ITV

Tag: FCC

  • TRAI issues fresh paper seeking views on Net Neutrality definition

    TRAI issues fresh paper seeking views on Net Neutrality definition

    NEW DELHI: India’s telecoms regulator Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) yesterday floated another consultation paper on Net Neutrality (NN) seeking to establish a framework that allows Internet users the `freedom of expression’ and non discriminatory access to the Net.

    In the discussion paper, TRAI stated having identified the India-specific context, the next challenge is to examine what should be the country’s policy response on issues relating to any form of discriminatory treatment in the provision of access to the Internet and seeks views on framing a regulatory framework that would ensure that access to content on the internet is neither ‘blocked’, ‘throttled’ nor ‘preferentially treated’ by ISPs and telecom service providers (TSPs).

    “The idea of equal or nondiscriminatory treatment of traffic that flows on the Internet resonates in the NN principles adopted by various jurisdictions, although the term itself does not necessary feature in their regulatory instruments. The EU regulations, for instance, create ‘common rules to safeguard equal and nondiscriminatory treatment of traffic’ without expressly using the term NN. Given that key terms such as `equal treatment’ are still contested, many have urged against a rigid definition of NN. This was also the view expressed by the DoT (Department of Telecoms) committee in its report where it stated that ‘the crux of the matter is that we need not hard code the definition of Net Neutrality but assimilate the core principles of Net Neutrality and shape the actions around them’,” TRAI said in the consultation paper.

    The issue of Net Neutrality has been occupying Indian mind space for the last 13 months with pro and anti neutrality views floating around without actually addressing the issue that is also a topic of debate in developed markets like the US, Europe and in Asia. TRAI, which has dealt with the issue in a piecemeal fashion (zero rating plans), for example, earlier in 2016, refers to US regulator FCC stand on the issue in its present paper. However, with a new government led by President-elect Trump to take over later this month, even FCC stand may change on the issue of Net Neutrality.

    Some of the questions raised by TRAI in its present 60+ pages paper on Net Neutrality include the following:

    # How should “Internet traffic” and providers of “Internet services” be un-derstood in the NN context?

    # Should certain types of specialised services, enterprise solutions, Inter¬net of Things, etc be excluded from its scope?

    How should such terms be defined?

    # How should services provided by content delivery networks and direct interconnection arrangements be treated?

    # In the Indian context, which of the following regulatory approaches would
    be preferable?

    # Whether and how should different categories of traffic be objectively defined from a technical point of view for this purpose?

    # Should application-specific discrimination within a category of traffic be viewed more strictly than discrimination between categories?

    # How should preferential treatment of particular content, activated by a users choice and without any arrangement between a telecom service provider and content provider be treated?

    The paper, however, does seem to highlight that telecom service providers have to deploy certain traffic management practices to ensure that the wireless networks are able to maintain a certain quality of standards. Hence, it also attempts to establish the framework for what it calls “reasonable traffic management practices” to ensure the wireless networks do not get choked or congested, Economic Times reported yesterday evening on its website.

    All stakeholders will have to give in their responses by February 28, 2017after which the telecom regulator will deliberate upon the responses and make its final recommendations to the government.

    ALSO READ

    “There would be a lot on TRAI’s plate in 2017” – RS Sharma

    Free data, net neutrality: Discussion on TRAI paper to be held

    Net Neutrality: Reactions from the consumers provide deep insights

    Net Neutrality: TRAI receives a million mails, Indians awaits judgment day

  • TRAI issues fresh paper seeking views on Net Neutrality definition

    TRAI issues fresh paper seeking views on Net Neutrality definition

    NEW DELHI: India’s telecoms regulator Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) yesterday floated another consultation paper on Net Neutrality (NN) seeking to establish a framework that allows Internet users the `freedom of expression’ and non discriminatory access to the Net.

    In the discussion paper, TRAI stated having identified the India-specific context, the next challenge is to examine what should be the country’s policy response on issues relating to any form of discriminatory treatment in the provision of access to the Internet and seeks views on framing a regulatory framework that would ensure that access to content on the internet is neither ‘blocked’, ‘throttled’ nor ‘preferentially treated’ by ISPs and telecom service providers (TSPs).

    “The idea of equal or nondiscriminatory treatment of traffic that flows on the Internet resonates in the NN principles adopted by various jurisdictions, although the term itself does not necessary feature in their regulatory instruments. The EU regulations, for instance, create ‘common rules to safeguard equal and nondiscriminatory treatment of traffic’ without expressly using the term NN. Given that key terms such as `equal treatment’ are still contested, many have urged against a rigid definition of NN. This was also the view expressed by the DoT (Department of Telecoms) committee in its report where it stated that ‘the crux of the matter is that we need not hard code the definition of Net Neutrality but assimilate the core principles of Net Neutrality and shape the actions around them’,” TRAI said in the consultation paper.

    The issue of Net Neutrality has been occupying Indian mind space for the last 13 months with pro and anti neutrality views floating around without actually addressing the issue that is also a topic of debate in developed markets like the US, Europe and in Asia. TRAI, which has dealt with the issue in a piecemeal fashion (zero rating plans), for example, earlier in 2016, refers to US regulator FCC stand on the issue in its present paper. However, with a new government led by President-elect Trump to take over later this month, even FCC stand may change on the issue of Net Neutrality.

    Some of the questions raised by TRAI in its present 60+ pages paper on Net Neutrality include the following:

    # How should “Internet traffic” and providers of “Internet services” be un-derstood in the NN context?

    # Should certain types of specialised services, enterprise solutions, Inter¬net of Things, etc be excluded from its scope?

