Paying for Digital Content Still Not the Norm in the UK – eMarketer

Paying for Digital Content Still Not the Norm in the UK – eMarketer.

There is no such thing as a free lunch, as the saying goes. However, as consumers have been moving their content consumption habits from the physical to the digital realm, that’s exactly what they’ve come to expect.

Expectation, it seems, is also being put into practice, with much larger numbers of UK internet users accessing free content or services than are opting for paid-for content. According to April 2014 research by Ipsos MORI, commissioned by Samsung, significantly greater numbers of UK internet users had accessed various categories of content for free than had paid for the privilege. For example, only 9% said they had paid for streamed TV, movie or video content; the proportion who had streamed this type of content for free was considerably higher, at 28%.

Even where there was greatest parity—14% said they’d paid for downloaded music content, vs. 18% who said they’d done this for free—this was in an area where a free streaming model is becoming increasingly common.

Of course, given the option of paying for something or getting it for free, who wouldn’t opt for the latter? But a free lunch is very rarely that, and this is true of digital content, too. While UK consumers aren’t particularly keen to pay for content with hard cash, they are prepared to pay with their attention, taking an “ad hit” in order to get their content for free. Given the numbers from Ipsos MORI, it appears that this method of “payment” is the most desirable. However, there are some factors that may sway consumers to pay with old-fashioned currency.

In the mobile app sphere, ad avoidance is something that some consumers take into account when opting to pay for apps, but it’s a far less important consideration than the quality of the content. November 2013 data from PricewaterhouseCoopers found that 40% of mobile phone users in the UK were willing to pay for mobile apps in order to have no ads. However, a far greater proportion—72%—were most willing to pay for what they deemed “valuable content.”

This is something that extends to other content categories, too. In TV and video, consumers are most likely to pay for streaming subscriptions, say, if there is quality content to be had on that platform that can’t be accessed anywhere else—accessing movie back catalogs, for example. The recent FIFA World Cup provided another example of consumers’ willingness to pay for content deemed exclusive or valuable, with 80% of UK smartphone users saying they were willing to pay for World Cup video content, according to research conducted by On Device Research for the Interactive Advertising Bureau. Build the content and maybe, just maybe, they’ll come.

- See more at: http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Paying-Digital-Content-Still-Not-Norm-UK/1011146/2#sthash.fIyGt4jg.dpuf

Most Consumers Don’t Tote Wearables to the Gym—Yet – eMarketer

Most Consumers Don’t Tote Wearables to the Gym—Yet – eMarketer.

Wearables are a hot topic at the moment. There’s been talk recently about the future of notifications on such devices, fashion brands such as Tory Burch and Diane von Furstenberg (DVF) have partnered with tech companies to make wearables more stylish, and GE is testing Google Glass to see how the technology could help boost efficiency in its car factories. In April 2014, International Data Corporation predicted that wearable device shipments worldwide would rise more than 488.9% between 2014 and 2018, from 19.0 million to 111.9 million.

E

Consumers have reported using mobile health and fitness apps to get in shape, and many industry sources believe that wearables are next. March 2014 polling by Makovsky Health and Kelton Research found high interest in wearable health and fitness devices: 81% of US internet users said they would use one. Tracking fitness was the top reason, cited by 48%. Keeping up with personal health issues landed in second place, while tracking diet and nutrition ranked third.

However, wearable health and fitness devices have a long way to go before they’re standard gym gear. In a June 2014 Opera Mediaworks study, just 2.5% of US smartphone users said they used wearable fitness and activity trackers while exercising. However, usage was relatively low for all devices except smartphones (57.7% of respondents). While the future may be bright for wearables, do-all smartphones are still No. 1 when exercisers need to pump it up.

- See more at: http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Most-Consumers-Dont-Tote-Wearables-GymYet/1011124/2#sthash.k1epKCOC.dpuf

Majority Of Digital Media Consumption Now Takes Place In Mobile Apps | TechCrunch

U.S. users are now spending the majority of their time consuming digital media within mobile applications, according to a new study released by comScore this morning. That means mobile apps, including the number 1 most popular app Facebook, eat up more of our time than desktop usage or mobile web surfing, accounting for 52% of the time spent using digital media. Combined with mobile web, mobile usage as a whole accounts for 60% of time spent, while desktop-based digital media consumption makes up the remaining 40%.

Apps today are driving the majority of media consumption activity, the report claims, now accounting for 7 our of every 8 minutes of media consumption on mobile devices. On smartphones, app activity is even higher, at 88% usage versus 82% on tablets.

