Welcome to our new head of development

Earlier this week I spent 2 days in Amsterdam as part of a Creative Industries KTN sponsored mission to connect British and Dutch startups.

There are some striking similarities between the two countries. On the upside both have booming creative and digital sectors, and are strong trading partners (The Netherlands is the UK’s 4th largest export market and vica versa). Both also have a growing number of accelerators, angel and VC networks, although it’s notable the UK been more successful in attracting international capital in the start-up scene.

So – the downside. A common problem in terms of start-ups is the difficulty for investors to achieve the kind of ‘exit’ they’re looking for. This is an interesting structural issue. Boris Veldhuijzen van Zanten, founder of NextWeb, puts this down to a lack of entrepreneurs within big business in Europe (it is, afterall, an acquisition of a startup by a bigger business that will give the investor their exit, unless of course the startups goes on to IPO).

Boris points to the US – if you take into account startups, acquisitions and mergers, the average Fortune 400 company is about 20 years old.  If you look at a similar set of companies throughout Europe the average big business is around 80 years old (quick disclaimer: I don’t vouch for these numbers – blame Boris if they’re wrong!)  The result is European companies are usually run by career managers, not entrepreneurs, and so the knowledge and first-hand experience needed to understand the start-up scene is lacking – from how to value startups, how to identify promising people, or to understand often new business models. It means there’s less competition to acquire startups amongst European companies.  No clear exit = no investment.

But it’s not all bad news – Boris spoke about how European entrepreneurs in start-ups are often better than their American counterparts – in the face of such adversity they have to be leaner, quicker and smarter to succeed.

One particular bright note from the UK side are the tax breaks being created to incentivise investment in SMEs.  Up until now there’s been the Enterprise Investment Scheme (E.I.S.) which has given investors a 30% tax break, but from April 6th there will be a new scheme – the Seed Enterprise Investment Scheme (S.E.I.S.) which will give tax breaks of 50% for investments of up to £150k in small UK startups under 2 years old.  What’s more with capital gains relief investors can gain an additional 28% relief – making a £100k investment effectively cost the investor just £22k.  Of course these things are always open to abuse (did anyone see Mackenzie Crook’s film ‘Three and Out’ which was supported by a similar tax relief scheme?) but it could be a lifeline for UK startups, and certainly something the Dutch delegates were incredibly envious of!

It’s that time of the year where it’s obligatory to make a few predictions about the year ahead.  Here’s my topline thoughts on what’s in-store for British TV broadcasters and producers in 2012:

5 things that are likely to happen

1. Massive upheaval in TV commissioning teams
For those commissioners that have their fingers firmly in their ears when it comes to multi-platform storytelling 2012 will be the year they get found out. Maybe five years ago it was cute to say “I’m no good with computers”, now it’s frankly embarrassing when you’re supposed to be in touch with how your audience are behaving. Channel 4 will probably be the most visible broadcaster to transform its commissioning team – weeding out people that are either not capable in a convergent age or are stale from too many years in the same place, and unlike in previous years where it was a case of musical chairs in the TV commissioning job market expect to see new types of producer stepping into their empty shoes.  With some big departures already announced at C4 it will be interesting to see who they hire.  Where Channel 4 lead expect others to follow – not least at UKTV now 50% owned by US network Scripps who will be looking to drive revenues through their digital lifestyle properties.  ITV on the other hand will probably continue to flail around in a state of utter confusion.

2. Reform of independent production commissioning quotas
With NewsCorp, NBC Universal & Time Warner rapidly snapping up indies (plus Endemol and All3Media likely candidates for acquisition in 2012) there will be an increasing pressure to reconsider the effectiveness of indie commissioning quotas in supporting grassroots creative TV production businesses.  I’m told that when Jeremy Hunt recommends reform to quotas in the forthcoming Communications Act he’ll be under considerable pressure from the BBC to replace the current ‘catch all’ indie quotas with a quota for start-up and small independent producers.  The likely effect on the big indies will be marginal as they already have diverse and often international businesses, but for smaller players this could be a huge boost and precipitate a new wave of startups (particularly led by key talent currently in broadcasters and the bigger indie groups).

