in Q2 FY2022

    Vodafone Idea records revenue growth of 2.8 per cent QoQ in Q2 FY2022

    Mumbai: Vodafone Idea recorded revenue growth of 2.8 per cent quarter-on-quarter (QoQ) in Q2 FY2022. The telecom company reported revenues of Rs 94.1 billion for the quarter.

    EBIDTA for the quarter improved to Rs 38.6 billion up by 4.6 per cent QoQ. EBITDA margins improved to 41.1 per cent over 40.5 per cent on a year-on-year basis. Capex spends for the quarter was Rs 13 billion.

    Vodafone Idea’s subscriber base stands at 253 million, a decline of 2.4 million YoY. The company saw a healthy addition of 3.3 million subscribers to its 4G base which stands at 116.2 million. The company reported improved subscriber churn at 2.9 per cent vs 3.5 per cent last year for the corresponding quarter.

    The company reported improved ARPUs of Rs 109 up by 5.3 per cent QoQ. “This quarter we had taken certain pricing initiatives to improve ARPU, in line with our stated strategy. We increased the entry level prepaid pricing plan from Rs. 49 to Rs. 79, in a phased manner, as well as increased the tariffs in some postpaid plans,” said the statement.

    The company’s total gross debt (excluding lease liabilities and including interest accrued but not due) stands at Rs. 1947.8 billion, comprising of deferred spectrum payment obligations of Rs. 1086.1 billion, AGR liability of Rs. 634.0 billion that is due to the government and debt from banks and financial institutions of Rs. 227.7 billion.

    “We welcome the Government’s landmark reform package which addresses several industry concerns and provides immediate relief to the financial stress in the sector,” said Vodafone Idea chief executive officer Ravinder Takkar. “During the last quarter, we witnessed a recovery in our operating momentum as the economy has started to gradually open up aided by the ongoing rapid vaccination drive. We continue to focus on executing our strategy to improve our competitive position and win in the marketplace.”

  • “Our carriage bill is down 30-35%; subscription up 14-15%”: Nikhil Gandhi

    “Our carriage bill is down 30-35%; subscription up 14-15%”: Nikhil Gandhi

    2015 will be remembered as a memorable year for Disney India’s TV biz. The mouse house took its TV channel distribution in its own hands when it terminated its joint venture with the Viacom outfit Indiacast.  For several years it had experimented with other distribution partners like Sun Distribution Services to Star Den, both of which are non-existent now.

    A new venture Disney Media Networks was set up and media vet Nikhil Gandhi – who was responsibile for revenue and profitability across Disney India media channels comprising of youth channels – Bindass and kids channels – Disney Channel, Disney Junior, Disney XD and Hungama TV, movies channels – UTV Movies and UTV Action –  was given its charge.

    His challenge: to jiggle out distribution and subscription  revenues from India’s fragmented cable TV ecosystem, while keeping affiliate fees under control even as he ensured carriage of Disney India’s eight channel bouquet.

    Six months down the line, Gandhi seems to have done well, if one goes by this exclusive interview to indiantelevision.com’s Anirban Roy Choudhury.  He speaks about the challenges he has and continues to face, and why he is still optimistic.

    Excerpts:

    How has the journey been so far? What made Disney decide to distribute its TV channels on its own?

    It has been a fabulous six months. The market has been receptive to whatever we are doing, which has been a major boost for us. We have been in the business for over 10 years now and we have been distributing through different partners. We started with Star, then we went to Sun and then to IndiaCast, following which we were on an agency relationship with them. Therefore we needed to take a call on what we really wanted to do.

    I think our network is one to reckon with. We have six per cent viewership share which is probably five or six times compared to the one following us. So we are the fifth largest broadcast network. That’s why we thought we could go out and take the business in our hands and see what we could do at the distribution level.

    One, it was also important to get our carriage fee bill down, which each  broadcaster is trying his level best to do. Two and the most important one was to get the subscription business in order. 

    What are the challenges that you faced and how did you counter them?