App Users

The report also details several interesting figures related to how U.S. app users are interacting with these mobile applications, noting that over one-third today download at least one application per month. The average smartphone user downloads 3 apps per month.

However, something which may not have been well understood before is that much of that download activity is concentrated within a small segment of the smartphone population: the top 7% of smartphone owners accounting for nearly half of all the download activity in a given month. Those are some serious power users, apparently.

But no matter how often consumers are actively downloading apps, they certainly are addicted to them. More than half (57%) use apps every single day, while 26% of tablet owners do. And 79% of smartphone owners use apps nearly every day, saying they use them at least 26 days per month, versus 52% for tablet users.

Facebook Still #1

Here’s another notable tidbit: 42% of all app time on smartphones takes place in that individual’s single most used app. 3 out of 4 minutes is spent in the individual’s top 4 apps. The top brands, which account for 9 out of the top 10 most used apps, include Facebook, Google, Apple, Yahoo, Amazon and eBay.

Facebook is the most used app, in both audience size and share of time spent among each demographic segment.

Social Networking, Games and Radio contribute to nearly half the total time spent on apps, indicating mobile usage is heavily centered around entertainment and communication.

On iPhone, users prefer spending time consuming media, with news apps, radio, photos, social networking, and weather as the highest-ranking categories, while Android users spent more time in search (Google) and email (Gmail).

13

Android Vs. iPhone

ComScore’s report also heats up the ol’ Android versus iPhone war, pointing out again that iPhone users have 40% higher median incomes, and engage with more applications. (9 more hours per month).

More details are in the full report here.

Gartner – 81% of large companies (US) now have the equivalent of a chief marketing technologist

From the MarTech Conference in Boston, Massachusetts, August 19-20, 2014. SESSION: Chief Marketing Technologists Symbolize Marketing’s Changing Role. PRESENTATION: Chief Marketing Technologists Symbolize Marketing’s Changing Role – Given by Laura McLellan, @lauramclellan – VP Marketing Strategies, Gartner Research. #MARTECH

The Spotifyization Of Television — Medium

 

Towards A Newer, Better Business Model

In the broad curve of technological change, the music industry has, for better and for worse, always been a few years ahead of the television industry. And while the very different business models between the two industries translates to very different disruption models, if you want to see where the future of television will net out, you need to look no further than Spotify.

Spotify provides the answer to the question as to how we’re going to be watching TV: will everything be on demand, with viewers sifting through a huge catalog of shows to find something to watch that night. Or will there still be linear TV, where all the viewer is required to do is hit the “on” button and sink back on the couch.

The answer, judging from the success of Spotify and similar services, is both.

Spotify works because it solves all of the various use case scenarios its audience might have.

If you feel like listening to a specific song, Spotify lets you do that, even providing alternate and cover versions.

Feel like listening to a playlist you’ve made yourself, the latter-day version of the mixtape? You can do that too.

Have a friend with really great taste in music and want to listen to their playlists? All you need to do is subscribe— the latter day version of the gifted mixtape.

And finally, if you just want someone else to take over the controls, Spotify provides a variety of curated “radio stations” either through the app or via third party providers like SoundCloud and Rolling Stone.

How does this translate for television?

So if we look at how this plays out in television, we’ll soon see a very similar array of options.

1. Video on Demand (VoD) If there’s a particular show or movie you want to watch, you’ll be able to do a quick search and call it up. This will also allow for binge viewing, as you’ll be able to watch an entire season at once or just the 4 episodes that you missed. VOD viewing can be a quick half hour surgical strike, or a long evening of catch-up— whatever suits your mood.

2. Playlists Viewers will have their own playlists of TV series they are in the midst of watching, movies they’ve flagged for future viewing and/or repeats of their favorite shows. These will function like music playlists — one show plays right after the next, so there’s no need to go back to the program guide after every episode.

3. Curated Playlists These can be from friends or from professional curators and may be around a specific topic: best crime dramas, best of CSI, best of 90s sitcoms— the possibilities are endless. Viewers can watch the entire playlist at once or just work their way through the list one at a time.

4. Linear Stations These will function similar to the “radio” stations on music services today and will in large part be curated by today’s cable and broadcast networks. They will have original, first-run content that’s aired at a specific day and time. Users will be able to personalize them by, say, emphasizing certain types of content (e.g. comedies), but some version of prime time will remain in effect because there’s still a lot of love for a shared communal live viewing experience beyond just news and sports.

