Tag: Turner

  • Time Warner FY-16 and fourth quarter numbers up

    Time Warner FY-16 and fourth quarter numbers up

    BENGALURU: Time Warner Inc. (Time Warner) reported higher numbers across all divisions and important parameters for the year (FY-16, current quarter) and the quarter (Q4-16, current quarter) ended 31 December 2016 as compared to the corresponding year ago periods.  Warner Bros, Turner and Home Box Office (HBO) all reported increase in revenues and operating incomes. The two major blips were a 1.6 percent (US19 million) decline in advertising revenue in Q4-16 to $1,187 million from$1,206 million in Q4-15; reduction in Warner Bros Videogames and other revenues for both FY-16 and Q4-16.

    Time Warner’s total revenues in FY-16 increased 4.3 percent to $29,318 million from $28,118 million reported for FY-15, while Q4-16 revenues increased 11.5 percent to $7,891 million from $7,079 million. Time Warner’s total operating income in FY-16 increased 9.9 percent to $7,547 million from $6,865 million in QFY-15. The company’s total operating for Q4-16 increased 22 percent to $1,691 million as compared to $1,386 million in Q4-15.

    Time Warner’s total adjusted operating income in FY-16 increased 9.8 percent to $7,601 million from $6,923 million in QFY-15. The company’s total operating for Q4-16 increased 25.2 percent to $1,759 million as compared to $1,405 million in Q4-15.

    Time Warner chairman and CEO Jeff Bewkes said, “We had another very successful year in 2016, demonstrating once more Time Warner’s ability to deliver strong financial performance alongside creative and programming excellence. All our operating divisions increased revenue and profits while also making investments to capitalize on the growing demand for the very best video content and new ways to deliver it to audiences around the world. Warner Bros. is once again the #1 supplier of television shows for the broadcast networks, and had its second-best year ever at the global box office, nearing $5 billion in receipts with such hits as Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice, Suicide Squad and Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them.”

    Bewkes continued, “Home Box Office again stood apart with its combination of the biggest Hollywood hit movies and best original programming — receiving more primetime Emmy Awards in 2016 than any other network for the 15th consecutive year and launching Westworld, which is produced by Warner Bros. and is the most-watched new series in HBO’s history. We’re also really pleased with the growth of HBO’s domestic OTT product, and we expanded HBO’s international OTT footprint with launches in Spain, Brazil and Argentina in 2016. Turner continued to strengthen its leadership with TBS, TNT and Adult Swim all ranking among ad-supported cable’s top five networks in primetime among adults 18-49 for the year. TBS was the #1 ad-supported entertainment cable network on the strength of great sports and a bold new lineup of originals, including Full Frontal with Samantha Bee, and CNN was the #1 news network among adults 18-49 in primetime and the #1 digital news destination in 2016. The deal to be acquired by AT&T Inc., which we announced in October 2016, will accelerate our efforts to spur innovation in the media industry and further strengthen our businesses. We remain on track to close the transaction later this year.”

    Warner Bros

    Warner Bros revenues for FY-16 were essentially flat at $13,037 million (12,992 million in FY-15). The company says that this reflects higher theatrical and television revenues offset by lower videogames revenues and the impact of foreign exchange rates. Theatrical revenues increased primarily due to the box office releases of Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice, Suicide Squad and Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Television revenues grew primarily due to increased production. Videogames revenues declined as the prior year benefited from the releases of Mortal Kombat X and Batman: Arkham Knight.

    Warner Bros Operating Income in FY-16 increased 22 percent ($318 million) to $1,734 million from $1,416 million in FY-15 as increased theatrical contributions and a $90 million gain on the April 2016 sale of Flixster more than offset the impact from lower videogames revenues.

    Warner Bros Revenues increased 17 percent ($563 million) to $3,868 million from $3,305 million in Q4-15 which Time Warner says was mainly due to higher theatrical revenues, which benefited from the releases of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them and The Accountant, and higher television revenues, primarily due to higher licensing revenues and increased production.

    Warner Bros operating Income increased 57 percent ($208 million) to $574 million in Q4-16 from $366 million in Q4-15 primarily due to the increase in revenues, partially offset by higher associated costs of revenues.

    Turner

    Turner revenues in FY-16 increased 7 percent ($768 million) to $11,364 million from $10,596 million in FY-15, benefiting from increases of 12 percent ($630 million) in Subscription revenues and 3 percent ($126 million) in Advertising revenues.

    The company says that the increase in Subscription revenues was due to higher domestic rates and growth at Turner’s international networks, partially offset by the impact of lower domestic subscribers and foreign exchange rates. Advertising revenues benefited from domestic growth and local currency growth at Turner’s international networks, partially offset by the impact of foreign exchange rates. Domestic advertising revenues grew primarily due to Turner’s news business and sports business, including the 2016 NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball National Championship game, partially offset by lower delivery at certain entertainment networks.

    Turner Operating Income increased 7 percent ($285 million) to $4,372 million in FY-16 from $4,087 million in Fy-15 due to the increase in revenues partially offset by higher expenses, including increased programming and marketing costs. Programming costs grew 5 percent primarily due to higher sports costs and increases at Turner’s news business related to its coverage of the 2016 US Presidential election. The increase in marketing costs was primarily associated with new original series related to the TBS and TNT rebrands.

    Turner’s revenues in Q4-16 increased 6.7 percent ($177 million) to $2,838 million from $2,661 million in Q4-15, due to an increase of 14 percent ($182 million) in Subscription revenues and 9 percent ($14 million) in Content and other revenues, partially offset by a decrease of 2 percent ($19 million) in Advertising revenues.

    The company says that Subscription revenues benefited from higher domestic rates and growth at Turner’s international networks, partially offset by the impact of lower domestic subscribers. Content and other revenues increased primarily due to higher licensing revenues. Advertising revenues decreased due to declines at Turner’s international networks, partially due to foreign exchange rates. Domestic advertising was flat with growth at Turner’s news business offset by lower delivery at certain entertainment networks and lower revenues associated with the MLB postseason games.

    Turners Operating Income in Q4-16 increased 8.2 percent ($64 million) to $841 million from $777 million in Q4-15, reflecting revenue growth partially offset by higher expenses, including increased marketing costs primarily due to new original series. Programming expenses were essentially flat.

    Home Box Office (HBO)

    HBO revenues in FY-16 increased 5 percent ($275 million) to $5,890 million from $5,615 million in FY-15, due to increases of 5 percent ($255 million) in Subscription revenues and 2 percent ($20 million) in Content and other revenues. Subscription revenues grew primarily due to higher domestic rates and international growth. The increase in Content and other revenues primarily reflects higher international licensing revenues, partially offset by lower domestic licensing revenues.

    Operating Income in FY-16 increased 2.1 percent ($39 million) to $1,917 million from $1,878 million, reflecting higher revenues partially offset by increased expenses, including higher programming and restructuring and severance costs. Programming costs grew 7 percent, primarily reflecting increased original programming costs, partially offset by a reduction in amortization resulting from a longer estimated utilization period for original programming.

    HBO Revenues increased 5.6 percent ($79 million) to $1,491 million in Q4-16 from $1,412 million, due to increases of 5 percent ($64 million) in Subscription revenues and 7 percent ($15 million) in Content and other revenues. The company says that Subscription revenues increased due to higher domestic rates and international growth. The increase in Content and other revenues primarily reflects higher home entertainment revenues, partially offset by lower international licensing revenues.