    How should such terms be defined?

    # How should services provided by content delivery networks and direct interconnection arrangements be treated?

    # In the Indian context, which of the following regulatory approaches would
    be preferable?

    # Whether and how should different categories of traffic be objectively defined from a technical point of view for this purpose?

    # Should application-specific discrimination within a category of traffic be viewed more strictly than discrimination between categories?

    # How should preferential treatment of particular content, activated by a users choice and without any arrangement between a telecom service provider and content provider be treated?

    The paper, however, does seem to highlight that telecom service providers have to deploy certain traffic management practices to ensure that the wireless networks are able to maintain a certain quality of standards. Hence, it also attempts to establish the framework for what it calls “reasonable traffic management practices” to ensure the wireless networks do not get choked or congested, Economic Times reported yesterday evening on its website.

    All stakeholders will have to give in their responses by February 28, 2017after which the telecom regulator will deliberate upon the responses and make its final recommendations to the government.

    ALSO READ

    “There would be a lot on TRAI’s plate in 2017” – RS Sharma

    Free data, net neutrality: Discussion on TRAI paper to be held

    Net Neutrality: Reactions from the consumers provide deep insights

    Net Neutrality: TRAI receives a million mails, Indians awaits judgment day

  • India lucrative market for 4K UHD STBs: Grand View Research

    India lucrative market for 4K UHD STBs: Grand View Research

    MUMBAI: Here’s a view on the demand for 4K or ultra high definition (UHD) set-top boxes (STBs) in India.

    American research firm Grand View Research Inc has forecast in a new report that India is “poised to emerge as a lucrative market for UHD STBs with the country expected to witness a CAGR substantially higher than the regional (Asia Pacific) average. Several DTH operators such as Tata Sky, Videocon, and Airtel have launched UHD STBs and are attempting to achieve a higher rural penetration with affordable regional packages.”

    The report says that the APAC 4K STB market was valued at just over $50 million in 2015 and will witness a high growth over the next eight years with India leading the charge.

    The Grand View Research Inc analysis states that the global 4K STB market size is projected to reach $7.18 billion by 2024. The growing inclination of the global public towards UHD video viewing can be attributed as the major reason for the 4K STB market growth.

    The demand for media-rich home entertainment services among consumers is increasing and is anticipated to fuel market growth. The growth is further fostered by favourable government initiatives, large-scale digitization programs, and mandatory installation of set-top boxes. Improved standard of living owing to increased purchasing power is positively impacting the industry growth.

    The initiatives undertaken by the Federal Communications Commission for supporting third-party STB manufacturers is paving the way for the expansion of the Ultra High-Definition (UHD) STB industry. The market is anticipated to gain traction in Asia Pacific owing to the strong presence of low-cost set-top box manufacturers, especially in countries such as Korea, Taiwan, and China.

    The increasing penetration of 3D and 4K TVs and escalating demand for large screen displays are fuelling the demand for UHD STBs. Smart features such as STB operability through voice commands given by remote control unit (RCU) is garnering high potential. The computational capabilities of STBs in combination with the advent of quality standards to satiate growing customer expectations have culminated in the STB market growth.

    Further key findings suggest:

    Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) 4K STBs accounted for over 20 per cent of the market share in 2015 and are expected to witness considerable growth over the forecast period. Increasing broadband penetration can be attributed as the major reason for the rise in the market share of IPTV 4K Set-top Box devices.

    The IPTV STB product segment is projected to gain traction owing to benefits such as integration of TV, PC, home phone, and wireless devices offering a high quality of viewing experience to the end-users.

    Key industry participants include ZTE Corporation, SAGEMCOM, Arion Technology, Roku, and Infomir. Manufacturers are emphasizing on UHD STBs incorporated with interactive 4K content to gain a competitive edge in the industry.

    Technology giants such as Apple have managed to make their mark in this competitive industry. The Apple TV device aids the streaming of (Over-The-Top) OTT content and other videos over the internet. The launch of advanced OTT devices such as Google Chromecast media streaming device and Amazon’s Fire TV STBs have opened up new avenues in the industry

  • India lucrative market for 4K UHD STBs: Grand View Research

    India lucrative market for 4K UHD STBs: Grand View Research

    MUMBAI: Here’s a view on the demand for 4K or ultra high definition (UHD) set-top boxes (STBs) in India.

    American research firm Grand View Research Inc has forecast in a new report that India is “poised to emerge as a lucrative market for UHD STBs with the country expected to witness a CAGR substantially higher than the regional (Asia Pacific) average. Several DTH operators such as Tata Sky, Videocon, and Airtel have launched UHD STBs and are attempting to achieve a higher rural penetration with affordable regional packages.”

    The report says that the APAC 4K STB market was valued at just over $50 million in 2015 and will witness a high growth over the next eight years with India leading the charge.

    The Grand View Research Inc analysis states that the global 4K STB market size is projected to reach $7.18 billion by 2024. The growing inclination of the global public towards UHD video viewing can be attributed as the major reason for the 4K STB market growth.

    The demand for media-rich home entertainment services among consumers is increasing and is anticipated to fuel market growth. The growth is further fostered by favourable government initiatives, large-scale digitization programs, and mandatory installation of set-top boxes. Improved standard of living owing to increased purchasing power is positively impacting the industry growth.

    The initiatives undertaken by the Federal Communications Commission for supporting third-party STB manufacturers is paving the way for the expansion of the Ultra High-Definition (UHD) STB industry. The market is anticipated to gain traction in Asia Pacific owing to the strong presence of low-cost set-top box manufacturers, especially in countries such as Korea, Taiwan, and China.

