Dubai, UAE, 20-21 September 2011

IPTV and Broadcast networks cooperation :

a necessary win-win deal

Bernard PauchonChairman BPCI

Chargé de Mission TDF Group CEO’s Office Chairman Broadcast Networks Europe

Chairman DigiTAG Task force on Digital Dividend and future of DTT

Joint ITU - AICTO Workshop on“Interoperability of IPTV in the Arab region”

(Dubai, UAE, 20 – 21 September 2011 )

Dubai, UAE, 20-21 September 2011 2

Agenda

Characteristics of main types of audio, video and data delivery networks

The limitations of broadcast networks and how they react

Why IP networks have not been in difficult situation so far, why they are now facing problems and how they react

Main current examples of cooperation between IPTV and Broadcast networks

Why a similar scenario is the solution for the data explosion in the mobile environment

Focus on HbbTV

Conclusion

TV : from where we have started to where we are today

Source: Arthur D Little(2009)

Three types of Networks as of today

BroadcastTerrestrialSatellite

UnicastWith or without IPFixed or mobile

CableBroadcast with return channel

Their main caracteristics

Broadcast( terrestrial and satellite) : One way to millions, at attractive delivery costs

Unicast(IP or not, fixed and mobile): Two ways to few, but allowing enriched services (replay,VoD…)

Cable : hybrid( broadcast like, with return capabilities, but expensive investment)

What follows will only deal with Broadcast and IP networks.

Limits of broadcast networks( satellite and terrestrial)

There is one main limit which is the absence of return channel

This had not been a problem for years

This has started to become one when IPTV (and cable) started to offer catch up TV and VoD services

How service providers via broadcast networks have reacted

By developping cooperation with… IPTV networks!

This was originally done by providers of satellite services (Sky, Canal+, SES-Astra…)

Connected TV, whatever directly offered by consumer electronic manufacturers, or managed by satellite and terrestrial broadcasters (MHP, YouView, HbbTV) is now the standard feature(see IFA 2011, in Berlin)

The example of Canal+( France)

In November 2008 Canal+ introduced a new generation of hybrid HD satellite receiver called « Le Cube ».

The receiver included broadband access to enable subscribers to have access to on demand content

It also includes a hard disk allowing « Le cube » to be a PVR

CE-Manufacturers redefine the sets

Now all braodcasters ( Pay and FTA) are offering services for connected TVs

Three main technologies are now available in Europe:

MHP was the first one implemented, but wrong pattent management prevented it from a wide development(Italy, thanks to government subsidies is the only country where it has really developped)

Developments led by the HbbTV consortium, which are based on already currently available technologies

In UK BBC and the other Freeview broadcasters are developping another system, Youview aims at being ready for 2012 Olympic games

DigiTAG, the association for development of DTT is active for ensuring maximum of communalities between at least those two last systems

It is however anticipated that developments of the HbbTV consortium will develop in most countries

Hybrid broadband/broadcast: where do we stand today?

Most modern receivers are connected to broadcast networks and in addition have Ethernet, WiFi and/or USB interfaces. Connecting these receivers to „the Internet“ was the logical next step

Many CE manufacturers offer proprietary hybrid broadband/broadcast services

The HbbTV consortium has developed a specification which promises an open solution

HbbTV ® in the international market

Limits of IP networks

QoS for IPADSL&Fiber : difficulty to have good QoS for HD and now 3D TV3G&4G: poor QoS for offering a sufficiently attractive number of programmes

Saturation Both for terrestrial and wireless resulting in ending unlimited access and billing depending on consumption (rationale:5% of users are responsible of 80% of traffic)

Huge investments are necessary in order to avoid such situation, but this creates an RoI issue, both for fixed or wireless networks

Cost is the problemHypothesis of a TDF study(1)

12 m 18 m 48 m 57 m

Mux Cost

Cost for 1 MUX (m€ / yr) (a) 0,7 m€ /yr 5 m€ /yr 16 m€ /yr 30 m€ /yr

Cost / channel (k€/r / channel)

SD ( 2,5 Mbps) 70 520 1 600 3 100

HD ( 6,5 Mbps) 180 1 350 4 300 8 100

Cost / POP/channel (€ cts / yr)

SD ( 2,5 Mbps) 0,6 2,9 3,3 5,4

HD ( 6,5 Mbps) 1,5 7,5 9,0 14,2

Notes & Hypothèses

(a) 1 Mux = 24 Mbps; Source ; TDF standard rates for France; coverage is rooftop antenna