3. The Rise and Rise of YouTube
2011 was the year where Google’s Eric Schmidt extended the hand of friendship to the TV broadcast and production community at Edinburgh TV Festival – wanting to bring together the ‘luvvies’ and the ‘boffins’ (all of course mediated by Google technologies and platforms).  Burnt by the lack of interest in Google TV in the US during 2011 Google were in overdrive wooing the British TV community as they prepare to launch Google TV in the UK.  Now in 2012 we’ll see how far Google are willing to go when the broadcasters most likely don’t play ball.  Google already have thousands of hours of professional content in production for a new suite of YouTube ‘channels’ and expect them to ramp this up further.  I’d put money on YouTube securing exclusivity with a number of key TV personalities to front content for them (is Jamie Oliver’s contract up soon?  Or what about Oprah or Doctor Phil?) plus they’ll go after sports rights, first look movies, bring back TV series – expect Google to write some big cheques for content in 2012.

4. Battle of the connected TV services
Putting Google TV to one side there will be a huge push by Microsoft to turn the XBox in to a premiere entertainment hub with a number of high profile content deals coming on stream in early 2012.  There’s the launch of youview *sometime* next year which, if done correctly, could be the logical next generation of Freeview for 8million+ homes. There’s the increasing sales of connected TV’s from the likes of Samsung, Panasonic, LG etc as people upgrade their TV’s for the summer olympics (although a continuing lack of compelling ‘app’ content will remain on these CE devices because of platform fragmentation), and finally there’s the rumoured entry of Apple in Q3 with an Apple TV set which will inevitably have a fantastic product design, intuitive UI (possibly using Siri) and great content via iTunes.  Away from the consumer electronics space there will also be some big entrants on the content distribution front – not least Netflix launching in the UK in early 2012, but don’t be surprised in Tesco does something clever too following its purchase of Blinkbox.

5. A breakthrough multiplatform format
This is the one I’m really hoping for!  There’s been success with shows like “Million Pound Drop” and tomorrow Channel 4′s next big interactive gameshow “The Bank Job” is due to launch, but I hope 2012 will deliver something truly transmedia that breaks all the rules.  I’m not saying “Million Pound Drop” isn’t a great show – it is – but I’m not sure how much we’ve really moved on in terms of play-along since BBC’s “The National IQ Test” which is now officially 10 years old!  Yes achieving 12% playalong levels is very good but I would love to see something that is so compelling to the audience they just have to participate!  I’m not saying all TV should be like that – lean back television is what the audience want most of the time – but I’m hoping 2012 will see at least a couple of new immersive formats that push boundaries, particularly in genres other than traditional studio gameshows… that’s certainly my personal focus for 2012.

3 weeks ago I bought myself a sexy new Samsung smart TV, then just over a week ago came the perfect accompaniment in the form of Zeebox for the iPad.  Sure it may not be the most incredibly groundbreaking idea to create a TV listings app that delivers and allows you to share contextual information about what you’re watching – but then it’s simple things which often catch on.  Most of us have done the conference circuit and heard talk after talk about all the amazing possiblities of the second screen syncing to TV (from interactive ads to transmedia TV formats, shopping to new forms of content discovery), but now someone’s actually done something about it, and you’ve gotta at least respect that.

So here’s what I like:

1. Simple, intuitive and clean UI: It’s a really sleek design on iPad.  I love the forwards/backwards EPG (albeit limited to now, next and the previous show).  Clearly Anthony Rose has taken one of the better ideas from youview and run with it, although it would obviously be very exciting if/when it integrates with catch-up services.  I also like the simple ways of organising content by channel, popularity, friends and genres… if I had more than one friend on Zeebox I’m sure the ‘friends’ view would be quite compelling, which takes me on to…

2. Social features: It’s nice I can see what my friends are watching (although maybe my friends don’t appreciate me knowing they’re watching ‘Boob Envy’ on PickTV).  I like the prospect of inviting friends to view with me (again, when I have more friends on the app).  It’s a great bit of foresight to automatically add the show hashtag when I go to tweet.  And the fact my login to the app is via Facebook Connect makes life easy too.