    The increasing penetration of 3D and 4K TVs and escalating demand for large screen displays are fuelling the demand for UHD STBs. Smart features such as STB operability through voice commands given by remote control unit (RCU) is garnering high potential. The computational capabilities of STBs in combination with the advent of quality standards to satiate growing customer expectations have culminated in the STB market growth.

    Further key findings suggest:

    Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) 4K STBs accounted for over 20 per cent of the market share in 2015 and are expected to witness considerable growth over the forecast period. Increasing broadband penetration can be attributed as the major reason for the rise in the market share of IPTV 4K Set-top Box devices.

    The IPTV STB product segment is projected to gain traction owing to benefits such as integration of TV, PC, home phone, and wireless devices offering a high quality of viewing experience to the end-users.

    Key industry participants include ZTE Corporation, SAGEMCOM, Arion Technology, Roku, and Infomir. Manufacturers are emphasizing on UHD STBs incorporated with interactive 4K content to gain a competitive edge in the industry.

    Technology giants such as Apple have managed to make their mark in this competitive industry. The Apple TV device aids the streaming of (Over-The-Top) OTT content and other videos over the internet. The launch of advanced OTT devices such as Google Chromecast media streaming device and Amazon’s Fire TV STBs have opened up new avenues in the industry

  • US Cable TV Industry Report: Video Subscribers again up, Business Services revenue continues to climb

    US Cable TV Industry Report: Video Subscribers again up, Business Services revenue continues to climb

    BENGALURU: For the second consecutive quarter, three of the biggest cable TV entities in the US have reported quarter-over-quarter (q-o-q) growth in video subscribers, along with the regular increase in overall video revenue for the quarter ended 31 March 2016 (Q-16, current quarter). Q1-16 also saw year-over-year (y-o-y) growth in video revenue and subscribers. Despite the increase in video subscribers, the percentage of subscribers opting for video services vis-à-vis customer relationships has declined both y-o-y and q-o-q. Another player – Verizon reported adding 36,000 net video subscribers to its wireline Fios video services in the current quarter. Overall revenue numbers were up, with video revenue increasing along with revenues from other services and streams.

    Comcast Cable Communications segment, Time Warner Cable (TWC) and Charter Communications (Charter) are the three sample players whose numbers have been used in this paper to arrive at generalisations for the US Cable TV industry. All have three major revenue streams – Video, Internet and Voice (VIVE). Besides VIVE, other revenue streams include advertisement and ‘others’. It may be noted that Charter Communications has completed the transactions with Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks, and soon the name of the products offered by the joined entity will be under the brand Spectrum.

    Business Services Revenue continued to grow in Q1-16. Contribution by Business Services to overall revenue also continued to grow in the current quarter while contributing to the growth of overall Average Revenue Per User (ARPU) for the players as well. Another factor that contributed to overall ARPU increase was the growth in percentage of Triple Play consumers in overall customer relationships. Broadband or High Speed internet segments of the three players reported the highest growth among the three major service streams, with Voice showing the next highest growth. Video grew the least among the three services.

    According to a US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) report, the total number of Cable TV Subscribers in the US in 2012 and 2013 were 56.4 million and 54.4 million respectively. Considering the higher value of 56.4 million, the 3 players in this paper have about two thirds of the cable TV subscribers in the US. According to industry reports, the cable providers industry in the US is highly concentrated, with the top five players generating over 96 percent of revenue.

    Comcast Inc., Cable Communications (Comcast CCS) segment is the largest player by far in the US and among the sample players; Time Warner Cable, Inc., (TWC), about half the size of Comcast’s Cable communications segment in terms of revenue and Charter Communications (Charter) with revenues that are less than half again as much as TWC’s.

    Subscription numbers, revenues

    Please refer to Figures A1 and A2 below.

    In Q1-16, the combined video subscription numbers of the three players increased 0.6 percent y-o-y to 37.574 million (74.4 percent of combined customer relationships) as compared to 37.473 million (77.8 percent of combined customer relationships) and increased 0.2 percent q-o-q from 37.490 million (76.3 percent of combined customer relationships).

    Combined customer relationships in the current quarter increased 5.1 percent y-o-y to 50.488 million as compared to 48.020 million and increased 2.8 percent q-o-q from 49.114 million.

    Combined video revenues in Q1-16 increased 3.2 percent y-o-y to $9,216 million (44 percent of combined total revenue) from $8,929 million (45.6 percent of combined total revenue) and increased 1.8 percent q-o-q from $9,058 million (44 percent of combined total revenue.

    Combined total revenue in Q1-16 increased 6.9 percent y-o-y to $20,925 million from $19.569 million and increased 1.8 percent q-o-q from $20,564 million.

    Note 1:
    (a)Residential customer relationship numbers have been used in this report wherever the breakup has been mentioned in SEC filings by the concerned entity. In the case Comcast Cable Communications segment, the breakup of subscription numbers in terms of Residential and Business Services has not been indicated.
    (b) The results and the conclusions in this report may not necessarily reflect the true trends and nature of the cable communications industry in US.

    Comcast Cable Communications (Comcast CCS)

    Comcast’s CCS segment reported 0.2 percent y-o-y growth in video subscribers at 22.4 million (80.1 percent of customer relationships) in the current as compared to 22.375 million (82.2 percent of customer relationships) in Q1-15 and a 0.1 percent q-o-q growth as compared to 22.347 million (80.7 percent of customer relationships) in Q4-15.

    Customer relationships in the current quarter increased 2.7 percent y-o-y to 27.970 million from27.234 million and increased 1 percent q-o-q from 27.701 million.