    Operating Income increased 9.2 percent ($36 million) to $429 million in Q4-16 from $393 million in Q4-15, due to the increase in revenues partially offset by higher expenses, including increased distribution expenses related to the timing of home video releases. Programming expenses decreased 2 percent mainly due to lower programming charges, partially offset by increased original programming costs.

  • Turner, Bigballs deal strengthens former’s digital sports & latter’s international foray

    Turner, Bigballs deal strengthens former’s digital sports & latter’s international foray

    MUMBAI: Turner International’s Digital Ventures & Innovation Group has announced an equity investment in digital media sports company Bigballs Media (BBM), parent company of one of the world’s fastest-growing digital video platforms for football content, Copa90.

    The funding will be used to fuel BBM’s international expansion, content production and distribution and enhance its data capabilities as it continues its growth trajectory. The investment will fuel further international growth and fully establish Copa90 as the definitive football youth media brand.

    Turner’s Digital Ventures & Innovation Group was recently formed to focus on opportunities for innovation, development and acquisition. The investment comes within the group’s first month of operations and signals the company’s commitment to increasing its presence in the digital sports space. Turner is the largest provider of funding for the Series B investment round and the main strategic investor.

    In parallel, Turner and BBM have signed a commercial agreement which embraces multiple opportunities for Turner and BBM to leverage their respective distribution and content production expertise. The partnership expands on an existing commercial relationship with leading digital sports brand Bleacher Report, a division of Turner.

    The cross-platform commercial agreement includes strategic co-branded content production, the development of third party branded content and sponsorship opportunities, and content creation for Turner’s own channels. It also facilitates BBM’s close collaboration across the wider Turner portfolio, including Esporte Interativo, Turner Sports and CNN. Additionally, Aksel van der Wal, head of Digital Ventures & Innovation, will take a seat on BBM’s board of directors, and Bleacher Report COO Alex Vargas, becomes a board observer.

    “Partnering with relevant brands is a core part of our strategy to compete and lead in today’s rapidly evolving digital landscape,” said Turner International executive vice president – digital ventures & innovation Aksel van der Wal.

    “We see really exciting opportunities to work with BBM in developing creative ways to engage new audiences, in particular expanding our growing touchpoints with millennials while also offering innovative new platforms for advertisers. It is exactly the kind of forward-looking partnership we hope to establish more of.”

    BBM CEO Tom Thirlwall said: “Our ambition is to be the world’s most influential football media business by the time the 2018 World Cup kicks off and this investment and partnership with Turner is a decisive step towards making that a reality.

    “We had significant interest in our round but Turner was by far and away the most compelling because of their team, vision and the strategic opportunities for both our businesses. The investment will enable us to accelerate our growth in our core markets, build our data and distribution capabilities and expand our commercial teams in Europe and the US and of course continue to make the best fan culture football content.”

    “Bleacher Report and Copa90 share a passion for global football fan culture. We are very excited about the investment and taking a step forward in expanding our existing relationship. Our hugely popular “Saturdays Are Lit” Snapchat collaboration has set a great benchmark for the kind of exciting opportunities we expect to develop together,” said Vargas.

    The investment in BBM is the latest in a series of investments by Turner in the digital space and the first with a company headquartered outside of the US. It follows on from similar investments in 2016 in Refinery29 and Mashable. The company also acquired a majority stake in iStreamPlanet in 2015. Turner has also recently expanded Bleacher Report and injected new investment in CNN Digital. Internationally it has launched a suite of new digital-first destinations and apps across the broader digital ecosystem to extend its fan engagement around flagship properties such as CNN, Cartoon Network, Boomerang and Adult Swim, as part of the company’s accelerated focus on evolving its digital business interests and capabilities.

  • Turner, Bigballs deal strengthens former’s digital sports & latter’s international foray

    Turner, Bigballs deal strengthens former’s digital sports & latter’s international foray

    MUMBAI: Turner International’s Digital Ventures & Innovation Group has announced an equity investment in digital media sports company Bigballs Media (BBM), parent company of one of the world’s fastest-growing digital video platforms for football content, Copa90.

    The funding will be used to fuel BBM’s international expansion, content production and distribution and enhance its data capabilities as it continues its growth trajectory. The investment will fuel further international growth and fully establish Copa90 as the definitive football youth media brand.

    Turner’s Digital Ventures & Innovation Group was recently formed to focus on opportunities for innovation, development and acquisition. The investment comes within the group’s first month of operations and signals the company’s commitment to increasing its presence in the digital sports space. Turner is the largest provider of funding for the Series B investment round and the main strategic investor.

    In parallel, Turner and BBM have signed a commercial agreement which embraces multiple opportunities for Turner and BBM to leverage their respective distribution and content production expertise. The partnership expands on an existing commercial relationship with leading digital sports brand Bleacher Report, a division of Turner.

    The cross-platform commercial agreement includes strategic co-branded content production, the development of third party branded content and sponsorship opportunities, and content creation for Turner’s own channels. It also facilitates BBM’s close collaboration across the wider Turner portfolio, including Esporte Interativo, Turner Sports and CNN. Additionally, Aksel van der Wal, head of Digital Ventures & Innovation, will take a seat on BBM’s board of directors, and Bleacher Report COO Alex Vargas, becomes a board observer.

    “Partnering with relevant brands is a core part of our strategy to compete and lead in today’s rapidly evolving digital landscape,” said Turner International executive vice president – digital ventures & innovation Aksel van der Wal.

    “We see really exciting opportunities to work with BBM in developing creative ways to engage new audiences, in particular expanding our growing touchpoints with millennials while also offering innovative new platforms for advertisers. It is exactly the kind of forward-looking partnership we hope to establish more of.”

    BBM CEO Tom Thirlwall said: “Our ambition is to be the world’s most influential football media business by the time the 2018 World Cup kicks off and this investment and partnership with Turner is a decisive step towards making that a reality.

    “We had significant interest in our round but Turner was by far and away the most compelling because of their team, vision and the strategic opportunities for both our businesses. The investment will enable us to accelerate our growth in our core markets, build our data and distribution capabilities and expand our commercial teams in Europe and the US and of course continue to make the best fan culture football content.”

    “Bleacher Report and Copa90 share a passion for global football fan culture. We are very excited about the investment and taking a step forward in expanding our existing relationship. Our hugely popular “Saturdays Are Lit” Snapchat collaboration has set a great benchmark for the kind of exciting opportunities we expect to develop together,” said Vargas.

    The investment in BBM is the latest in a series of investments by Turner in the digital space and the first with a company headquartered outside of the US. It follows on from similar investments in 2016 in Refinery29 and Mashable. The company also acquired a majority stake in iStreamPlanet in 2015. Turner has also recently expanded Bleacher Report and injected new investment in CNN Digital. Internationally it has launched a suite of new digital-first destinations and apps across the broader digital ecosystem to extend its fan engagement around flagship properties such as CNN, Cartoon Network, Boomerang and Adult Swim, as part of the company’s accelerated focus on evolving its digital business interests and capabilities.

  • Q3-16: Time Warner revenue up 9.2 percent

    Q3-16: Time Warner revenue up 9.2 percent

    BENGALURU: Time Warner Inc., (Time Warner) reported 9.2 percent year-over-year (y-o-y) growth in revenue for the third quarter ended 30 September 2016 (Q3-16, current quarter).

    Time Warner reported total revenue of $7,167 million for the current quarter versus $6,564 million in the corresponding year ago quarter. Among its three divisions – Turner, Home Box Office, and Warner Bros, Turner reported 8.8 percent y-o-y increase in revenue of $2,610 million in Q3-16 vis-à-vis $2,398 million in Q3-15. HBO revenue grew 4.3 percent y-o-y in the current quarter to $1,426 million from$1,367 million, while Warner Bros revenue increased 6.6 percent y-o-y to $3,402 million from $3,190 million.