    We had to inform the ecosystem – the MSOs’ and the DTH players about Disney Media Networks, that we have eigh channels, we have very high premium brands. We had to tell them what we are and what value we could add to them. I think that at certain point after our initial efforts, they did realise that they had never seen Disney as an entity in its own right. They began to understand the value that we brought to the table in terms of packaging. They realised we were the leaders in kids and youth channels and we had a sizeable movie business. We were not just another bouquet, we were leaders of sorts. The challenge was to communicate that and the team did a fantastic job.

    I think that the deals that we have struck are our biggest achievement. We have reached very big milestones in the first year itself. To begin with we have got our carriage bill down by 30 to 35 per cent and at the same time we have taken our subscription revenue up 14 to 15 per cent and it happened after rounds of negotiations and discussions with our carriage partners.

    When you talk about distribution success, do you mean a pan India success or is it a particular market?

    It is a pan India success for us. We are distributed nationally. Our channels reach east, west, north and south. And that is because of the fantastic work done by our teams on ground. We got a fantastic bunch of talented people from across different fields. They have successfully communicated what really Disney Media Networks stands for, and most of the negotiations are done by them. So whenever we talk about success or numbers, it is pan India that we are talking about, and not a particular market.

    What is your opinion about the CPS model? If rolled out properly, will it enhance your subscription revenue?

    CPS is there…and yet it’s not there as a whole. In phases I and II, we know what is going on. Phases III and IV will take shape with time. It’s good that we’ve digitized, now what really matters is how it is being addressed, how the CAF is filled up and how it is packaged. 

    It is a great move forward, and as a broadcaster and content provider, we can only add value to the process by giving superior content and a brand which will enhance ARPUs.

    CPS will happen as the progression of packaging happens and the progression of addressability happens.

    The MSO-LCO equation needs to change and become more mature. Yes, the moves are very positive, but we are still not there, there are areas where we need some amount of investor players to come and change the game at least from a mind-set point of view. CPS will go up with ARPU going up.  And when there is a transparent system in place that enables addressability, subscription revenue will move up in the right direction.

    What is your opinion on the regulators stand so far?

    The regulators have been very pro industry, which is a great thing. We have seen how there was a hard stance when it came to the phase III deadline. So I think it’s a very bold move, because for them also, it’s about getting the industry which is so big in size organised and deriving the maximum out of it in terms of entertainment tax and other revenue generating propositions. And an organised platform is always more transparent, and transparency is the need of the hour for the industry. So I think the regulator’s stand so far has been immensely pro industry.

    Do you think content, if paid for in India, will grow?

    ARPUs’ have been flat for last 10 years. So obviously India is not paying for content, but the moot point is that India is capable of paying more. We, at Disney, are manufacturers; we are content providers. There are platforms and there are wholesalers and retailers involved.  It is the retailers and the wholesalers who need to drive the ARPU and there are many elements on which it all depends.

    At a pricing level we are restricted by the RIO model, and then on the ground level there is the LCO who by no means is interested as it might hurt him. I think to drive payment for content, the LCO – MSO equation needs to change, DTH needs to play its role and it all needs to happen in a collaborated manner.

    I think there is a need for standard pricing similar to any other industry. You buy toothpaste the price is the same everywhere.  In India there is a legacy involved in the way it has been run. The legacy needs to change. It is changing, we expected it to change fast, but it’s actually changing at a snail’s pace.

    Can the broadcasters not play a role in ensuring higher ARPU?

    Look at what the broadcasters are offering these days. Look at the quality of the content. It’s premium content created with superior sophistication. There are HD channels offering HD content. A few of them have rolled out 4K channels.

     So while ARPU has remained same over the last 10 years, the investment on content did not stop. It kept on going. New formats, acquisitions, new and bold ways of storytelling have been explored, and then there are the additions in the number of channels every year.

    Rs 300 for 50 channels 10 years ago, has now become 250 channels of superior quality for the same old price. We have witnessed a few ARPU movements at least in the metros with DTH and a few MSOs, but these are minuscule movements. The movements need to happen much faster because that’s where the motivation is. From a broadcaster’s point of view, there is nothing that we can do but play the game as per the nature of the business.