    Video revenue increased 3.9 percent y-o-y in the current quarter to $5,538 million (45.4 percent of total or consolidated revenue) from $5,331 million (46.6 percent of total revenue) and increased 2.3 percent q-o-q from $5,416 million (45.2 percent of total revenue).

    Comcast CCS reported consolidated or total revenue of $12,204 million for Q1-16, up 6.8 percent y-o-y as compared to $11,430 million and up 1.9 percent q-o-q as compared to $11,980 million.

    Time Warner Cable (TWC)

    TWC reported 0.2 percent y-o-y growth in video subscribers to 10.842 million (67.2 percent of customer relationships) in Q1-16 as compared to 10.819 million (73.5 percent of total customer relationships) and also 0.2 percent q-o-q growth as compared to 10.821 million (71.5 percent of customer relationships) in the immediate trailing quarter.

    Customer relationships in the current quarter increased 9.6 percent y-o-y to 16.130 million from 14.716 million and increased 6.6 percent q-o-q from 15.129 million.

    Video revenue increased 1.6 percent y-o-y in Q1-16 to $2,508 million (40.5 percent of total or consolidated revenue) from $2,469 million (42.7 percent of total revenue) and increased 1.6 percent q-o-q from $2,471 million (40.7 percent of total revenue).

    TWC reported consolidated revenue or total revenue of $6,191 million, up 7.2 percent y-o-y from $5,777 million and up 2 percent q-o-q from $6,072 million.

    Charter Communications (Charter)

    Charter’s video subscribers increased 4.3 percent y-o-y in Q1-16 to 4.332 million (67.8 percent of customer relationships) from 4.153 million (68.4 percent of customer relationships) and increased 0.2 percent q-o-q from 4.322 million (68.8 percent of customer relationships).

    Customer relationships in the current quarter increased 5.2 percent y-o-y to 6.388 million from 6.070 million and increased 1.7 percent q-o-q from 6.284 million.

    Video revenue increased 3.6 percent y-o-y to $1,170 million (46.2 percent of total or consolidated revenue) from $1,129 million (47.8 percent of total revenue) and increased 0.3 percent from $1,167 million (46.5 percent of total revenue) in Q4-15.

    Consolidated or total revenue in Q1-16 increased 7.1 percent y-o-y to $2,530 million from $2,352 million and increased 0.7 percent q-o-q from $2,512 million.

    Average Revenue per User (ARPU) and multi-play numbers

    ARPU has been increasing as more and more customers move from single to double play and triple play and from double play to triple play. Please refer to Figures B1 and B2 below.

    Note 2:
    ARPU in the case of Charter has been estimated based on the numbers submitted by it for its residential and business services ARPU. Charter’s ARPU numbers in the above chart are likely an approximation.

    Business Services Revenue (BSR)

    All the three players offer video, data (internet) and voice services to businesses. Unlike retail customers, the proportion of data and voice services are higher than video services. Business services revenue has been growing, as has its contribution to overall revenue. BSR’s contribution to total revenue is in double digits, in the case of TWC it was 14.3 percent in Q1-16. In the case of Comcast CCS, BSR contributed $1.3 billion to overall revenue in Q1-16. Please refer to Figures C1 and C2 below.

    Note 3:
    Business services revenue numbers may have many components including revenue from the three main service streams – video, data (high speed internet) and voice as well as revenue from advertising, wholesale transport, others, etc., depending upon the entity.

    Note:
    (a)Residential customer relationship numbers have been used in this report wherever the breakup has been mentioned in SEC filings by the concerned entity. In the case Comcast Cable Communications segment, the breakup of subscription numbers in terms of Residential and Business Services has not been indicated.
    (b) The results and the conclusions in this report may not necessarily reflect the true trends and nature of the cable communications industry in US.

  • US Cable TV Industry Report: Video Subscribers again up, Business Services revenue continues to climb

    US Cable TV Industry Report: Video Subscribers again up, Business Services revenue continues to climb

    BENGALURU: For the second consecutive quarter, three of the biggest cable TV entities in the US have reported quarter-over-quarter (q-o-q) growth in video subscribers, along with the regular increase in overall video revenue for the quarter ended 31 March 2016 (Q-16, current quarter). Q1-16 also saw year-over-year (y-o-y) growth in video revenue and subscribers. Despite the increase in video subscribers, the percentage of subscribers opting for video services vis-à-vis customer relationships has declined both y-o-y and q-o-q. Another player – Verizon reported adding 36,000 net video subscribers to its wireline Fios video services in the current quarter. Overall revenue numbers were up, with video revenue increasing along with revenues from other services and streams.

    Comcast Cable Communications segment, Time Warner Cable (TWC) and Charter Communications (Charter) are the three sample players whose numbers have been used in this paper to arrive at generalisations for the US Cable TV industry. All have three major revenue streams – Video, Internet and Voice (VIVE). Besides VIVE, other revenue streams include advertisement and ‘others’. It may be noted that Charter Communications has completed the transactions with Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks, and soon the name of the products offered by the joined entity will be under the brand Spectrum.

    Business Services Revenue continued to grow in Q1-16. Contribution by Business Services to overall revenue also continued to grow in the current quarter while contributing to the growth of overall Average Revenue Per User (ARPU) for the players as well. Another factor that contributed to overall ARPU increase was the growth in percentage of Triple Play consumers in overall customer relationships. Broadband or High Speed internet segments of the three players reported the highest growth among the three major service streams, with Voice showing the next highest growth. Video grew the least among the three services.