    Operating Income increased 9.8 percent y-o-y to $2,014 million in Q3-16 from $1,834 million. Adjusted Operating Income increased 12.4 to $2,070 million from $1,842 million, which the company says was due to increases at all operating divisions and lower intercompany eliminations. Revenues included the unfavourable impact of foreign exchange rates of approximately $55 million in the quarter.

    Breakup of numbers

    Turner

    A 12.4 percent y-o-y) increase in subscription revenue helped boost Turner revenue, while Advertising (ad) revenue increased 1.2 percent y-o-y during the current quarter.  Time Warner’s Subscription revenue in Q3-16 was $1,480 million as against $1,317 million in the corresponding year ago quarter. The division’s ad revenue in the current quarter was $996 million, while it was $980 million in Q3-15.

    Turner’s operating income increased 8.4 percent y-o-y in Q3-16 to $1,612 million from $1,072 million in Q3-15.

    Time Warner says that Subscription revenues increased due to higher domestic rates and growth at Turner’s international networks, partially offset by the impact of lower domestic subscribers and foreign exchange rates. Advertising revenues benefited from growth at Turner’s domestic news business, partially offset by lower delivery at certain domestic entertainment networks. International advertising was essentially flat with local currency growth offset by the impact of foreign exchange rates. Content and other revenues increased due to higher international licensing revenues.

    HBO

    HBO revenues increased on account of a 5.2 percent y-o-y increase in subscription revenue in Q3-16 to $1,262 million from $1,200 million. Content and other revenue declined 1.8 percent y-o-y in the current quarter to $164 million from $167 million.

    HBO’s operating income in Q3-16 increased 2.1 percent y-o-y to $530 million from $519 million.

    The company says that Subscription revenues increased due to higher domestic rates and international growth. The decrease in Content and other revenues was due to lower domestic licensing revenues, partially offset by higher international licensing revenues.

    Warner Bros

    Warner Bros revenues increased due to a 44.9 percent y-o-y gain in its Theatrical product to $1,605 million in Q3-16 from $1,108 million. This gain was offset by a 2.1 percent y-o-y decline in Warner’s Television product to $1,430 million from #1,460 million and a 41 percent decline in its ‘Videogames and other’ revenue to $367 million from$672 million.

    The company says that Theatrical revenues increased due to the box office releases of Suicide SquadThe Legend of TarzanSully and Lights Out. Videogames revenues declined due to the comparison to the launch ofLEGO Dimensions and carryover revenues from Mortal Kombat X in the prior year quarter.

    Warner Operating Income increased 11.2 percent ($43 million) y-o-y in the current quarter to $428 million from $385 million, due to the increase in revenues, partially offset by higher costs of revenues associated with the mix of film releases.

    Company speak

    Time Warner chairman and CEO Jeff Bewkes said, “We had a strong third quarter, which keeps us on track to exceed our original 2016 outlook and underscores our leadership in creating and distributing the very best content. In television, HBO took home more Primetime Emmy Awards than any other network for the 15th consecutive year and Time Warner’s divisions won a total of 40 Emmys, more than any other company. CNN’s standout election coverage made it the #1 news network in primetime among adults 18-49 for the fourth consecutive quarter and Turner’s momentum doesn’t stop there. Year-to-date, TBS, TNT and Adult Swim are three of the top five ad-supported cable networks in primetime among adults 18-49. In film, Warner Bros. had a strong quarter led by Suicide Squad and has the #1 release of the fall in Sully, while anticipation is off the charts for J.K. Rowling’s Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, which hits the big screen on November 18.”

    Bewkes continued, “The agreement we announced on October 22 to be acquired by AT&T Inc. represents a great outcome for our shareholders and an excellent opportunity to drive long-term value well into the future. Combining with AT&T is the natural next step in the evolution of our business and allows us to significantly accelerate our most important strategies.”

  • Q3-16: Time Warner revenue up 9.2 percent

    Q3-16: Time Warner revenue up 9.2 percent

    BENGALURU: Time Warner Inc., (Time Warner) reported 9.2 percent year-over-year (y-o-y) growth in revenue for the third quarter ended 30 September 2016 (Q3-16, current quarter).

    Time Warner reported total revenue of $7,167 million for the current quarter versus $6,564 million in the corresponding year ago quarter. Among its three divisions – Turner, Home Box Office, and Warner Bros, Turner reported 8.8 percent y-o-y increase in revenue of $2,610 million in Q3-16 vis-à-vis $2,398 million in Q3-15. HBO revenue grew 4.3 percent y-o-y in the current quarter to $1,426 million from$1,367 million, while Warner Bros revenue increased 6.6 percent y-o-y to $3,402 million from $3,190 million.

    Operating Income increased 9.8 percent y-o-y to $2,014 million in Q3-16 from $1,834 million. Adjusted Operating Income increased 12.4 to $2,070 million from $1,842 million, which the company says was due to increases at all operating divisions and lower intercompany eliminations. Revenues included the unfavourable impact of foreign exchange rates of approximately $55 million in the quarter.

    Breakup of numbers

    Turner

    A 12.4 percent y-o-y) increase in subscription revenue helped boost Turner revenue, while Advertising (ad) revenue increased 1.2 percent y-o-y during the current quarter.  Time Warner’s Subscription revenue in Q3-16 was $1,480 million as against $1,317 million in the corresponding year ago quarter. The division’s ad revenue in the current quarter was $996 million, while it was $980 million in Q3-15.

    Turner’s operating income increased 8.4 percent y-o-y in Q3-16 to $1,612 million from $1,072 million in Q3-15.

    Time Warner says that Subscription revenues increased due to higher domestic rates and growth at Turner’s international networks, partially offset by the impact of lower domestic subscribers and foreign exchange rates. Advertising revenues benefited from growth at Turner’s domestic news business, partially offset by lower delivery at certain domestic entertainment networks. International advertising was essentially flat with local currency growth offset by the impact of foreign exchange rates. Content and other revenues increased due to higher international licensing revenues.

    HBO

    HBO revenues increased on account of a 5.2 percent y-o-y increase in subscription revenue in Q3-16 to $1,262 million from $1,200 million. Content and other revenue declined 1.8 percent y-o-y in the current quarter to $164 million from $167 million.

    HBO’s operating income in Q3-16 increased 2.1 percent y-o-y to $530 million from $519 million.

    The company says that Subscription revenues increased due to higher domestic rates and international growth. The decrease in Content and other revenues was due to lower domestic licensing revenues, partially offset by higher international licensing revenues.

    Warner Bros

    Warner Bros revenues increased due to a 44.9 percent y-o-y gain in its Theatrical product to $1,605 million in Q3-16 from $1,108 million. This gain was offset by a 2.1 percent y-o-y decline in Warner’s Television product to $1,430 million from #1,460 million and a 41 percent decline in its ‘Videogames and other’ revenue to $367 million from$672 million.

    The company says that Theatrical revenues increased due to the box office releases of Suicide SquadThe Legend of TarzanSully and Lights Out. Videogames revenues declined due to the comparison to the launch ofLEGO Dimensions and carryover revenues from Mortal Kombat X in the prior year quarter.

    Warner Operating Income increased 11.2 percent ($43 million) y-o-y in the current quarter to $428 million from $385 million, due to the increase in revenues, partially offset by higher costs of revenues associated with the mix of film releases.