    You spoke about collaboration, recently we witnessed switching off of signals, what is your opinion on such acts?  

    Firstly, the switching off of services and disturbing the consumer at a fundamental level is very unfair, it should not happen. There could be differences on the negotiation table, but that by no means should disturb the end consumer. 

    The fact that the consumer is deprived of a service in itself is very sad.  I don’t subscribe to such negotiations. We have also gone through highs and lows in our negotiation process but, at the end of the day, you cannot starve your consumer of superior content, or any content for that matter, because the consumer has subscribed for it. The ecosystem is such that the business is dependent on ad sales, and that is why the switch offs’ happen.

    What should lead the business, subscription or ad revenue?

    Ad sales should be an icing on the cake, subscription revenue should steer the business. Look at the mature markets – subscription revenue is leading the business, the negotiations that happen there are at a different level.

    Fundamentally the broadcast business has to be a subscription led business. You can have an advertising-based play that we are seeing with the FTA’s and that’s majorly because of the huge population of our country and the market size and the reach that TV offers. But a premium pay channel creating original superior content needs to be pay first.

    What is your take on the growing OTT business?

    At the heart of the OTT ecosystem is bandwidth and the bandwidth needs to improve.  What will be interesting to see is if it becomes subscription based (SVOD) or advertising based video on demand (AVOD). 

    Now if you are providing superior content for an AVOD model you are not creating a great environment as such. It’s all about how you form the habit. Consumers who consume OTT content are paying about Rs 1,000 for data, and we tend to think that the same consumer will not pay for  content. This mentality is not a long term one, we need to think 10 years ahead and then take steps.

    Smart TVs are in place; people are talking about 8K.  There are great leaps in terms of technology, but if we don’t take the correct steps, we won’t be able to get value out of the OTT business.

    Will you make yourself available on OTT platforms? Star has Hotstar, SPN has Sony Liv, ZEE has a couple of them and Viacom is launching VOOT. Is Disney also looking towards launching an OTT platform?

    Anywhere where consumption is there, we will make ourselves present. That’s the way forward for us. We do have plans, but we are at a very nascent stage as far as OTT is concerned. As a linear service we will be available on all OTT platforms, but when it comes to launching our own venture we will evaluate when the time is right.

    Where are you generating more subscription revenue from, DTH or cable?

    DTH has a slight edge over cable when it comes to our subscription revenue. We are gradually moving towards level contributions from both the platforms. Now with DAS phase III, I think the headroom for growth is massive in the case of cable. At this stage I think that DTH, given its organised and transparent nature, has the edge.

    Is it the bouquet mode of distribution that you are looking at, at this stage?

    Most of our deals are all bouquet offerings, if there is any platform that requires a youth offering or kids offering or a movie offering, such deals happen at a very high CPS price and we create those packages. We are there on a la carte as an offering, but there is a very small set of consumers who subscribe to the service. So it’s largely all bouquet.

    What is it that Disney Media Networks is looking for in the foreseeable future?

    I have mandated the team in Disney that the subscription business needs to overtake the ad sales business over the next three years’  and that will change the entire ecosystem. An MSO cannot then threaten me with a switch off and that’s what we are targeting. We were at about 65:35 ratio, now we have become 60:40 so we are moving towards that direction. Over time the target is to make it 40:60 or 30:70 for that matter.

     

  • “Our carriage bill is down 30-35%; subscription up 14-15%”: Nikhil Gandhi

    “Our carriage bill is down 30-35%; subscription up 14-15%”: Nikhil Gandhi

    2015 will be remembered as a memorable year for Disney India’s TV biz. The mouse house took its TV channel distribution in its own hands when it terminated its joint venture with the Viacom outfit Indiacast.  For several years it had experimented with other distribution partners like Sun Distribution Services to Star Den, both of which are non-existent now.