    According to a US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) report, the total number of Cable TV Subscribers in the US in 2012 and 2013 were 56.4 million and 54.4 million respectively. Considering the higher value of 56.4 million, the 3 players in this paper have about two thirds of the cable TV subscribers in the US. According to industry reports, the cable providers industry in the US is highly concentrated, with the top five players generating over 96 percent of revenue.

    Comcast Inc., Cable Communications (Comcast CCS) segment is the largest player by far in the US and among the sample players; Time Warner Cable, Inc., (TWC), about half the size of Comcast’s Cable communications segment in terms of revenue and Charter Communications (Charter) with revenues that are less than half again as much as TWC’s.

    Subscription numbers, revenues

    Please refer to Figures A1 and A2 below.

    In Q1-16, the combined video subscription numbers of the three players increased 0.6 percent y-o-y to 37.574 million (74.4 percent of combined customer relationships) as compared to 37.473 million (77.8 percent of combined customer relationships) and increased 0.2 percent q-o-q from 37.490 million (76.3 percent of combined customer relationships).

    Combined customer relationships in the current quarter increased 5.1 percent y-o-y to 50.488 million as compared to 48.020 million and increased 2.8 percent q-o-q from 49.114 million.

    Combined video revenues in Q1-16 increased 3.2 percent y-o-y to $9,216 million (44 percent of combined total revenue) from $8,929 million (45.6 percent of combined total revenue) and increased 1.8 percent q-o-q from $9,058 million (44 percent of combined total revenue.

    Combined total revenue in Q1-16 increased 6.9 percent y-o-y to $20,925 million from $19.569 million and increased 1.8 percent q-o-q from $20,564 million.

    Note 1:
    (a)Residential customer relationship numbers have been used in this report wherever the breakup has been mentioned in SEC filings by the concerned entity. In the case Comcast Cable Communications segment, the breakup of subscription numbers in terms of Residential and Business Services has not been indicated.
    (b) The results and the conclusions in this report may not necessarily reflect the true trends and nature of the cable communications industry in US.

    Comcast Cable Communications (Comcast CCS)

    Comcast’s CCS segment reported 0.2 percent y-o-y growth in video subscribers at 22.4 million (80.1 percent of customer relationships) in the current as compared to 22.375 million (82.2 percent of customer relationships) in Q1-15 and a 0.1 percent q-o-q growth as compared to 22.347 million (80.7 percent of customer relationships) in Q4-15.

    Customer relationships in the current quarter increased 2.7 percent y-o-y to 27.970 million from27.234 million and increased 1 percent q-o-q from 27.701 million.

    Video revenue increased 3.9 percent y-o-y in the current quarter to $5,538 million (45.4 percent of total or consolidated revenue) from $5,331 million (46.6 percent of total revenue) and increased 2.3 percent q-o-q from $5,416 million (45.2 percent of total revenue).

    Comcast CCS reported consolidated or total revenue of $12,204 million for Q1-16, up 6.8 percent y-o-y as compared to $11,430 million and up 1.9 percent q-o-q as compared to $11,980 million.

    Time Warner Cable (TWC)

    TWC reported 0.2 percent y-o-y growth in video subscribers to 10.842 million (67.2 percent of customer relationships) in Q1-16 as compared to 10.819 million (73.5 percent of total customer relationships) and also 0.2 percent q-o-q growth as compared to 10.821 million (71.5 percent of customer relationships) in the immediate trailing quarter.

    Customer relationships in the current quarter increased 9.6 percent y-o-y to 16.130 million from 14.716 million and increased 6.6 percent q-o-q from 15.129 million.

    Video revenue increased 1.6 percent y-o-y in Q1-16 to $2,508 million (40.5 percent of total or consolidated revenue) from $2,469 million (42.7 percent of total revenue) and increased 1.6 percent q-o-q from $2,471 million (40.7 percent of total revenue).

    TWC reported consolidated revenue or total revenue of $6,191 million, up 7.2 percent y-o-y from $5,777 million and up 2 percent q-o-q from $6,072 million.

    Charter Communications (Charter)

    Charter’s video subscribers increased 4.3 percent y-o-y in Q1-16 to 4.332 million (67.8 percent of customer relationships) from 4.153 million (68.4 percent of customer relationships) and increased 0.2 percent q-o-q from 4.322 million (68.8 percent of customer relationships).

    Customer relationships in the current quarter increased 5.2 percent y-o-y to 6.388 million from 6.070 million and increased 1.7 percent q-o-q from 6.284 million.

    Video revenue increased 3.6 percent y-o-y to $1,170 million (46.2 percent of total or consolidated revenue) from $1,129 million (47.8 percent of total revenue) and increased 0.3 percent from $1,167 million (46.5 percent of total revenue) in Q4-15.

    Consolidated or total revenue in Q1-16 increased 7.1 percent y-o-y to $2,530 million from $2,352 million and increased 0.7 percent q-o-q from $2,512 million.

    Average Revenue per User (ARPU) and multi-play numbers

    ARPU has been increasing as more and more customers move from single to double play and triple play and from double play to triple play. Please refer to Figures B1 and B2 below.

    Note 2:
    ARPU in the case of Charter has been estimated based on the numbers submitted by it for its residential and business services ARPU. Charter’s ARPU numbers in the above chart are likely an approximation.

    Business Services Revenue (BSR)

    All the three players offer video, data (internet) and voice services to businesses. Unlike retail customers, the proportion of data and voice services are higher than video services. Business services revenue has been growing, as has its contribution to overall revenue. BSR’s contribution to total revenue is in double digits, in the case of TWC it was 14.3 percent in Q1-16. In the case of Comcast CCS, BSR contributed $1.3 billion to overall revenue in Q1-16. Please refer to Figures C1 and C2 below.