3. Zeetags: Sure some of these aren’t quite right – but they’re pretty spot on!  While everyone else seems to be talking up investing shed loads of money into audio stream technologies Anthony Rose has taken the simpler and cheaper approach of generating tags from subtitles.  Ok – so it’s not that exciting that zeetags only lead to wikipedia and news – but there is HUGE commercial and creative potential here for both broadcasters, content owners and third parties – zeetags could be like a google adwords (or promoted tweets) for TV.

4. Controls your TV: I love the fact it can switch between channels on my TV – that makes it worth it alone.  Of course it’s pretty limited right now and doesn’t really address the issue that I tend to flick between Freeview HD and Sky – but again there’s a lot of potential as Zeebox is cutting out the remote and the traditional EPG – again a clever move with big implications (how long until a service like YouTube or Netflix buys a placement in the Zeebox EPG?).

5. Fast: It goes without saying but to keep my attention the app needs to download images/metadata quickly and be traction free – and it is pretty good in this regard.

There’s a few other bits in Zeebox that I’ve not tried or don’t really pay attention to (shopping, audience popularity, twitter feed (but that’s because I have my tweets open in tweetdeck on my third screen)), but then I’m sure others do use them.

The big thing for me is this has the potential to be disruptive.  So no one’s heard of ‘Zeebox’ as a brand yet, but how far behind are the broadcasters with their own version of this kind of thing?  If youview try to do something then are we to wait another year?  In that time zeebox (which will be on iPhone and android too I’d guess) may be a destination in its own right.  I was running a brainstorm called ‘Death of the Remote Control’ at Mindshare last Thursday and I was taken aback when I showed them Zeebox and they got very excited at how they could promote brands through zeetags… there are serious dollars which might leak to this kind of third party app.

So what are broadcasters to do?  They can get on board and make Zeebox an even more compelling proposition by giving it access to advertising timelines, additional content, interactive features, on-demand, and maybe in return share that potential revenue and get some valuable data?  Or they can try to kill it – create technical standards that make integration complex, deny it access to on-demand content, or try to create something better (and stay better).

It’s an exciting (and shrewd) move on the part of Anthony Rose.  To deliver something like this in under 9 months is pretty impressive, and the broadcasters are going to struggle to move at that pace themselves. I look forward to seeing what Zeebox, broadcasters and advertisers do next.

Zeebox Video Tutorial

Since coming back from our summer holidays things have been gearing up and we’re getting a bit stretched – that’s why we’re looking for a brilliant freelance iPhone UX expert to help us out for a few days on an exciting mobile app we’re building for a leading TV broadcaster.  Please feel free to pass this around if you know anyone who’s both talented and (even more importantly) lovely to work with – ask them to email jason@theconnectedset.tv

iPhone UX expert
approx. 5 days consultancy initially
(to start ASAP but can be spaced out over a few weeks if preferred)

We’re looking for an expert from the world of mobile UX to take what is currently a topline concept and work with us to create a compelling product vision.  You do not need to be a high-fidelity visual designer, but you do need proven senior experience of working in the mobile UX field.  You must be totally comfortable with facilitating and interpreting user research, story-boarding, running brainstorms/design workshops, all leading up to creating detailed functional/design specifications, sitemaps and wireframes for our development team and visual designer.  In an ideal world you’ll have worked on mobile products for TV broadcasters and have a good understanding of the UK TV market.  This is a quick turnaround prototype project so we need someone who can work quickly and efficiently with a smile on their face.  This project will be run from London or Brighton.  I appreciate it’s only 5 days work initially, but if we like you (and you like us) there’s much more in pipeline!  Please do get in touch: jason@theconnectedset.tv

I’ve just read in Broadcast an extract of Peter Bennett-Jones’ BAFTA speech – with the headline “Has data become the enemy of originality?”.  The article is about how broadcasters are taking less risk because of the increasing use of data in decision making – namely that commercial pressures drive commissioners to chase ratings, and this ultimately leads to a raft of derivative programmes.  The result, according to PBJ, is that “original and polemical programming is in the casualty ward”.

This view troubles me… data is a great thing. Look at the world of entertainment outside television… is crunching numbers and understanding audience behaviour making things like social games worse?  Apart from the fact if it weren’t for understanding this data social games wouldn’t exist, let alone be a $2billion market, but understanding the numbers (and by extension the audience) means they can constantly innovate, tweak their product, and improve the experience.