    A new venture Disney Media Networks was set up and media vet Nikhil Gandhi – who was responsibile for revenue and profitability across Disney India media channels comprising of youth channels – Bindass and kids channels – Disney Channel, Disney Junior, Disney XD and Hungama TV, movies channels – UTV Movies and UTV Action –  was given its charge.

    His challenge: to jiggle out distribution and subscription  revenues from India’s fragmented cable TV ecosystem, while keeping affiliate fees under control even as he ensured carriage of Disney India’s eight channel bouquet.

    Six months down the line, Gandhi seems to have done well, if one goes by this exclusive interview to indiantelevision.com’s Anirban Roy Choudhury.  He speaks about the challenges he has and continues to face, and why he is still optimistic.

    Excerpts:

    How has the journey been so far? What made Disney decide to distribute its TV channels on its own?

    It has been a fabulous six months. The market has been receptive to whatever we are doing, which has been a major boost for us. We have been in the business for over 10 years now and we have been distributing through different partners. We started with Star, then we went to Sun and then to IndiaCast, following which we were on an agency relationship with them. Therefore we needed to take a call on what we really wanted to do.

    I think our network is one to reckon with. We have six per cent viewership share which is probably five or six times compared to the one following us. So we are the fifth largest broadcast network. That’s why we thought we could go out and take the business in our hands and see what we could do at the distribution level.

    One, it was also important to get our carriage fee bill down, which each  broadcaster is trying his level best to do. Two and the most important one was to get the subscription business in order. 

    What are the challenges that you faced and how did you counter them?

    We had to inform the ecosystem – the MSOs’ and the DTH players about Disney Media Networks, that we have eigh channels, we have very high premium brands. We had to tell them what we are and what value we could add to them. I think that at certain point after our initial efforts, they did realise that they had never seen Disney as an entity in its own right. They began to understand the value that we brought to the table in terms of packaging. They realised we were the leaders in kids and youth channels and we had a sizeable movie business. We were not just another bouquet, we were leaders of sorts. The challenge was to communicate that and the team did a fantastic job.

    I think that the deals that we have struck are our biggest achievement. We have reached very big milestones in the first year itself. To begin with we have got our carriage bill down by 30 to 35 per cent and at the same time we have taken our subscription revenue up 14 to 15 per cent and it happened after rounds of negotiations and discussions with our carriage partners.

    When you talk about distribution success, do you mean a pan India success or is it a particular market?

    It is a pan India success for us. We are distributed nationally. Our channels reach east, west, north and south. And that is because of the fantastic work done by our teams on ground. We got a fantastic bunch of talented people from across different fields. They have successfully communicated what really Disney Media Networks stands for, and most of the negotiations are done by them. So whenever we talk about success or numbers, it is pan India that we are talking about, and not a particular market.

    What is your opinion about the CPS model? If rolled out properly, will it enhance your subscription revenue?

    CPS is there…and yet it’s not there as a whole. In phases I and II, we know what is going on. Phases III and IV will take shape with time. It’s good that we’ve digitized, now what really matters is how it is being addressed, how the CAF is filled up and how it is packaged. 

    It is a great move forward, and as a broadcaster and content provider, we can only add value to the process by giving superior content and a brand which will enhance ARPUs.

    CPS will happen as the progression of packaging happens and the progression of addressability happens.

    The MSO-LCO equation needs to change and become more mature. Yes, the moves are very positive, but we are still not there, there are areas where we need some amount of investor players to come and change the game at least from a mind-set point of view. CPS will go up with ARPU going up.  And when there is a transparent system in place that enables addressability, subscription revenue will move up in the right direction.

    What is your opinion on the regulators stand so far?

    The regulators have been very pro industry, which is a great thing. We have seen how there was a hard stance when it came to the phase III deadline. So I think it’s a very bold move, because for them also, it’s about getting the industry which is so big in size organised and deriving the maximum out of it in terms of entertainment tax and other revenue generating propositions. And an organised platform is always more transparent, and transparency is the need of the hour for the industry. So I think the regulator’s stand so far has been immensely pro industry.