    Note 3:
    Business services revenue numbers may have many components including revenue from the three main service streams – video, data (high speed internet) and voice as well as revenue from advertising, wholesale transport, others, etc., depending upon the entity.

    Note:
    (a)Residential customer relationship numbers have been used in this report wherever the breakup has been mentioned in SEC filings by the concerned entity. In the case Comcast Cable Communications segment, the breakup of subscription numbers in terms of Residential and Business Services has not been indicated.
    (b) The results and the conclusions in this report may not necessarily reflect the true trends and nature of the cable communications industry in US.

  • FCC action could stifle TV innovation

    FCC action could stifle TV innovation

    On Wednesday, FCC chairman Tom Wheeler proposed a new technology mandate that would require satellite and cable TV providers to disaggregate or separate their services so that a few companies could repackage them as their own without negotiating for content rights like everybody else in the market does today. While the chairman touts consumer benefits to his proposal, the opposite is the case. 

     

    The proposal, like prior federal government technology mandates, would impose costs on consumers, adversely impact the creation of high-quality content, and chill innovation. It also flies in the face of the rapid changes that are occurring in the marketplace and benefitting consumers.

     

    As a member of the technical advisory committee that the FCC formed, I, along with others on the committee, put in an extraordinary amount of time examining these issues. The Report we produced comprehensively discussed the widely-adopted apps-based model. The chairman ignores the less regulatory apps-based approach that is already expanding the array of choices that consumers have to access content on retail devices.  

     

    In the 21st century, television has been on a tear of innovation. In the 1980s, wanting your MTV became an anthem. The 1990s saw an explosion of channels and diversity of voices on television, and the beginnings of HDTV. Change has been accelerating ever since. 

     

    Netflix now has more customers in the US than any traditional TV provider; tablets, smartphones, smart TVs, connected devices for accessing video are ubiquitous; and new online video services are announced all the time. There are services from online powerhouses like Amazon; from new entrants like Sony’s Play Station Vue and Dish’s Sling TV that sell packages including linear channels; and from programmers like HBO, Showtime, and CBS. Just this week, we’ve seen the influence of these new services in locking up content at Sundance.

     

    These changes are bringing enormous consumer benefits — the quantity and variety of high-quality programming is better than ever, and consumers expect access to content anytime, anywhere, and on devices of their choice.

     

    Comcast is responding with our innovative X1 platform, and enabling access on a growing array of devices. Like other traditional TV distributors, online video distributors, networks, and sports leagues, Comcast is using apps to deliver its Xfinity service to popular customer-owned retail devices.

     

    These apps are wildly popular with consumers. Comcast customers alone have downloaded our apps more than 20 million times. This apps revolution is rapidly proliferating, and we are working with others in the industry and standards-setting bodies to expand apps to reach even more devices.

     

    Given these exciting, pro-consumer marketplace developments, it is perplexing that the FCC is now considering a proposal that would impose new government technology mandates on satellite and cable TV providers with the purported goal of promoting device options for consumers. 

     

    A little background here. Congress enacted “navigation device” legislation twenty years ago that directed the FCC to foster retail alternatives to cable set-top boxes. The FCC responded with a CableCARD mandate. Despite the cable industry’s longstanding and ongoing support for CableCARDs, consumers showed little interest in the technology; it saddled cable operators and their customers with over $1 billion in unnecessary costs; and, it was overtaken by the explosive growth in connected devices and apps. 

     

    It is strange now that the FCC is ignoring the important lesson of history that intrusive federal governmental regulatory interference in the market just doesn’t work by proposing new mandates at a time when Congress’s goals are being realized in the marketplace and consumers have unprecedented device choices that go well beyond what anyone could possibly have imagined even a decade ago. 

     

    The proposal would require traditional TV distributors like satellite and cable providers – but not other video distributors – to re-architect their networks and develop an undefined new piece of customer equipment just so device companies can take apart the video service and selectively reassemble it. 

     

    Consumer costs would rise, content security would weaken, and consumer protections such as privacy would erode. It would undermine intellectual property rights and content licensing agreements. The Chairman has said that his proposal addresses these concerns, but the simple fact is that the proposal strips away the tools that video distributors use to present service in a way that satisfies security, regulatory, and licensing requirements.

     

    As noted, the FCC’s track record on these types of technology mandates has been less than stellar. CableCARD is just one example. Another is the 1394 output mandate. The FCC required cable operators to include 1394 outputs on their set-top boxes, the mandate went on for years even after it was clear that other outputs had won out in the marketplace.

     

    Already, a broad range of parties is weighing in to support the innovation that is occurring in the marketplace and raising concerns including Disney, 21st Century Fox, NBCUniversal, and Viacom as well as small, independent, and diverse programmers like TV One, Fuse Media, Crossings TV , Revolt, and Baby First Americas; device manufacturers like Roku, Cisco, and ARRIS; diversity organizations such as the Hispanic Technology and Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP), a coalition of Hispanic organizations; and legislators, including 30 members of the Congressional Black Caucus and the National Black Caucus of State Legislators.

     

    As the Commission considers taking this initial step to launch a rulemaking proceeding to determine whether to impose new mandates and if so, what those should ultimately be, we look forward to studying the proposal and providing constructive input. We hope the FCC will decide to avoid this major step backward for consumers and video innovation. 

     

     

    (Disclaimer: The article has been sourced from Comcast’s website. The views expressed here are purely personal views of the author, who is Comcast Cable SVP – business and industry affairs and chief technology officer Mark Hess and Indiantelevision.com does not necessarily subscribe to them.)