The real problem with how data inhibits innovation in TV is actually a cultural problem in TV itself… *some* (or maybe I should say *most*) people who don’t understand how to use data to aid creativity.  I actually don’t have a problem with commissioning on the basis of how a similar format did on another channel when moving that format on in a decent way (for example it’s great how Channel 4 borrowed the successful ’fixed camera rig’ from shows like Big Brother and applied it to documentary), that doesn’t mean that I approve of the BBC making ‘Upstairs Downstairs’ as soon as they saw ‘Downtown Abbey’ was a hit.  One thing I certainly disapprove of though, much to the disappointment of the old school of TV producers and commissioners, is commissioning based on whims – on things you read about in a newspaper or something your daughter said was a good idea.  Occasionally you hit gold, but rarely.  I think it’s a unique trait of TV that decisions are so often made with little or no business case, at least data goes some way to helping broadcasters scrutinise ideas.

Where data could really empower commissioners goes beyond just understanding the competition – it even goes beyond understanding the audience - it should be about responding to them, and quickly.  The big entertainment companies operating online work on an ‘agile’ basis -they release quickly and refine constantly.  Wouldn’t it be great if TV were more like that?  Ok – maybe not always practical for a drama, but what about live TV?  I personally loved ’10 O’Clock Live’ on Channel 4 – but it didn’t rate that well – and the format didn’t change over the entire run. Sure things can take a while to get an audience and I’d never advocate ripping up the format completely each week – but where was the iteration, the testing, the evolution of the show?  It’s not just ’10 O’Clock Live’: ‘Famous and Fearless’, ‘Red Or Black’, the list goes on.

Peter Bennett-Jones may yearn after the good old days when it was all about the idea – that ‘hunch’ on an A4 piece of paper with no supporting evidence.  I’m not saying broadcasters shouldn’t take risks, they must to stay ahead, but data can mean the difference between an informed risk and just being downright reckless.  If TV is going to survive in the long term we all have to work and think differently.  We need to use the powerful and exciting richness of data to improve the products we offer – and ultimately improve the prospects for our businesses.

Peter Bennett Jones speaking at BATFA

Earlier this week I read Deloitte’s report “TV+”, published to coincide with Edinburgh Television Festival.  One section that I found particularly interesting was buried at the back of the report and is all about TV’s relationship with shopping.  No doubt as IBC kicks off in Amsterdam broadcasters and producers will be looking at all kinds of tech solutions to bring TV viewing and online shopping closer together.

We’ve known for a long time that TV has driven shopping – from Jamie Oliver selling cookery books to Teletubbies toys.  In fact the Deloitte study shows that even amongst the 18-24 age group (who spend considerable amounts of time engaging with media other than TV) in the last year one in five found out about a new product and then bought it after seeing it on TV.  1 in 5 you say?  Well the only influencing factors higher were recommendations from friends or coming across the product in a store – social networks didn’t come close.

TV raises awareness of products more than any other media – and yet it’s hard to follow the path from seeing a product on TV and actually parting with hard earned cash.  On the web it’s so much simpler to track as, if people don’t buy it in situ, you can prove their path to the purchase.  Of course convergence offers big opportunities for TV – to take people all the way from ‘awareness’ to ‘transaction’.  Deloitte point to three trends that mean TV is in a great place to becomme a bigger force in shopping:

1. Connected devices in the living room – from smartphones (set to rise to 60% penetration over the next four years) to tablets (which are due to be sold at the same rate as HD TVs in the UK) – increasingly viewers will have the equivalent of a digital till sitting in their laps.

2. Multi-screening – almost half of the Delloite survey sample are browsing the web while they watch TV either ‘frequently’ or ‘almost always’.  Only one year ago 38% of people never two-screened, now it’s less than 25% (and amongst 18-24 year olds it’s only 3% who don’t do it!).  This behaviour means TV is increasingly having the power to influence and drive web based purchasing in real time.