    Do you think content, if paid for in India, will grow?

    ARPUs’ have been flat for last 10 years. So obviously India is not paying for content, but the moot point is that India is capable of paying more. We, at Disney, are manufacturers; we are content providers. There are platforms and there are wholesalers and retailers involved.  It is the retailers and the wholesalers who need to drive the ARPU and there are many elements on which it all depends.

    At a pricing level we are restricted by the RIO model, and then on the ground level there is the LCO who by no means is interested as it might hurt him. I think to drive payment for content, the LCO – MSO equation needs to change, DTH needs to play its role and it all needs to happen in a collaborated manner.

    I think there is a need for standard pricing similar to any other industry. You buy toothpaste the price is the same everywhere.  In India there is a legacy involved in the way it has been run. The legacy needs to change. It is changing, we expected it to change fast, but it’s actually changing at a snail’s pace.

    Can the broadcasters not play a role in ensuring higher ARPU?

    Look at what the broadcasters are offering these days. Look at the quality of the content. It’s premium content created with superior sophistication. There are HD channels offering HD content. A few of them have rolled out 4K channels.

     So while ARPU has remained same over the last 10 years, the investment on content did not stop. It kept on going. New formats, acquisitions, new and bold ways of storytelling have been explored, and then there are the additions in the number of channels every year.

    Rs 300 for 50 channels 10 years ago, has now become 250 channels of superior quality for the same old price. We have witnessed a few ARPU movements at least in the metros with DTH and a few MSOs, but these are minuscule movements. The movements need to happen much faster because that’s where the motivation is. From a broadcaster’s point of view, there is nothing that we can do but play the game as per the nature of the business.

    You spoke about collaboration, recently we witnessed switching off of signals, what is your opinion on such acts?  

    Firstly, the switching off of services and disturbing the consumer at a fundamental level is very unfair, it should not happen. There could be differences on the negotiation table, but that by no means should disturb the end consumer. 

    The fact that the consumer is deprived of a service in itself is very sad.  I don’t subscribe to such negotiations. We have also gone through highs and lows in our negotiation process but, at the end of the day, you cannot starve your consumer of superior content, or any content for that matter, because the consumer has subscribed for it. The ecosystem is such that the business is dependent on ad sales, and that is why the switch offs’ happen.

    What should lead the business, subscription or ad revenue?

    Ad sales should be an icing on the cake, subscription revenue should steer the business. Look at the mature markets – subscription revenue is leading the business, the negotiations that happen there are at a different level.

    Fundamentally the broadcast business has to be a subscription led business. You can have an advertising-based play that we are seeing with the FTA’s and that’s majorly because of the huge population of our country and the market size and the reach that TV offers. But a premium pay channel creating original superior content needs to be pay first.

    What is your take on the growing OTT business?

    At the heart of the OTT ecosystem is bandwidth and the bandwidth needs to improve.  What will be interesting to see is if it becomes subscription based (SVOD) or advertising based video on demand (AVOD). 

    Now if you are providing superior content for an AVOD model you are not creating a great environment as such. It’s all about how you form the habit. Consumers who consume OTT content are paying about Rs 1,000 for data, and we tend to think that the same consumer will not pay for  content. This mentality is not a long term one, we need to think 10 years ahead and then take steps.

    Smart TVs are in place; people are talking about 8K.  There are great leaps in terms of technology, but if we don’t take the correct steps, we won’t be able to get value out of the OTT business.

    Will you make yourself available on OTT platforms? Star has Hotstar, SPN has Sony Liv, ZEE has a couple of them and Viacom is launching VOOT. Is Disney also looking towards launching an OTT platform?

    Anywhere where consumption is there, we will make ourselves present. That’s the way forward for us. We do have plans, but we are at a very nascent stage as far as OTT is concerned. As a linear service we will be available on all OTT platforms, but when it comes to launching our own venture we will evaluate when the time is right.

    Where are you generating more subscription revenue from, DTH or cable?