  • FCC action could stifle TV innovation

    FCC action could stifle TV innovation

    On Wednesday, FCC chairman Tom Wheeler proposed a new technology mandate that would require satellite and cable TV providers to disaggregate or separate their services so that a few companies could repackage them as their own without negotiating for content rights like everybody else in the market does today. While the chairman touts consumer benefits to his proposal, the opposite is the case. 

     

    The proposal, like prior federal government technology mandates, would impose costs on consumers, adversely impact the creation of high-quality content, and chill innovation. It also flies in the face of the rapid changes that are occurring in the marketplace and benefitting consumers.

     

    As a member of the technical advisory committee that the FCC formed, I, along with others on the committee, put in an extraordinary amount of time examining these issues. The Report we produced comprehensively discussed the widely-adopted apps-based model. The chairman ignores the less regulatory apps-based approach that is already expanding the array of choices that consumers have to access content on retail devices.  

     

    In the 21st century, television has been on a tear of innovation. In the 1980s, wanting your MTV became an anthem. The 1990s saw an explosion of channels and diversity of voices on television, and the beginnings of HDTV. Change has been accelerating ever since. 

     

    Netflix now has more customers in the US than any traditional TV provider; tablets, smartphones, smart TVs, connected devices for accessing video are ubiquitous; and new online video services are announced all the time. There are services from online powerhouses like Amazon; from new entrants like Sony’s Play Station Vue and Dish’s Sling TV that sell packages including linear channels; and from programmers like HBO, Showtime, and CBS. Just this week, we’ve seen the influence of these new services in locking up content at Sundance.

     

    These changes are bringing enormous consumer benefits — the quantity and variety of high-quality programming is better than ever, and consumers expect access to content anytime, anywhere, and on devices of their choice.

     

    Comcast is responding with our innovative X1 platform, and enabling access on a growing array of devices. Like other traditional TV distributors, online video distributors, networks, and sports leagues, Comcast is using apps to deliver its Xfinity service to popular customer-owned retail devices.

     

    These apps are wildly popular with consumers. Comcast customers alone have downloaded our apps more than 20 million times. This apps revolution is rapidly proliferating, and we are working with others in the industry and standards-setting bodies to expand apps to reach even more devices.

     

    Given these exciting, pro-consumer marketplace developments, it is perplexing that the FCC is now considering a proposal that would impose new government technology mandates on satellite and cable TV providers with the purported goal of promoting device options for consumers. 

     

    A little background here. Congress enacted “navigation device” legislation twenty years ago that directed the FCC to foster retail alternatives to cable set-top boxes. The FCC responded with a CableCARD mandate. Despite the cable industry’s longstanding and ongoing support for CableCARDs, consumers showed little interest in the technology; it saddled cable operators and their customers with over $1 billion in unnecessary costs; and, it was overtaken by the explosive growth in connected devices and apps. 

     

    It is strange now that the FCC is ignoring the important lesson of history that intrusive federal governmental regulatory interference in the market just doesn’t work by proposing new mandates at a time when Congress’s goals are being realized in the marketplace and consumers have unprecedented device choices that go well beyond what anyone could possibly have imagined even a decade ago. 

     

    The proposal would require traditional TV distributors like satellite and cable providers – but not other video distributors – to re-architect their networks and develop an undefined new piece of customer equipment just so device companies can take apart the video service and selectively reassemble it. 

     

    Consumer costs would rise, content security would weaken, and consumer protections such as privacy would erode. It would undermine intellectual property rights and content licensing agreements. The Chairman has said that his proposal addresses these concerns, but the simple fact is that the proposal strips away the tools that video distributors use to present service in a way that satisfies security, regulatory, and licensing requirements.

     

    As noted, the FCC’s track record on these types of technology mandates has been less than stellar. CableCARD is just one example. Another is the 1394 output mandate. The FCC required cable operators to include 1394 outputs on their set-top boxes, the mandate went on for years even after it was clear that other outputs had won out in the marketplace.

     

    Already, a broad range of parties is weighing in to support the innovation that is occurring in the marketplace and raising concerns including Disney, 21st Century Fox, NBCUniversal, and Viacom as well as small, independent, and diverse programmers like TV One, Fuse Media, Crossings TV , Revolt, and Baby First Americas; device manufacturers like Roku, Cisco, and ARRIS; diversity organizations such as the Hispanic Technology and Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP), a coalition of Hispanic organizations; and legislators, including 30 members of the Congressional Black Caucus and the National Black Caucus of State Legislators.

     

    As the Commission considers taking this initial step to launch a rulemaking proceeding to determine whether to impose new mandates and if so, what those should ultimately be, we look forward to studying the proposal and providing constructive input. We hope the FCC will decide to avoid this major step backward for consumers and video innovation. 

     

     

    (Disclaimer: The article has been sourced from Comcast’s website. The views expressed here are purely personal views of the author, who is Comcast Cable SVP – business and industry affairs and chief technology officer Mark Hess and Indiantelevision.com does not necessarily subscribe to them.)

  • Dish, NAB & others urge FCC to deny Charter-Time Warner Cable merger

    Dish, NAB & others urge FCC to deny Charter-Time Warner Cable merger

    MUMBAI: The Charter Communications, Inc – Time Warner Cable, Inc merger is facing a lot of opposition from broadcasters. 

     

    The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) has filed a petition with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that it should not approve the merger unless it is also willing to change broadcast ownership rules, which limits the number of radio and TV stations that a single entity can own.