    Company speak

    Time Warner chairman and CEO Jeff Bewkes said, “We had a strong third quarter, which keeps us on track to exceed our original 2016 outlook and underscores our leadership in creating and distributing the very best content. In television, HBO took home more Primetime Emmy Awards than any other network for the 15th consecutive year and Time Warner’s divisions won a total of 40 Emmys, more than any other company. CNN’s standout election coverage made it the #1 news network in primetime among adults 18-49 for the fourth consecutive quarter and Turner’s momentum doesn’t stop there. Year-to-date, TBS, TNT and Adult Swim are three of the top five ad-supported cable networks in primetime among adults 18-49. In film, Warner Bros. had a strong quarter led by Suicide Squad and has the #1 release of the fall in Sully, while anticipation is off the charts for J.K. Rowling’s Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, which hits the big screen on November 18.”

    Bewkes continued, “The agreement we announced on October 22 to be acquired by AT&T Inc. represents a great outcome for our shareholders and an excellent opportunity to drive long-term value well into the future. Combining with AT&T is the natural next step in the evolution of our business and allows us to significantly accelerate our most important strategies.”

  • Originals are a big play for us, says Viacom 18’s Gaurav Gandhi

    Originals are a big play for us, says Viacom 18’s Gaurav Gandhi

    If you look at Gaurav Gandhi’s CV, you will see that this NMIMS graduate began as a strategic business media executive with the Sam Balsara-promoted Madison Communications way back in 1998. He then took the plunge into television, joining Turner as a researcher and planner, and then, Star India. He followed that up with a stint in NDTV Imagine. 

    But, for the past six years, he has been associated with the Viacom18 brand – first as the commercial head, then moving on to distribution of traditional television with various assignments in Sun18 and IndiaCast, before being given the responsibility of steering the company into the digital space in late 2015. 

    Burning the midnight oil for more than seven months, he and his team, rolled out their first offering – a VOD service called Voot in March 2016. Rivals such as Star India, and Zee TV had their versions – Hotstar and DittoTV — in play for a longer period. But, that did not faze Voot COO who is known to be a feisty fighter. He is quite clear of the direction that Voot is taking, and he spoke about its journey so far in a tete-a-tete with Indiantelevision.com’s Megha Parmar. Read on to get some Gandhi insights on the Indian OTT space.

    How has the response to Voot been so far?

    The response has been very good. We are happy where we are. To get to be the third largest streaming website in watch time in a short period that we have is very encouraging. It’s been a good journey. We know that, as a market, we have close to 100 million users now, which will go to 400 million. So, the 4x growth is happening in the market, and we are riding that well.  There are three things that really encourage us. First, 45 minutes per day per user on an average is a very good number, so the watchtime is there. We have a large user base now, which excites us. Second is the fantastic response to our content. Of our three properties (TV, kids and originals), specifically for television, there is so much to do around a reality show. Thirty per cent of the views come from the extra stuff that we do around it. We shoot a lot of things along with our TV counterparts. And having 50+ advertisers on board definitely gives us a sense that we are going in the right direction.

    What were the learnings in the past few months?

    There has been a lot of learning. With our kids, we know exactly what is going on.We have a publishing cycle in place and the way it works is to make sure that we refresh it thrice a day. Kids will come back from school by 4 pm, and we thought that we should put our best content there and market it. Reality happened to us at 9 pm as the kids were watching it at that point of time when their parents are busy with dinner. That was the learning, which came alongside. Actually, the father’s phones have been used far more on weekends.

    We initially were of the opinion that 500 cities are enough for us but, in the third month, we crossed 1000 cities. There are viewers in 1100 cities right now who regularly consume Voot.  It’s all been a great learning. We had originally thought that it was about currency or new shows, but the catalogue has been watched by people for new stuff.

    People repeatedly come to us for something they love such as the MTV show, Kaisi Yeh Yaariyan. We look at the data and have witnessed that a lot of people consume data when in office between 1:30 am and 3 pm. There is a big surge of content.

    The kids demo peaks at 9 pm, the GEC at 10 pm and youth escalates from 11 pm to 1 at night. Our traffic only goes down from 2:30 am to 5 am. That is the time when we have some time with us, say, to solve a technical problem. Those things are very different. This is a consumer business, B2C, as against the past. We have not been going to  the consumers directly. We are consumer brands now, and that is an interesting proposition.

    When you say that 75 per cent of video consumption is now happening through WiFi and it is expected to change after digitization, after which a majority of the consumption will happen through telcos. The telcos are also coming into play with their own offerings of VOD and aggregation OTT platforms such as Jio, Wynk, Idea TV. Are the VOD platforms going to be at a disadvantage?

     Let me be honest with you, there is no dearth of platforms, and there will be none going forward. It’s like we have approximately 600 to 800 channels right now technically, and it still has a demand because people are watching. We are ultimately providing content. Those are platforms wherein everything is available but ours is a video-on-demand platform where you can choose what you want to watch and at what time.

    If you are talking from the content front, if you have a clear direction on the partnerships, the consumers as well as the content creation that you are doing, I don’t see a threat. Second, telcos are building services out. How we work with them and tie up is yet to be seen. The fact that we are over the top, we are available to every single person. We are an OTT service and we are available to all.

    Telcos are only concerned about one thing: consumer data. We work very closely with Jio and many other players. I think, from a telecoms perspective, they want to give their users everything possible and encourage them to consume data. From our point of view, we are talking about the fact that we want maximum viewership and that converts to eyeballs, money, and so on. So it’s very much a complementary situation. We provide content, and they get the users to use that content on their network. We get our eyeballs they get their consumption.

    What type of growth do you see after 4G rolls out completely?

     I see currently 120 million digital video users overall to go to 400 million next year. That’s three and a half times growth. You are doubling the user base over digital video every year. Now, if that is the case, all the players will grow automatically. Obviously, there will be top three, four, five, naturally who will see more growth because of more content.

    The other part of India is an interesting challenge because top five or six companies control 80 per cent of the IP. They are investing on the IPs and they are building more and more. Naturally, they will have a bigger advantage. Telcos will build their interesting products. How you will work with the telcos and how they launch their products will be interesting to see.

    Currently, it’s an ad-supported market largely, and that leads to getting more eyeballs because you are making it available to a large set. We foresee growth to be fairly phenomenal in the next 36 months for everyone in the market. We want to grow at a faster pace — naturally.

    So, you think an ad supported model is faring well for you, and that is the way to go? Or, will you also experiment with other models?

    There are multiple models that you can play with. The reason that, today an ad supported model works, and is the right way is because of three main reasons. One, people are psychologically prepared to pay for content. You get 400 channels for Rs 300, and if you go back 10 years, the cable TV monthly subscription was around Rs 200. Channels have increased, it’s become digital, HD has arrived, etc., but the amount you are paying is the same. People think that this is our birthright, we will get it anyhow. So, there is a big mindset shift that needs to happen and it has to happen with the distribution industry. But, till then, the value of content in the mind is benchmarked to the amount you pay on TV, especially if it a subscription base. If it is event based, for eg, paying for a movie where you are paying for the experience of movie, you will not pay the same amount for watching a movie at home. You are paying for the outing, the experience, so there is a challenge.

     The second challenge is data prices, that are very high. To pay for data and to pay for content together for a consumer is very steep today.

    The third one is payment gateways. How do you pay for content? Not many people have credit cards, and people are not using it for recurring charge.

    I see this mindset changing in the next 36 months as well. The data prices will fundamentally come down, you will have data, bundled deals of content, you will have better speed connectivity, you will be offered premium services, HD service and various other services. Even the gateways will emerge. All these things will allow me to do a subscription model or a TVOD model as well. But, the large belly of the business is the ad-supported model.