    DTH has a slight edge over cable when it comes to our subscription revenue. We are gradually moving towards level contributions from both the platforms. Now with DAS phase III, I think the headroom for growth is massive in the case of cable. At this stage I think that DTH, given its organised and transparent nature, has the edge.

    Is it the bouquet mode of distribution that you are looking at, at this stage?

    Most of our deals are all bouquet offerings, if there is any platform that requires a youth offering or kids offering or a movie offering, such deals happen at a very high CPS price and we create those packages. We are there on a la carte as an offering, but there is a very small set of consumers who subscribe to the service. So it’s largely all bouquet.

    What is it that Disney Media Networks is looking for in the foreseeable future?

    I have mandated the team in Disney that the subscription business needs to overtake the ad sales business over the next three years’  and that will change the entire ecosystem. An MSO cannot then threaten me with a switch off and that’s what we are targeting. We were at about 65:35 ratio, now we have become 60:40 so we are moving towards that direction. Over time the target is to make it 40:60 or 30:70 for that matter.

     

  • Videocon d2h’s Saurabh Dhoot: HD, big driver of ARPUs

    Videocon d2h’s Saurabh Dhoot: HD, big driver of ARPUs

    BALI: He is young, but the young Dhoot scion’s debut on the Asian stage at the Asia Pacific Operators Summit (APOS) in Bali was pretty impressive by most yardsticks. Dhoot dismissed any suggestions about DTH operators getting together to bring down content costs. “We at Videocon d2h have very good relations with broadcasters. We don’t have a single court case against any of them; we don’t have any contentious disagreements over packages. And we don’t want to get into any complex arrangements,” he said.

     

    He revealed that the newest DTH player has about 11 million gross subs out of which about seven million plus are active.  “It’s all about how everything is being executed,” he said. “And we are doing it right. The top two or three players have almost 70-80 per cent of active subs. India is a land of opportunities; there is space for everyone even for a FreeDish.”

     

    The next phase for the DTH players is going to be about HD, he emphasised.  “We embraced HD from day one.  HD is a game changer in our plan. HD sub base will treble—that will make a great difference to ARPUs.”

     

    Additionally, he said that packaging of products such as kid’s packs will make a difference. “We need to work with our broadcast partners to work out new packages,” he highlighted.

     

    He revealed that the company was generating cash from operations, excluding finance costs, depreciation and amortization.

     

    One of the big impediments to growth of the DTH business is regulatory is Saurabh Dhoot’s view. “The 30 per cent entertainment tax in some states almost equals to the tax on alcohol and cigarettes. We as an industry need to come together to raise our voice. It is archaic and needs to be changed,” he concluded.

  • “We will focus on compelling sports content, across multiple sports and languages”

    “We will focus on compelling sports content, across multiple sports and languages”

    By the end of 2011, Star had clearly established itself as the premier entertainment network in India and for Indians worldwide, with 400 million people watching our drama and movie channels in seven languages every day. In one of the most competitive markets in the world, we had established substantial leadership in every genre and in most geographies.And while Star and Fox had built an attractive franchise in entertainment, in sports, very unlike our traditional approach, we had tucked the business away in a joint venture with ESPN that was not managed or controlled by us.
     

    Starting in April 2012, this started to change. We acquired the rights to India’s international cricket calendar that month; a few months later, our parent company bought out its partner from the ESPN Star Sports joint venture in Asia with the intent to roll the Indian part of the joint venture into Star; we launched two new domestic leagues in university cricket and hockey; and we renewed the rights to English Premier League football with a substantive bid. All in all, we invested a billion dollars in less than six months.As a result, by the end of 2012, we had established ourselves as India’s leading sports broadcaster.

    So, why did we get aggressive on a business where the traditional wisdom is that no one makes money?

    Many experts mused loudly that Star had found a way to quickly kill a highly profitable franchise built on leadership in entertainment across genres and languages. I still run into these questions every day. Just two days ago, a leading Indian business daily ran a big story wondering why Star had entered a business that usually never makes money. After all, one sports broadcaster had gone bankrupt trying to pay the bills for the Indian cricket rights, another is struggling to break even and yet another is trying to run a sports business without much sports content. Why would Star make such a big, bold move particularly at a time when the overall

     sentiment on the India story has gone cold?