     

    Joining the NAB is Dish Network Corp, which has filed a petition with the FCC to deny the proposed merger citing substantial harm to competition and consumers. Additionally, set top box maker Zoom Telephonics also asked the FCC to deny the said merger between the two over the issue of access to third-party modems.

     

    As broadcast ownership rules limit mergers, NAB said that broadcasters have far less negotiating power than big cable companies, which will only get bigger if the FCC allows the latest cable merger to proceed.

     

    According to the NAB, the greater imbalance will harm broadcasters in retransmission consent negotiations, in which cable operators pay broadcast stations for the right to air their channels.

     

    NAB said that if the pending merger was approved, then the top four multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs) will control 79 per cent of the nationwide MVPD market, measured in terms of subscribers, and the top three alone, according to SNL Kagan, “will control two-thirds of the video delivery universe.” If consummated, the merger also would exacerbate concentration levels at the local and regional levels, with clear implications for consumers, as empirical research has shown that large, clustered cable companies charge higher prices than smaller, unclustered ones.

     

    The creation of yet another pay-TV behemoth would further competitively disadvantage local broadcast stations kept by outdated ownership rules from achieving a fraction of the vital economies of scale and scope that MVPDs enjoy and, as the FCC has recognized, can advance the public interest. The gross regulatory disparities between the pay-TV and the free-TV industries are illustrated in any number of ways, including the sheer size of MVPDs compared to TV broadcasters. The market capitalization of the combined AT&T/DIRECTV, for example, is more than 200 times larger than the market cap of several of the most sizable broadcast TV companies. New Charter – which the merging parties describe as “modest” in size – will have a market capitalization 72 times larger than some of the biggest broadcast TV station groups. Beyond this national scale, single pay-TV providers control access to significant percentages of viewers in many local markets. Even standing alone, Time Warner Cable (TWC), for instance, controls over 40 percent of the total MVPD market in 30 different Designated Market Areas (DMAs), and in eight DMAs, TWC’s share of the entire MVPD market exceeds 60 percent. Broadcast TV stations unable to combine under the FCC’s local TV ownership rule are at a notable disadvantage in negotiating retransmission consent agreements with such locally and nationally consolidated MVPDs.

     

    On the other hand, Dish Network Corp’s petition to deny the merger, outlines, among other things, the critical role that high-speed broadband plays in the video industry and the potential for the merger to significantly damage competitive development of over-the-top (OTT) video and limit consumer access to online video programming.

     

    Dish Network said that the merger presents risk of significant harms:

     

    New Parties, Same Harms: The proposed transaction would be no better for the public interest than the one proposed between Comcast and Time Warner Cable.

     

    A Suffocating Duopoly: The transaction will create a suffocating duopoly. Where a Comcast/Time Warner Cable merger would have created one behemoth, this transaction will result in two broadband providers (Comcast and New Charter) controlling about 90 per cent of the nation’s high-speed broadband homes between them.

     

    Threats to Online Video: The top two cable providers post-merger will not need to collude in order to bring their collective weight to bear on an online video distributor (OVD). Parallel foreclosures, with one of the two following the other, would be enough for an OVD to be shut off from most of the homes in the country.

     

    Concentration of Broadband Subscribers: The impact of New Charter would cause a significant proportion of the combined company’s high-speed broadband subscribers to lack access to alternative high-speed broadband options. Indeed, Charter admits that almost two-thirds of households in the New Charter footprint will not have access to at least one alternative high-speed broadband provider. For these customers, switching ISPs is not just an inconvenience, but an impossibility.

     

    Choke Points on the Charter/TWC Broadband Network: New Charter would have a panoply of foreclosure techniques at its disposal. It would be able to foreclose or degrade the online video offerings of competing MVPD and OTT video providers at any of three “choke points”: (1) the points of interconnection to the combined company’s broadband network, in effect the “on ramp” to the New Charter network; (2) the “public Internet” portion of the pipe to the consumer’s home; and (3) managed or specialised service channels, which can act as super HOV-lanes and squeeze the capacity of the “public Internet” portion of the New Charter broadband pipe. In addition, New Charter would have increased leverage that it could use to coerce third-party content owners and programmers to withhold online rights from online video platforms, thereby stifling a source of competition and innovation in the video industry.

     

    Sling TV CEO Roger Lynch states, “I believe that the proposed merger…. would cause significant and irreparable harm to emerging competitive online video products and services, as well as the performance of traditional satellite television service, ultimately reducing competition and choice for consumers. Accordingly, I believe that the merger as currently constructed is not in the public interest and should be denied.”

  • Court dismisses $20 bn lawsuit against Comcast, Time Warner Cable; NAAAOM to appeal

    Court dismisses $20 bn lawsuit against Comcast, Time Warner Cable; NAAAOM to appeal

    MUMBAI: Federal Judge Terry Hatter issued a short ruling dismissing the $20 billion racial discrimination in contracting lawsuit filed by the National Association of African American Owned Media (NAAAOM) and Entertainment Studios Networks, Inc.

     

    Judge Hatter’s ruling did not provide any detail as to why the case was dismissed except to say that the Plaintiffs had failed to allege a claim for relief.

     

    “Knowing that our lawsuit helped the FCC and the DOJ deny Comcast’s bid to buy Time Warner Cable is already a big win for us. We are going to immediately appeal this decision to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals who I believe will deliver us a favorable decision,” said Entertainment Studios Networks chairman, CEO and founder Byron Allen.

     

    “We will continue to vigorously pursue Comcast and Time Warner Cable, who spend approximately $25 billion annually licensing cable networks with less than $3 million going to 100% African American owned media. We will not stop until the discrimination stops and we achieve true economic inclusion,” said NAAAOM president Mark DeVitre.