    To run an advertising model you need humongous volumes. If you are a niche player, however good you might be, you can’t get business on advertising because the whole model of advertising is built on the number of eyeballs.

    It is a very expensive business. There are technology costs which are very high, there are content costs, there are costs of marketing and acquiring a customer, there are costs of streaming to the customer.

    The more content you watch on Voot or Hotstar or Youtube, there are two things which tend to happen. You are charged for data and it will also cost more to me as well as I have to pay the CDN (content delivery network) cost. So, the more you watch, the more I am paying. So I have to recover that cost. Unless you are a large volume player, you can’t do ad-supported. If you are a small player, you have to charge a sensible price to recover that cost. Netflix  – taking the sliver of the market at that price point, saying I only want these people – is one model. You are paying Netflix month on month.

    I think there will be more interesting models emerging in India going forward to break the psychological barrier in people’s mind. It’s not only an affordability barrier, but also a psychological barrier.

    We have to traverse the journey from ‘completely free’ to ‘completely pay.’ That journey has to pass through the consumer’s point of view, who is trying to pay for somethings. Once you are hooked on, then you tend to convert into a smaller package. The consumers will convert, but you can’t straight away give them a shock that tomorrow morning you will have to pay Rs 700. You will then get some, but a small portion.

    However, that’s not enough as in this country you have to build volumes. We are in the volume business. But, with some products, you can say that I want to play the international market game and play on the subscription part. It makes a lot of sense.

    But, one player has minimalised its rate to say the cost of a samosa. What do you have to say about that?

    We are not comparing with them. They only offer channels and not video on demand. I don’t know how are they doing it. Any strategy in my mind has to be sustainable. If they are able to offer all the channels in the world at Rs 20, then I think cable companies should talk to them and figure out why are they not charging that amount for the same channels.

    But, think of it logically. If you have all channels, everything for life at Rs 20 per month, then why would you pay the cable operators? You can choose to acquire customers from any route. You have a different way of acquiring customers and then you can hope them to stay hooked. I think it’s a marketing strategy from their point of view. People use different marketing strategies. But, I don’t think it makes business sense.

    I personally consume Voot content while it also is a ritual for me to catch up on Splitsvilla. But, there is a lag of around eight hours. Why?

    Splitsvilla has a humongous catch-up. There was a day where the Splitsvilla Sunday numbers were bigger than the next three days put together combined in a total value. I am a firm believer that consumers should have an ad model but you also need to understand that an ad supported model, you are getting this absolutely free as compared to me providing it to a cable or a DTH operator who is charging customers for it. There needs to be some gap. I could make this little pay and make it at the same time. But, if it is absolutely free here, you can play it, Chromecast it, share it, then personally I don’t feel that it is the right model. But, you can argue with me why it has to be eight hours? Why can’t it be six hours or a four hour lag? Those things are workable from my point of view but currently we have started with this strategy to put it up next morning. So, the way it works is TV airs it, we then process it, which takes about two to three hours. The team comes up here at 5am and publishes it on for the TV, tablet, mobile, website, etc. By 7:30 am, the content gets published most of the times.
    Is there scope of providing live content? How much, according to you, can the window be narrowed which also makes sense to your business?
    I am not going to comment on live, but, from case to case, we might have a much shorter window. I can narrow it down to zero also but, right now, I am not taking up that call because putting it up in the morning makes sense. You have to look at the larger thing. Currently, TV is measured on ratings and that’s how channels and advertisers are making money. TV has a large business there. This type of an emerging business has a separate sales, cost, structure, separate consumer base; we have to grow both businesses. It can’t be at the cost of the other. Definitely, it can’t be that you are actually working against the partners of yours especially on the distribution side by providing it free or live at the same time. I know some of my competitors have done it on the same time or even before, but as a stunt it is fine. But, if you do it continuously, I think it is should be made a free channel, which should be also free for the cable operators.

     I think giving it absolutely free at the same time is something I am not completely convinced right now. It is just a commercial business challenge to figure out whether it makes sense.

    We at the same time are also trying to increase the ARPU of the consumers. The business will grow but it also needs value. If I say that the same channel is available here for free and you stream it whereas there you are charging Rs 600 for it, then why will you pay? For what? The consumers will come and leave. We are just four months old, and this is an evolving space for us. At this time, we feel a six to eight hours lag is good. But, sometimes we reduce the lag.

    Do you plan to have Colors Infinity content on Voot?

    We do have it with us. The stage is there. We already have all the Indian productions of Infinity. At this time, it will only be home-grown content because the international content has two challenges, one is the third-party rights and the international players are a little more circumspect about putting content on ad-supported models. They want to put it on premium models. So, we are working with them to see what we can do. We have the format for ‘24’ with catch-up available. So, we get the stuff we create here. I think it is a journey. There are only two large ad-supported models in the world i.e China and India. They have never seen many big ad-supported models in the world.

    It’s a shift for us as well. If you talk to large players, they come to India and are amazed by the advertising growth here. Their mindset has changed. Netflix charges $8 in US which is like Rs 500 for us. But, that is their price point. I think as you are playing with the consumers in the market, you also have to adjust your prices and look at that.

    Some are B2B players who don’t talk to consumers directly. It takes sometime for them to figure out their life. So, I think it will take some time to convince the big studios to put their content on the ad-supported model in English.

    How are your originals doing onVoot?

    Very good. We only started with a few. There is a surge in catch-up audience or the ones who were more skewed towards TV content. ‘Chinese Bhasad’ has done well for us. ‘Badman’ has won awards India and internationally as well. ‘Shaadi Boys’ have seen a crazy demand and we have some episodes in place for the next season to come up shortly. The kind of traction we get for trailers is mind-blowing. I have got my competitors writing to us saying the content is phenomenal. Just now, someone from Star wrote that you are killing it with your shows. So, we are very happy with the response. I think the idea really is to create differentiated content that people don’t get on television but also have it relevant. We don’t want flaky things at all. We want to connect with the audience, and this is mature show. This is for everybody who is either married or is in relationship. It is not for a 15, 18 or 20 year old.

    Do you plan to package separately for your originals on Voot?

    As we speak, we have launched six shows. But, overtime, we will create a separate section of Voot Originals on the app. That is the way for us. Totally! Originals are a big play for us.

    Data is crucial for OTT and VOD. Are advertisers buying (agreeing with) the data you are giving them. What do they expect?

    Fifty advertisers on board, it’s not a small number. Everybody can see us as the third largest platform in the country in terms of size, in terms of minute data. You look how we have gotten million downloads. We are amongst the first guys who shared our data weekly dashboard to advertisers. Before us nobody used to do that. We are proud of what we have pursued in the first few months but it’s a long way to go. So advertisers are very keen. We have deals with several agencies, all the big clients are on board, we have long term deals as well.

    What is the sweet spot for advertising rates for OTT and VOD platforms? Let’s say for Voot?

    That is very hard, I can’t guesstimate. Let me tell you that we are on the higher end of the market. Because you know what you get here are the premium audiences – in the sense that they would not be buying Porsche and BMW but a loyal audience who can actually be fully measured and targeted.  You will be able to get a sponsorship opportunity, content, several integrations and lot more things surrounded. Sometimes, you are able to own the entire show as well.

    SonyLiv, Hotstar, Amazon Prime are going to be bidding for IPL rights? Where will that place platforms such as Voot as compared to the one who gets it?