    So, again, why did we do this? Did we lose the plot?

    In order to answer this question, it is important to take a close look at a few facts, some conventional wisdom and many myths that surround the Indian sports business.

    Everyone in this industry knows one thing. India is a single sport country. It is a country where cricket is a religion, where passion for the game is deep and where the country shuts down when the national team is playing.

    And yet, this is only half the truth. Even for a big match where India plays arch rival Pakistan, consumers do not view the entire match, they view only 15 per cent of the match on an average. The reality outside of really big tournaments is even starker. Out of more than 1000 hours that an Indian viewer spent watching television last year, only 20 hours was on cricket, about 2 percent.This is actually less than the time spent on a single successful show on Star Plus!Consumption of domestic cricket is even worse. Although matches are played round the year, only 50 matches are broadcast on television in a year.And very often, the best of the country’s talent do not participate in these games.

    Imagine if soccer crazy England manifested its interest in the game only by watching the FIFA World Cup once in four years and only really paid attention when England played Spain or Italy. That is the equivalent of India’s current state in cricket viewership. In fact, until the Board of Control for Cricket in India introduced the Indian Premier League, there was not even a domestic league, the equivalent of an EPL or an NFL.

    So, India is not a single-sport country, it is at the moment a zero-sport country that occasionally follows 11 Indian cricketers when they play a big marquee tournament.

    For us, though, the more interesting question is why this happened, and what has led to the current state of affairs. We believe that the biggest culprit is the Indian sports broadcaster. Let me explain why.

    A big shift happened in the last twenty years in cricket in the profile of its followership. It moved from being a sport for the urban elite to one that has a mass following across the country.The BCCI deserves credit for this transformation by making substantial investments to improve the quality of stadiums and infrastructure around the country.Today, some of the country’s best cricketers come from outside the large cities; and small towns host international matches on a regular basis. It is also a country where less than 1 per cent of the population has actually watched any sport in a stadium.

    And, yet, sports broadcasters have not made any effort to make their programming more relevant to the new audience.

    In a country where less than 10 per cent of the population understands English, and a much smaller number are native speakers, sports broadcasters programmed only in one language: guess which one? English. This, despite the fact that everyone knew that the big growth in entertainment consumption in the country came when programming on satellite switched to Hindi and other local languages. And even for the very few that actually understand English, it is quite a world they have to navigate to understand the diversity of commentator accents on television: from the Westernised Indian accent to the local Indian accent to the Aussie accent to the Kiwi accent to the Scottish accent to the West Indian accent. It is almost as if the sports broadcasters were not relaying sports, they were running extraordinarily painful accent training programs on television for the very small English speaking audience that came to watch in the first place.

    The pain did not stop there. Around the world, sports graphics is used to bring the game closer to the viewer and to help the viewer understand the game. Yet, in cricket, graphics is more a nuanced tool meant to tickle the sensibilities of the few deep masters of the game, not the 99 per cent of the country that has never even been to a stadium. The same story extends to television commentary too. Rather than being the anchors of the game who explain the game and bring the excitement of the stadium to the viewer’s living room, the cricket commentator is invariably an expert talking to his peers.

    It is no surprise then that the Indian viewer does not spend much time on sports on television.

    But, it would be unfair to put all the blame on just the sports broadcaster. The broadcaster has had many fellow partners-in-crime in ensuring that sports viewership remains miniscule.

    It’s biggest partner has been the cable and satellite platform. Around the world, sports have been a huge driver of revenue and profit for pay television operators. In India every operator complains about the low ARPUs they get from the business. And yet, instead of using compelling sports content to get more money from consumers and reduce churn, the cable and satellite operators make it difficult for their subscribers to discover and develop a habit of consuming sports.

    And this attitude shows up in the distribution of sports channels, which are treated less like the mass product that they should be, and more as premium add-on products for a small, rich, niche audience.