5. Personalized Linear Stations These will be the oft-cited “Pandora for TV” — the viewer inputs some of the shows or types of shows they like and an algorithm puts together a personalized linear station for them, a combination of live broadcast, VoD and non-broadcast video from alternative providers. Users will be able to set up linear stations for short-form content, long-form content or both.

6. Personalized Accounts While Spotify’s pay service is still in its nascency, we can see the outlines of how a system works where users are charged according to the number of devices they wish to access and the number of individual users they want on each account. This is the wave of the future and while it may not result in any significant financial savings for consumers, it will (finally) enable the roll out of true TV Everywhere.

As with the current music services, how you watch will vary depending on your mood, your time commitment. even your personality. There are people who love the randomness of Pandora, others who want to control their entire listening experience and every variation in between. TV will work the same way and truth is, many of us are already watching it this way: bingeing on series via VOD or streaming services like Amazon, watching live sporting events or NBC’s Thursday night line-up, supplementing our pay TV subscriptions with Netflix, Hulu and other streaming services.

Personalization and Monetization

Personalization will be the buzzword as everyone will have their own TV service that travels with them no matter what device they’re watching on. Though here again, there may be playlists or stations viewers associate with their mobile phones or tablets, given the environment they’re in when they watch on their phone (out of home, on a train, etc.) Recommendations will be key in this new world too, as viewers are looking for new shows to add to existing playlists, new playlists to add to their rotation and new shows on linear channels that become “appointment TV” for them.

Monetization will be key to enabling this new world and the solution is likely to come in two forms: (a) dynamically inserted ad units that run using algorithms that take into account time of day, location, what show is being watched and the user’s prior behavior and (b) straight-up fees which will enable a viewer to watch an entire series without commercial interruption or to access special super-premium content that’s above and beyond the usual fare.

The operators who run these multi-platform systems will differentiate themselves the same way the music services currently do: variations in the interface and user experience. To wit, the hand-curated playlists on the Beat Music service is something that could easily be adapted to television and give whoever offered them a competitive advantage.

The future of television isn’t far off, but unlike the music industry, it’s not going to change overnight. There are too many legal restrictions, too many complicated rights issues, too much legacy equipment in the field to see the sort of rapid metamorphosis we’ve seen in other media industries.

It will change though and the challenge now is to actually build it.

Nielsen Online Campaign Ratings (OCR) : permettre d’attirer les budgets de la télé vers le digital ?

Vidéo : ce qui va permettre d’attirer les budgets de la télé vers le digital

Nielsen a récemment créée pour l’univers en ligne un nouvel indicateur qui devrait fonctionner à la manière du GRP (Gross Rating Point ou Point de couverture brute) pour la télévision, très centré sur des données socio-démographiques. Le Nielsen Online Campaign Ratings (OCR) peut donc être utilisé comme standard pour l’industrie afin de lui permettre de mesurer l’impact d’une campagne publicitaire en ligne, notamment vidéo. Mais de ce fait, comment s’en assurer que les critères de ciblage d’audience des différents DSP, éditeurs et fournisseurs de 3rd party data seront au même diapason ?

 

Comment être sûr qu’entre les uns et les autres des différences importantes de critères de ciblage ne finissent pas par fausser des résultats au sujet de la pertinence des campagnes ? L’industrie  devra en fait s’adapter, car l’opportunité lui est désormais donnée de « évaluer la publicité vidéo digitale avec les yeux des annonceurs de la télévision », analyse Chris Smith, directeur général de médias émergents de Turn. En d’autres mots: opportunité lui est donnée pour attirer les gros budgets de la télévision. Il faudra être proactif. D’abord, prendre en considération que les seuls impressions qui comptent pour un acheteur de la télévision sont celles qui touchent des critères socio-démographiques. Ensuite, essayer de comprendre les différences entre ses propres critères et ceux utilisés pour le calcul de l’OCR et s’y adapter. L’OCR a pour objectif de mesurer et d’optimiser quotidiennement l’audience des campagnes publicitaires en ligne, le profil et la fréquence d’exposition ainsi que la couverture sur cible, tout en se rapprochant des critères utilisés par d’autres médias, comme évidemment la télévision. Par exemple, en France,  pour produire OCR, Nielsen (associé à Médiamétrie) se base sur 3 sources de données : le taggage des campagnes, des données socio-démographiques anonymisées fournies par Facebook, et le panel d’audience Médiamétrie/NetRatings, soit une base de données des 26 millions d’individus inscrits sur Facebook et 22 000 panélistes Médiamétrie//NetRatings. Cette mesure fournit des analyses par jour, par cible, par campagne, par site-support, par emplacement publicitaire et par régie sur des indicateurs d’audience, de couverture, de répétition et de GRP. Cet outil servira largement aux annonceurs traditionnellement adeptes de la télévision qui commencent à migrer petit à petit leurs budgets vers le digital.