    See, we don’t play in sports. Whether it comes on OTT or television, the reality of it is very simple. When there is cricket and when there is India playing, people are watching something. I do not buy the fact people are watching both things at the same time. The statement that you are watching TV and you are watching Voot or Hotstar or whatever it might be does not work.

    I actually believe that a sport, especially cricket, is something which you watch with a lot of people together. It’s an event-based thing. People watch it so numbers are there is no doubt about it. But, in my mind, it’s not as if those two hours or four hours or three hours of a match impacting my Voot journey too much. Contrary to that, I think we have a clear strategy on three big or four big types of content and I want to put my money behind that and that’s why what I am doing with kids, originals, reality. It is a clear indicator that I was actually putting my money before advertisers came on. I commissioned the shows in originals before they came on right. I am not waiting for the next guy to come who will give me money so that I can start.

  • Originals are a big play for us, says Viacom 18’s Gaurav Gandhi

    Originals are a big play for us, says Viacom 18’s Gaurav Gandhi

    If you look at Gaurav Gandhi’s CV, you will see that this NMIMS graduate began as a strategic business media executive with the Sam Balsara-promoted Madison Communications way back in 1998. He then took the plunge into television, joining Turner as a researcher and planner, and then, Star India. He followed that up with a stint in NDTV Imagine. 

    But, for the past six years, he has been associated with the Viacom18 brand – first as the commercial head, then moving on to distribution of traditional television with various assignments in Sun18 and IndiaCast, before being given the responsibility of steering the company into the digital space in late 2015. 

    Burning the midnight oil for more than seven months, he and his team, rolled out their first offering – a VOD service called Voot in March 2016. Rivals such as Star India, and Zee TV had their versions – Hotstar and DittoTV — in play for a longer period. But, that did not faze Voot COO who is known to be a feisty fighter. He is quite clear of the direction that Voot is taking, and he spoke about its journey so far in a tete-a-tete with Indiantelevision.com’s Megha Parmar. Read on to get some Gandhi insights on the Indian OTT space.

    How has the response to Voot been so far?

    The response has been very good. We are happy where we are. To get to be the third largest streaming website in watch time in a short period that we have is very encouraging. It’s been a good journey. We know that, as a market, we have close to 100 million users now, which will go to 400 million. So, the 4x growth is happening in the market, and we are riding that well.  There are three things that really encourage us. First, 45 minutes per day per user on an average is a very good number, so the watchtime is there. We have a large user base now, which excites us. Second is the fantastic response to our content. Of our three properties (TV, kids and originals), specifically for television, there is so much to do around a reality show. Thirty per cent of the views come from the extra stuff that we do around it. We shoot a lot of things along with our TV counterparts. And having 50+ advertisers on board definitely gives us a sense that we are going in the right direction.

    What were the learnings in the past few months?

    There has been a lot of learning. With our kids, we know exactly what is going on.We have a publishing cycle in place and the way it works is to make sure that we refresh it thrice a day. Kids will come back from school by 4 pm, and we thought that we should put our best content there and market it. Reality happened to us at 9 pm as the kids were watching it at that point of time when their parents are busy with dinner. That was the learning, which came alongside. Actually, the father’s phones have been used far more on weekends.

    We initially were of the opinion that 500 cities are enough for us but, in the third month, we crossed 1000 cities. There are viewers in 1100 cities right now who regularly consume Voot.  It’s all been a great learning. We had originally thought that it was about currency or new shows, but the catalogue has been watched by people for new stuff.

    People repeatedly come to us for something they love such as the MTV show, Kaisi Yeh Yaariyan. We look at the data and have witnessed that a lot of people consume data when in office between 1:30 am and 3 pm. There is a big surge of content.

    The kids demo peaks at 9 pm, the GEC at 10 pm and youth escalates from 11 pm to 1 at night. Our traffic only goes down from 2:30 am to 5 am. That is the time when we have some time with us, say, to solve a technical problem. Those things are very different. This is a consumer business, B2C, as against the past. We have not been going to  the consumers directly. We are consumer brands now, and that is an interesting proposition.

    When you say that 75 per cent of video consumption is now happening through WiFi and it is expected to change after digitization, after which a majority of the consumption will happen through telcos. The telcos are also coming into play with their own offerings of VOD and aggregation OTT platforms such as Jio, Wynk, Idea TV. Are the VOD platforms going to be at a disadvantage?

     Let me be honest with you, there is no dearth of platforms, and there will be none going forward. It’s like we have approximately 600 to 800 channels right now technically, and it still has a demand because people are watching. We are ultimately providing content. Those are platforms wherein everything is available but ours is a video-on-demand platform where you can choose what you want to watch and at what time.

    If you are talking from the content front, if you have a clear direction on the partnerships, the consumers as well as the content creation that you are doing, I don’t see a threat. Second, telcos are building services out. How we work with them and tie up is yet to be seen. The fact that we are over the top, we are available to every single person. We are an OTT service and we are available to all.

    Telcos are only concerned about one thing: consumer data. We work very closely with Jio and many other players. I think, from a telecoms perspective, they want to give their users everything possible and encourage them to consume data. From our point of view, we are talking about the fact that we want maximum viewership and that converts to eyeballs, money, and so on. So it’s very much a complementary situation. We provide content, and they get the users to use that content on their network. We get our eyeballs they get their consumption.

    What type of growth do you see after 4G rolls out completely?

     I see currently 120 million digital video users overall to go to 400 million next year. That’s three and a half times growth. You are doubling the user base over digital video every year. Now, if that is the case, all the players will grow automatically. Obviously, there will be top three, four, five, naturally who will see more growth because of more content.

    The other part of India is an interesting challenge because top five or six companies control 80 per cent of the IP. They are investing on the IPs and they are building more and more. Naturally, they will have a bigger advantage. Telcos will build their interesting products. How you will work with the telcos and how they launch their products will be interesting to see.

    Currently, it’s an ad-supported market largely, and that leads to getting more eyeballs because you are making it available to a large set. We foresee growth to be fairly phenomenal in the next 36 months for everyone in the market. We want to grow at a faster pace — naturally.

    So, you think an ad supported model is faring well for you, and that is the way to go? Or, will you also experiment with other models?

    There are multiple models that you can play with. The reason that, today an ad supported model works, and is the right way is because of three main reasons. One, people are psychologically prepared to pay for content. You get 400 channels for Rs 300, and if you go back 10 years, the cable TV monthly subscription was around Rs 200. Channels have increased, it’s become digital, HD has arrived, etc., but the amount you are paying is the same. People think that this is our birthright, we will get it anyhow. So, there is a big mindset shift that needs to happen and it has to happen with the distribution industry. But, till then, the value of content in the mind is benchmarked to the amount you pay on TV, especially if it a subscription base. If it is event based, for eg, paying for a movie where you are paying for the experience of movie, you will not pay the same amount for watching a movie at home. You are paying for the outing, the experience, so there is a challenge.

     The second challenge is data prices, that are very high. To pay for data and to pay for content together for a consumer is very steep today.

    The third one is payment gateways. How do you pay for content? Not many people have credit cards, and people are not using it for recurring charge.

    I see this mindset changing in the next 36 months as well. The data prices will fundamentally come down, you will have data, bundled deals of content, you will have better speed connectivity, you will be offered premium services, HD service and various other services. Even the gateways will emerge. All these things will allow me to do a subscription model or a TVOD model as well. But, the large belly of the business is the ad-supported model.

    To run an advertising model you need humongous volumes. If you are a niche player, however good you might be, you can’t get business on advertising because the whole model of advertising is built on the number of eyeballs.