    To make matters worse, these platforms turn off the channel when a marquee event is not on. While this may have made sense in the old, bandwidth-limited analog world where you could only put 20-30 channels, it makes no sense that even DTH operators are employing the same tactic when they have 300 channels to offer. Compare this to other content categories. They do not switch off a news channel when a breaking news event is not on; they do not turn off the movies channel when a blockbuster is not on. But this is exactly what they do in sports. It is the worst kind of behaviour that limits the ability to build habit for the sports fan.

    Even worse is the behaviour of a few platforms that have created their own channels that switch to the most marquee sports events of multiple broadcasters. While they hide under the pretence that they are addressing a consumer need, what they are really doing is illegal piracy. But what is distressing is that they do not understand the long term damage they are doing to the business. Instead of multiplying choices and triggering demand, they are creating a structure that will ensure that viewers only watch a few cricket events.

    Put together, it is therefore not a surprise that the reach of sports channels lags that of even niche channels like Discovery and MTV!

    So in a zero-sport country, sports broadcasters and pay-TV platforms have worked very hard to make sure that it is only the deeply committed, rich expert fan comfortable with English that actually watches a match on television.

    Of course, if the sports broadcaster and the platform have done their part in eroding the value of sports franchise, the regulator and the government have not been far behind.

     
    For the regulator and the government, the overwhelming objective must be to further consumer interest. It is in the interest of consumers to have more and more sports available for them. It is in the interest of any country to have more and more people play sports. And the reality is that people play sports only when they passionately follow games and teams. If India has to break its poor status in international sports and use sports to create a virtuous cycle for the larger society, then the regulator and the polityhave a powerful role to play.

    I am reminded of an incident that happened in Canada last year. When the hockey union went on strike, the prime minister of the country got involved because his fear was that a prolonged strike would have an adverse impact on the GDP of Canada! More than anything, it showed the power of sports and its ability to be a huge economic growth engine. It also shows the lens with which politicians and executives approach sports globally.

    However, the regulator, the bureaucracy and the political class have not shown such an enlightened approach to sports in India.

    Of all things, the regulator has imposed a cap on prices. A price cap is never good for the long term health of a business but it is especially absurd in the context of sports, where the market we operate in is truly global, where the acquisition costs for rights reflects a global market.

     What is even more absurd is that a news channel, a general entertainment channel, an education channel and a sports channel are all capped at the same level, without any linkage to the underlying cost of content or the relevance of its shelf life. Shockingly, Star Sports which has the most compelling portfolio of content in the country can charge no more than the country’s weakest sports channel with practically no sports on it.

    To make matters worse, the government has mandated that the most expensive sports events are events of national importance that need to be made available to the public broadcaster – who in turn not only retransmits an unencrypted signal to all its subscribers for free, but also makes it available to private platforms to carry the content under a statutorily mandated ‘must carry’ law. So even as you are making no effort to ensure wider coverage for all sports for the long term, you are killing the economics of the sports broadcaster by forcing it to share the most popular content today without adequate compensationand also legitimizing piracy by permitting access to sports content by platforms for free.

    The entire eco system has therefore unwittingly conspired to ensure that sports broadcast is unprofitable, sports consumption is limited and sports followership is minimal.

    So, the question comes back to: if things are looking so bad, why did Star decide to make a big push into sports?

    For only one reason.The current state of affairs is just not right, is not sustainable and is not good for anyone. Somebody needs to change this unhealthy equilibrium which is hurtingthe country, the consumer and the media industry.

    And as the country’s media leader, and as a company that has faced such hurdles before and still managed to build an outstanding franchise, we believe that we can shape this change.

    Clearly, change will not happen overnight. It will require a lot of effort to break the status quo. We will have to ensure that we create compelling sports content, across multiple sports, across multiple languages, with an economic structure that will add value for all.

    But, we are patient, as we always have been in India. And our history, our parentage and the coherence of our approach gives us confidence that we will build India’s first successful and profitable sports franchise.