Pour Chris Smith les acheteurs dans le digital ont désormais une bonne opportunité pour bâtir d’importants partenariats avec les annonceurs sur la manière d’utiliser l’achat de la publicité vidéo en ligne comme défini par l’OCR. « Ce savoir-faire ouvrira les portes vers de meilleurs résultats », il croit. Et ils ne seront pas les seuls affectés par ce nouveau critère. Les éditeurs et les fournisseurs de données 3rd party devront eux aussi vérifier comment leurs sites et segments s’adaptent aux critères OCR. Du coup, « les fournisseurs de données voudront augmenter leur dégrée de précision et les éditeurs voudront voir comment leurs audiences sont indexées par l’OCR ». Enfin, pour lui, tout acteur impliqué dans l’achat de média vidéo en ligne devra avoir la même proactivité à l’égard de l’OCR de Nielsen. Ce qui donnera un standard à l’industrie, et surtout, la confiance aux annonceurs nécessaire à la captation des gros budgets actuellement sur la télévision – See more at: http://www.ad-exchange.fr/video-ce-qui-ve-permettre-dattirer-les-budgets-de-la-tele-vers-le-digital-13184/#sthash.OOIcXzT7.dpuf

Acquisition de PrecisionDemand, spécialiste du ciblage publicitaire TV à partir des données issues des Set-Top-Boxes: AOL Platforms pour l’achat programmatique en Télévision

AOL Platforms prêt à profiter de l’émergence de l’achat programmatique en Télévision – JDN Média.

AOL Advertising, l’activité publicitaire du groupe américain, a pour stratégie de proposer à ses clients – marques, agences et éditeurs – les dispositifs les plus intégrés et performants possibles. Aujourd’hui, le groupe US met au point des outils d’achat TV programmatique.

Orientation progressive vers la commercialisation des espaces TV

Ainsi, après le Display, AOL Platforms s’est positionnée sur un segment en forte croissance, la vidéo, via l’acquisition d’Adapt.tv en Août 2013 (pour 405 M$). Cette entité développe donc son expertise d’achat automatisé en temps réel et la mise au point de campagnes à la performance grâce à des inventaires issus d’une large gamme de supports de communication (Desktop, Mobile, Tablette).
Progressivement, la Télévision a été intégrée dans les offres, car il s’agit d’une part d’un média dominant en termes d’usages. La durée d’écoute quotidienne auxEtats-Unis s’est élevée à 4h31 en 2013 selon eMarketer, contre 2h19 respectivement pour l’Internet fixe et mobile. De plus, la TV reste un poste d’investissement publicitaire privilégié par les annonceurs : 75 Milliards de dollars en 2013, en comparaison de 2,8 Mds $ pour la vidéo, d’après l’IAB. Et l’eCPM TV continue de surpasser celui de la vidéo, avec 25$ vs 12$ en moyenne.
Adapt.tv, dont la plateforme Marketplace gère des inventaires TV couvrant plus de 90 millions de foyers américains via une centaine de réseaux câblés, s’est engagé dans la commercialisation d’espaces TV linéaires avec l’intégration à son outil de gestion des audiences vidéo « Audience Path » de données de ciblage adapté aux campagnes en télévision. Des tests ont été menés pendant plusieurs mois en partenariat avec l’agence média Magna Global pour les données annonceurs (1st party), avec l’institut de mesure d’audience Nielsen pour les données relatives à l’âge et au sexe, et avec Rentrak, spécialiste des analytics comportementales (3rd party). La plateforme Adapt.tv propose aux annonceurs des dispositifs d’optimisation de leurs investissements en lien avec les objectifs de campagne et leur data CRM, quels que soient les supports.

