Skip to main content

Technology and TV: The continuation of a beautiful friendship

As I promised 2 weeks ago, here's a link to the second of our reports on the state of the TV sector. This one - Technology and TV: The continuation of a beautiful friendship covers the effects of digital on TV and was written for the annual IBC in Amsterdam.

As we point out, TV is actually the most digital of media and has been an early adopter of technology in the distribution and production parts of the industry. In many markets it's not even possible to receive an analogue signal anymore and yet commentators still predict that technology advancement will be responsible for the demise, rather than the growth of the TV industry.

Personally, my favourite chapter is that on digital production. The specifics of this part of the value chain is invisible to viewers, but its impact on the quality of output have been huge. Take the BBC's enduringly popular Doctor Who as an example: a show that used to have to make a feature of its terrible effects, now deploys almost Hollywood standards of FX in every episode.

That's just the visible changes. Moore's Law has also vastly reduced the cost of non-differentiating facilities like edit suites, studio consoles and the like, enabling more money to be spent on differentiating capabilities... like talent, for instance.

And there's the crux of the dilemma. It doesn't matter how much you spend on fancy digital tech; if you haven't got the creative talent to script, direct, shoot and produce it, you'll still have a bad product. The UK has plenty of the latter, which is why the future of our content industry is assured for the long term.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Impacts of a handset leasing model on mobile telcos

Following yesterday's post, here's some related thinking on the impacts on operators of handset leasing. Handset sales represent around 25% of operator revenues in a typical European market, but generate only around 5% of margin. It may therefore be the case that the scenario described would lead operators to a more profitable structural model than exists today. Oil companies are consistently and acceptably profitable, despite being (literally in some cases) the ‘dumb pipe’ that operators are so desperate to avoid becoming. One of the reasons for the oil majors sustained profitability is clear focus on their role in the value chain – to supply the fuel that enables transportation, relying primarily on location, then brand and finally product innovation to compete. BP or Shell do not need to subsidise the purchase of a car in order to drive consumption of fuel because consumers are ‘hooked’ on it (it gets them from place to place) and there are many credible car manufacturers an...

Differences between Industrial and Digital businesses

Since I'm stuck on a Eurostar crawling through western France I thought I'd use the downtime to share this table I've made on the differences between Industrial and Digital companies across the main business functions. A strange insight into how my mind works... but hopeful a useful summary!

Chief Strategy Officers II - Career Development

Here's a follow up to my earlier post on the starting point of Chief Strategy Officer (CSO) careers in the FTSE 100 and S&P 500 companies - a visualisation of two steps in their careers: their first employer or job and the job they had before they got their current position. Lots of work went into this... so any insights that you glean from the visualisation would be great to hear about :). The CSO is a crucial strategic role on the executive (!) and the owner of the tone and philosophy of decision making across much of the business, knowingly or unknowingly. Scrutiny of their experience in defining the process and language of strategic management is therefore appropriate not just amongst their executive peers, but in my view amongst shareholders. The days when being very smart and able to analyse large amounts of data were enough to be a CSO are basically gone... has the profession moved on enough to cope?