3. E-commerce – Britain is the world’s leading online shopping nation – we spend more time buying things online than in any other nation. E-commerce already represents a sizeable 10% of all retail sales in the UK and that is growing 50% every year.  Even now, amongst those browsing the web while they watch TV, shopping is the second most popular activity (45% of this group and 50% of women).

So we know TV plays a significant part in influencing purchasing decisions.  Now convergence means we can track consumers to the till, but more than that, we can encourage and fulfil the impulse purchase.  Every broadcaster is thinking about incremental revenue opportunities, and this certainly presents an opportunity, but the report does recommend caution – that broadcasters being overt about trying to sell products could not only cause a brand backlash, but even more serious it could precipitate a wholesale shift from premium display advertising to commission-based advertising.  Convergence of TV and e-commerce is an exciting prospect for broadcasters and content producers, but just as fraught with risk as it is with opportunity.

Last weekend I was at Edinburgh TV festival.  In previous years it’s been a bit of naval gazing affair – opulent parties where commissioners congratulate each other, screenings of forthcoming ‘hits’, the odd celebrity wheeled out by his or her paymasters.  This year wasn’t a massive departure from that except for the addition of those pesky internet people encroaching on the party – infact I’m told by the organisers that they’ve seen the biggest growth in attendees from outside the broadcaster/indie sector.  This year there were sessions on IPTV, mobile apps, data crunching, and not least the addition of YouTube as a headline sponsor and Google chairman Eric Schmidt giving the McTaggart lecture.  For me the interesting session wasn’t Dr Schmidt but the session on how convergence is impacting the business of television for broadcaster/publishers.

One big theme was the debate about how broadcasters have taken their eye off the ball and seen lots of valuable interaction around their content take place on third party platforms like Facebook and YouTube.  David Abrahams talked a lot about how Channel 4 is thinking hard about the extent to which they work with successful social services like Facebook to ‘join the dots’ between their programmes and other forms of interaction, and how their solution will (in part) be their own proprietary registration system.  At the moment Channel 4 have all kinds of inert databases around different shows and genres, so they’re working hard to join these up and create a backend system to help them mine more valuable data from their audience, and thus prove their worth to advertisers with the kind of analytics social networks can offer.

Of course the big question for me is what do the audience get in return? David Abrahams talks about personalisation and some exclusive content, but is that really enough?

For me the most exciting places on the web are the communities where you can express your identity, connect and share – and yet every broadcaster is obsessed with moderation and the integrity of the channel brand- too scared to give their audience free-reign to comment, or self-moderate.  The broadcasters have imposed such strict standards on their services that apart from great on-demand content everything around it is generally sparse and dull.  Fru Hazlitt from ITV talked about the future of TV being around not only live TV but keeping engagement running between live shows – but how many of us are actually reading about X Factor on ITV.com when rivals like MailOnline have juicier content, infused with personality, allowing people to add their comments, and even allowing people to vote on the comments on those message boards?  The Ofcom regulatory mindset has crept into the broadcasters’ online offerings, and so they’re not realising their full potential.  Sure they do ok, but imagine the potential.

David Abrahams talks about Channel 4 as this big trusted brand that people will see as a safe place to share their information, but I still think people are more engaged with shows than channels – and so real fans will ultimately engage with that show in the place that gives them the most freedom to express themselves.  There’s always a balance of carrot and stick – but ‘personalisation’ and ‘extra content’ feels like a given in a world where consumers have such high expectations.  Even though Channel 4 give their content away for free on 4oD (ad supported) this is still something the audience has come to expect after a decade of publishers giving away their content for free online.  How ITV think they’ll make any meaningful revenues from charging for content online is beyond me.

So yes – broadcasters are right that they need to become the place where show interactions happen.  Yes – this is how they’ll defend their revenues from online rivals who can offer deep audience insight.  But the question remains – what’s the carrot for the audience? For me going down an AOL.com/Yahoo route of expensive editorial teams producing copy and exclusive videos is not the answer – it’s removing the filters and allowing people who are passionate about programmes to truly express themselves, to connect with fans, and to use this insight to deliver them richer and more personalised experiences.  It requires a big culture change in the channels’ brand and editorial teams, but ultimately this is the only way I can see broadcasters really becoming multiplatform destinations in their own right.