    It is a very expensive business. There are technology costs which are very high, there are content costs, there are costs of marketing and acquiring a customer, there are costs of streaming to the customer.

    The more content you watch on Voot or Hotstar or Youtube, there are two things which tend to happen. You are charged for data and it will also cost more to me as well as I have to pay the CDN (content delivery network) cost. So, the more you watch, the more I am paying. So I have to recover that cost. Unless you are a large volume player, you can’t do ad-supported. If you are a small player, you have to charge a sensible price to recover that cost. Netflix  – taking the sliver of the market at that price point, saying I only want these people – is one model. You are paying Netflix month on month.

    I think there will be more interesting models emerging in India going forward to break the psychological barrier in people’s mind. It’s not only an affordability barrier, but also a psychological barrier.

    We have to traverse the journey from ‘completely free’ to ‘completely pay.’ That journey has to pass through the consumer’s point of view, who is trying to pay for somethings. Once you are hooked on, then you tend to convert into a smaller package. The consumers will convert, but you can’t straight away give them a shock that tomorrow morning you will have to pay Rs 700. You will then get some, but a small portion.

    However, that’s not enough as in this country you have to build volumes. We are in the volume business. But, with some products, you can say that I want to play the international market game and play on the subscription part. It makes a lot of sense.

    But, one player has minimalised its rate to say the cost of a samosa. What do you have to say about that?

    We are not comparing with them. They only offer channels and not video on demand. I don’t know how are they doing it. Any strategy in my mind has to be sustainable. If they are able to offer all the channels in the world at Rs 20, then I think cable companies should talk to them and figure out why are they not charging that amount for the same channels.

    But, think of it logically. If you have all channels, everything for life at Rs 20 per month, then why would you pay the cable operators? You can choose to acquire customers from any route. You have a different way of acquiring customers and then you can hope them to stay hooked. I think it’s a marketing strategy from their point of view. People use different marketing strategies. But, I don’t think it makes business sense.

    I personally consume Voot content while it also is a ritual for me to catch up on Splitsvilla. But, there is a lag of around eight hours. Why?

    Splitsvilla has a humongous catch-up. There was a day where the Splitsvilla Sunday numbers were bigger than the next three days put together combined in a total value. I am a firm believer that consumers should have an ad model but you also need to understand that an ad supported model, you are getting this absolutely free as compared to me providing it to a cable or a DTH operator who is charging customers for it. There needs to be some gap. I could make this little pay and make it at the same time. But, if it is absolutely free here, you can play it, Chromecast it, share it, then personally I don’t feel that it is the right model. But, you can argue with me why it has to be eight hours? Why can’t it be six hours or a four hour lag? Those things are workable from my point of view but currently we have started with this strategy to put it up next morning. So, the way it works is TV airs it, we then process it, which takes about two to three hours. The team comes up here at 5am and publishes it on for the TV, tablet, mobile, website, etc. By 7:30 am, the content gets published most of the times.
    Is there scope of providing live content? How much, according to you, can the window be narrowed which also makes sense to your business?
    I am not going to comment on live, but, from case to case, we might have a much shorter window. I can narrow it down to zero also but, right now, I am not taking up that call because putting it up in the morning makes sense. You have to look at the larger thing. Currently, TV is measured on ratings and that’s how channels and advertisers are making money. TV has a large business there. This type of an emerging business has a separate sales, cost, structure, separate consumer base; we have to grow both businesses. It can’t be at the cost of the other. Definitely, it can’t be that you are actually working against the partners of yours especially on the distribution side by providing it free or live at the same time. I know some of my competitors have done it on the same time or even before, but as a stunt it is fine. But, if you do it continuously, I think it is should be made a free channel, which should be also free for the cable operators.

     I think giving it absolutely free at the same time is something I am not completely convinced right now. It is just a commercial business challenge to figure out whether it makes sense.

    We at the same time are also trying to increase the ARPU of the consumers. The business will grow but it also needs value. If I say that the same channel is available here for free and you stream it whereas there you are charging Rs 600 for it, then why will you pay? For what? The consumers will come and leave. We are just four months old, and this is an evolving space for us. At this time, we feel a six to eight hours lag is good. But, sometimes we reduce the lag.

    Do you plan to have Colors Infinity content on Voot?

    We do have it with us. The stage is there. We already have all the Indian productions of Infinity. At this time, it will only be home-grown content because the international content has two challenges, one is the third-party rights and the international players are a little more circumspect about putting content on ad-supported models. They want to put it on premium models. So, we are working with them to see what we can do. We have the format for ‘24’ with catch-up available. So, we get the stuff we create here. I think it is a journey. There are only two large ad-supported models in the world i.e China and India. They have never seen many big ad-supported models in the world.

    It’s a shift for us as well. If you talk to large players, they come to India and are amazed by the advertising growth here. Their mindset has changed. Netflix charges $8 in US which is like Rs 500 for us. But, that is their price point. I think as you are playing with the consumers in the market, you also have to adjust your prices and look at that.

    Some are B2B players who don’t talk to consumers directly. It takes sometime for them to figure out their life. So, I think it will take some time to convince the big studios to put their content on the ad-supported model in English.

    How are your originals doing onVoot?

    Very good. We only started with a few. There is a surge in catch-up audience or the ones who were more skewed towards TV content. ‘Chinese Bhasad’ has done well for us. ‘Badman’ has won awards India and internationally as well. ‘Shaadi Boys’ have seen a crazy demand and we have some episodes in place for the next season to come up shortly. The kind of traction we get for trailers is mind-blowing. I have got my competitors writing to us saying the content is phenomenal. Just now, someone from Star wrote that you are killing it with your shows. So, we are very happy with the response. I think the idea really is to create differentiated content that people don’t get on television but also have it relevant. We don’t want flaky things at all. We want to connect with the audience, and this is mature show. This is for everybody who is either married or is in relationship. It is not for a 15, 18 or 20 year old.

    Do you plan to package separately for your originals on Voot?

    As we speak, we have launched six shows. But, overtime, we will create a separate section of Voot Originals on the app. That is the way for us. Totally! Originals are a big play for us.

    Data is crucial for OTT and VOD. Are advertisers buying (agreeing with) the data you are giving them. What do they expect?

    Fifty advertisers on board, it’s not a small number. Everybody can see us as the third largest platform in the country in terms of size, in terms of minute data. You look how we have gotten million downloads. We are amongst the first guys who shared our data weekly dashboard to advertisers. Before us nobody used to do that. We are proud of what we have pursued in the first few months but it’s a long way to go. So advertisers are very keen. We have deals with several agencies, all the big clients are on board, we have long term deals as well.

    What is the sweet spot for advertising rates for OTT and VOD platforms? Let’s say for Voot?

    That is very hard, I can’t guesstimate. Let me tell you that we are on the higher end of the market. Because you know what you get here are the premium audiences – in the sense that they would not be buying Porsche and BMW but a loyal audience who can actually be fully measured and targeted.  You will be able to get a sponsorship opportunity, content, several integrations and lot more things surrounded. Sometimes, you are able to own the entire show as well.

    SonyLiv, Hotstar, Amazon Prime are going to be bidding for IPL rights? Where will that place platforms such as Voot as compared to the one who gets it?

    See, we don’t play in sports. Whether it comes on OTT or television, the reality of it is very simple. When there is cricket and when there is India playing, people are watching something. I do not buy the fact people are watching both things at the same time. The statement that you are watching TV and you are watching Voot or Hotstar or whatever it might be does not work.