L’acquisition de PrecisionDemand, dernier étage de la fusée

Avec l’acquisition de PrecisionDemand, spécialiste du ciblage publicitaire TV à partir des données issues des Set-Top-Boxes, AOL Platforms rajoute le dernier étage de la fusée. En plus d’intégrer des données démographiques, l’entreprise utilise des datas 1st party et permet de cibler les consommateurs, grâce à un recoupement de multiples variables. Ainsi, le couplage d’un grand nombre de données permet d’entériner l’ouverture de l’achat TV au CRM et au Big Data.
L’objectif d’AOL Platforms en intégrant la TV à la commercialisation programmatique est d’apporter les avantages du digital, d’améliorer les capacités de ciblage et la performance des dispositifs de communication. Et ce, d’autant plus que le groupe US vient également de faire entrer dans son giron Convertro (pour 101 M$), expert dans l’analyse de l’efficacité des campagnes marketing multi-canales.
L’importance de ces opérations et de ce positionnement apparaît de façon encore plus vivace avec le lancement de ONE, qui vise à unifier l’ensemble des plateformes d’AOL dans le but d’offrir un « écosystème ouvert » au sein d’une interface unique permettant à ses clients d’intégrer l’ad planning, l’achat d’espaces et les données d’analyse qu’ils souhaitent.

FIFA World Cup final breaks records for TV broadcasters

14 July 2014, Brussels - As Philipp Lahm raised the FIFA World Cup trophy in the Maracana on Sunday night, TV broadcasters around the world joined in celebrating an outstanding set of results from the FIFA World Cup 2014.

The group matches had already set new TV records in a number of markets, from Belgium to the US. Sales of television advertising and subscriptions have also benefitted. And records continued to tumble on screen as well as on the pitch throughout the knock out stages, with new records set for the most-watched TV programme in Germany, Belgium and other countries.

Broadcasters have also been quick to grasp the opportunities provided by online distribution. Germany’s extraordinary semi-final victory over Brazil was watched online bya record 8.4 million fans across Europe and the Middle East including 2.35 million visitors on mobile platforms operated by broadcasters. And viewer engagement was up, with the same match generating a new record for any sports event of over 35m tweets.

The fully audited global figures for Sunday’s match will not be known for some time but broadcasters are already optimistic that the numbers may approach or even surpass the 909 million who watched the Spain v Netherlands final in 2010.

Capture d’écran 2014-07-15 à 11.08.11

Top TV viewing figures for the final phase of the FIFA World Cup 2014:

-        Germany: an all-time-high audience of 41.89 million viewers tuned in to watch their national team win the World Cup (86.3% share). An online survey conducted on early Sunday evening suggested that an additional 12 million Germans cheered the game in a public space. Belgium: the TV viewing record set during the match against South Korea was broken during the Red Devils’ win over the US team. It became the most watched football match in the history of Belgian television with 5.5 million viewers (85% TV audience).

-        The Netherlands: the semi-final against Argentina has set a new record of 12.4 million viewers including out-of-home viewing (89.3% share). The game triggered 158,192 tweets.

-        France: the 0-1 win for Germany reached an audience of 16.9 million people (72.1% share). The game scored more than one million related tweets.

-        Sweden: the final game was the most viewed match of the World Cup 2014 with 2.58 million viewers (73.84% share)

-        UK: a peak TV audience of 21 million tuned in for the World Cup final.

-        Poland: the final achieved the biggest Polish TV audience since 2012: 10.56 million (63.43% share).

-        Portugal: the match againstthe US attracted 3.6 million viewers (75.4% share). It was the second most viewed broadcast in Portugal since March 2012.

-        Hungary: the final attracted 1.86 million Hungarians to their TV screens (47.8% share).

-        Austria: whereas Brazil’s defeat by Germany was watched by 1.36 million viewers (52% audience share), the final game reached a record audience of 1.81 million viewers (55.3% making it the highest rated football in Austria since the Euro 2008.

-        Ireland: the final scored a TV audience of 857,000 people (55.73% share) and the total world cup triggered 2.5 million online streams. Looking specifically at adults 15-34, the final also ranks as the number one programme this year to-date across all channels.

-        Italy: the Uruguay game reached a total of 19.19 million viewers (81.5% share).

-        Romania: the highest TV audience share for this World Cup was reported for the final match: 43%.

-        The US: Netherlands vs. Argentina match ranks as the highest-rated and most-viewed World Cup semi-final match ever on any U.S. network with 6.8 million viewers.

-        Argentina: 63.7% of the Argentinian TV audience watched their national team being defeated by Germany in the finals.

 

PRESS CONTACTS / ABOUT:

PEPPTV, Platform for European Promotion of TV is an informal grouping of broadcasters’ trade bodies and sales houses, active at EU level and across EU Member States: ACT, egta, SNPTV, SPOT, Thinkbox, Wirkstoff and ABMA.