    I actually believe that a sport, especially cricket, is something which you watch with a lot of people together. It’s an event-based thing. People watch it so numbers are there is no doubt about it. But, in my mind, it’s not as if those two hours or four hours or three hours of a match impacting my Voot journey too much. Contrary to that, I think we have a clear strategy on three big or four big types of content and I want to put my money behind that and that’s why what I am doing with kids, originals, reality. It is a clear indicator that I was actually putting my money before advertisers came on. I commissioned the shows in originals before they came on right. I am not waiting for the next guy to come who will give me money so that I can start.

  • OTT players spend exceeds traditional broadcasters; Netflix weighing  Indian content to drive growth

    OTT players spend exceeds traditional broadcasters; Netflix weighing Indian content to drive growth

    MUMBAI: Online platforms such as Amazon and the streaming giant Netflix have ramped up their investment in programming, investing US$ 7.5 billion last year which is more than HBO, Turner and CBS in most countries including Australia and South Korea.

    Netflix invested over twice as much on original programming as the entire Australian TV market, a new report stated. In India, it could look at licensing deals and produce more local language content as it seeks to strengthen its presence here.

    The US-based company, which expanded into over 130 markets, entered India a few months ago and rivals streaming sites or platforms such as Star India’s Hotstar, SonyLiv, YuppTV, Spuul, Ditto TV, Eros Now, and Hungama. All these are betting on growing smartphone and Internet use to drive growth. Netflix could soon be introducing ‘download-and-go’ offline streaming.

    Between 2013 and 2015, Amazon and Netflix doubled their annual investments on programming. In 2013, Amazon spent US$ 1.22 billion, that jumped to US$ 2.67 billion in 2015. In the corresponding period, Netflix investments rose from US$ 2.38 billion to US$ 4.91 billion, a IHS Markit report stated while examining how TV programme producers are adapting to the era of internet TV.

    “Netflix and Amazon investments are only topped by Disney ($11.84 billion) and NBC ($10.27 billion),” said IHS Technology senior principal analyst Tim Westcott,.

    Netflix added over 50 per cent more subscribers than expected in the third quarter as original shows such as “Stranger Things” drew new international viewers and kept US customers despite a price hike, according to FactSet StreetAccount.

    Other online platforms such as China’s Youku Toudu, iQifyi, Tencent and Hulu in the US have also increased their investment in original programming and acquisitions.

    “More and more consumers are watching content online, shaking the foundations of the traditional TV industry,” Westcott said. “However, it’s premature to declare that the era of linear TV is over,” he added.

    Westcott estimated that, in 2015, the US represented 33 per cent of worldwide expenditure on TV programming, with US$ 43 billion invested across free-to-air, pay TV and online.” “Netflix and Amazon, though they are US companies, are now commissioning for multiple territories, so we have treated them as global platforms.”

    The biggest markets in Western Europe were the UK with $10.7 billion, Germany ($7.3 billion), France ($6.6 billion) and Italy ($4.6 billion). “Notably, China is now the second largest market in Asia Pacific, with $8.4 billion invested last year,” Westcott said. Japan is the largest in the region with $9.8 billion, followed by South Korea ($2.6 billion), Australia and India—both on $2.4 billion.

    Netflix considers pouring money into building its stable of licensed and original movies and TV shows. Content spending will rise to $6 billion next year, a $1 billion increase from 2016, its CEO Reed Hastings has said.

    It faces competition from the likes of Amazon and Hulu. Figures released in the World TV Production Report 2016 claim Netflix spent US$ 4.91bn on new programming the last year, compared to Australia’s total market spend of US$2.4bn. Amazon, which may reportedly launch in Australia in a few months, increased its programming investment in 2016 to US$ 2.67bn from US$ 1.22bn in 2015, although far below Disney’s spend of US$ 11.84bn in 2016.

    In India however Netflix has branded itself in the premium bracket and therefore has some disadvantage as far as pricing is concerned. A majorly English language content makes business difficult for Netflix in India. More local language content and licensing deals could help in this context. Netflix, which has not disclosed its subscribers base in India, may need to adopt a localisation strategy for growth in the country.

  • OTT players spend exceeds traditional broadcasters; Netflix weighing  Indian content to drive growth

    OTT players spend exceeds traditional broadcasters; Netflix weighing Indian content to drive growth

    MUMBAI: Online platforms such as Amazon and the streaming giant Netflix have ramped up their investment in programming, investing US$ 7.5 billion last year which is more than HBO, Turner and CBS in most countries including Australia and South Korea.

    Netflix invested over twice as much on original programming as the entire Australian TV market, a new report stated. In India, it could look at licensing deals and produce more local language content as it seeks to strengthen its presence here.

    The US-based company, which expanded into over 130 markets, entered India a few months ago and rivals streaming sites or platforms such as Star India’s Hotstar, SonyLiv, YuppTV, Spuul, Ditto TV, Eros Now, and Hungama. All these are betting on growing smartphone and Internet use to drive growth. Netflix could soon be introducing ‘download-and-go’ offline streaming.

    Between 2013 and 2015, Amazon and Netflix doubled their annual investments on programming. In 2013, Amazon spent US$ 1.22 billion, that jumped to US$ 2.67 billion in 2015. In the corresponding period, Netflix investments rose from US$ 2.38 billion to US$ 4.91 billion, a IHS Markit report stated while examining how TV programme producers are adapting to the era of internet TV.

    “Netflix and Amazon investments are only topped by Disney ($11.84 billion) and NBC ($10.27 billion),” said IHS Technology senior principal analyst Tim Westcott,.

    Netflix added over 50 per cent more subscribers than expected in the third quarter as original shows such as “Stranger Things” drew new international viewers and kept US customers despite a price hike, according to FactSet StreetAccount.

    Other online platforms such as China’s Youku Toudu, iQifyi, Tencent and Hulu in the US have also increased their investment in original programming and acquisitions.

    “More and more consumers are watching content online, shaking the foundations of the traditional TV industry,” Westcott said. “However, it’s premature to declare that the era of linear TV is over,” he added.

    Westcott estimated that, in 2015, the US represented 33 per cent of worldwide expenditure on TV programming, with US$ 43 billion invested across free-to-air, pay TV and online.” “Netflix and Amazon, though they are US companies, are now commissioning for multiple territories, so we have treated them as global platforms.”

    The biggest markets in Western Europe were the UK with $10.7 billion, Germany ($7.3 billion), France ($6.6 billion) and Italy ($4.6 billion). “Notably, China is now the second largest market in Asia Pacific, with $8.4 billion invested last year,” Westcott said. Japan is the largest in the region with $9.8 billion, followed by South Korea ($2.6 billion), Australia and India—both on $2.4 billion.

    Netflix considers pouring money into building its stable of licensed and original movies and TV shows. Content spending will rise to $6 billion next year, a $1 billion increase from 2016, its CEO Reed Hastings has said.

    It faces competition from the likes of Amazon and Hulu. Figures released in the World TV Production Report 2016 claim Netflix spent US$ 4.91bn on new programming the last year, compared to Australia’s total market spend of US$2.4bn. Amazon, which may reportedly launch in Australia in a few months, increased its programming investment in 2016 to US$ 2.67bn from US$ 1.22bn in 2015, although far below Disney’s spend of US$ 11.84bn in 2016.

    In India however Netflix has branded itself in the premium bracket and therefore has some disadvantage as far as pricing is concerned. A majorly English language content makes business difficult for Netflix in India. More local language content and licensing deals could help in this context. Netflix, which has not disclosed its subscribers base in India, may need to adopt a localisation strategy for growth in the country.