DTT Network costsPOP Covered

Cost is the problemHypothesis of a TDF study(2)

Volumetrics

Encoding rate ( Mbps) 2,5 Mbps 6,5 Mbps

Data volume / hour of video (GB) 1,1 GB 2,9 GB

Avge Usage 3,5 hr / day 3,5 hr / day

Daily Data volume / user 3,9 GB 10,2 GB

CDN costs if al traffic on CDN ( Note CDN doe NOT cover local loop costs)

assumed CDN price (a) 2 €cts/GB 2 €cts/GB

cost for 1 hour of video 2,3 €cts 5,9 €cts

daily cost / user 7,9 €cts 20,5 €cts

monthly cost / user 2,4 €/mth 6,2 €/mth

yearly cost / user 29 €/yr 75 €/yr

CDN vs DTT ( average approach)

assumed fat tail in user volume 80%

cost of carriage for fat tail (/ user) 23 €/yr 60 €/yr

number of chanels in fat tail 15

carriage cost / channel / POP / yr 153 €cts/yr 399 €cts/yr

cariage cost DTT / channel / POP / yr

low 0,6 €cts/yr 2 €cts/yr

high 5,4 €cts/yr 14 €cts/yr

CDN Network costs SD HD

Results of the TDF study

CDN vs DTT cost ratio

low 263 x 266 x

high 28 x 28 x

CDN vs DTT ( de-averaged)

Audience of High audience channel 23%

CDN cost high audience channel / user 7 €/yr 17 €/yr

Population to be served (mhomes) 27

Carriage cost High Audience channel 178 m€/yr 464 m€/yr

as a mult of DTT cost (national) 33 x 33 x

Audience of Low audience channel 0,7%

CDN cost LOW audience channel / user 0,20 €/yr 0,52 €/yr

Population to be served (mhomes) 27

Carriage cost low Audience channel 5 m€/yr 14 m€/yr

as a mult of DTT cost (national) 1,0 x 1,0 x

Notes & Hypothèses

(a) Source ; TDF analysis on standard CDN market price

How service providers via IPTV networks are now reacting

Ending unlimited access and billing depending on consumption

rationale:5% of users are responsible of 80% of traffic

Developping cooperation with… broadcast networks!

Deutsche Telekom And SES ASTRA Cooperate In Combined Satellite-DSL Offer

Annouced cooperation will combine ASTRA`s broad satellite free-TV offer including HD+ with Deutsche Telekom`s IPTV product Entertain.

The offer will include all free-to-air, TV and radio channels in Standard and High Definition (HD) on ASTRA including HD+ as well as the typical Entertain services like Video on Demand, a TV archive and an Electronic Programme Guide. Entertain Sat also comprises time shift functions and hard disk recording with 500 GB memory. Flat rate telephony and Internet will also be included. Entertain Sat will be available for households all across Germany with a DSL connection of at least 3 Mbit/s. HD+ is a platform launched by SES ASTRA in Germany for access to free-TV programmes in HD. The HD+ offer currently comprises eight German private free-TV programmes in HD: RTL HD, Vox HD, RTL2 HD, ProSieben HD, Sat.1 HD, kabel eins HD, Sport1 HD and sixx HD.

Ferdinand Kayser, President and CEO of SES ASTRA, said: "The cooperation with Deutsche Telekom demonstrates the strengths of satellite reception and the attractiveness of HD+. The combination of the broad and high quality Direct-to-Home offer from ASTRA and HD+ with the additional interactive services from Deutsche Telekom creates an attractive media proposition."

Christian P. Illek, Managing Director Marketing Telekom Deutschland, said: "Our Entertain service currently reaches about 20 million households in Germany. With our satellite offer, we will address new customer groups and convince even more customers of our TV offer.

And in the Mobile environment?

LTE is well suited for the delivery of wireless Internet services The LTE downlink is very similar to the physical layer of many broadcast

standards such as DVB-T, DVB-H, DVB-SH, ISDB-T The bandwidth efficiency of the downlink is comparable LTE networks are planned with a view to the necessary data traffic

capacity – not with a view to to the size of the coverage area Due to the fact that LTE relies on small cells it is no competitor to

terrestrial broadcasting It would be nonsense to try and transmit SDTV or HDTV in LTE

networks Narrowband broadcast services such as radio (@ 64 kbit/s) or mobile

video (@ 256 kbit/s) are possible – but will a cellular network operator pro-actively allocate capacity to such services?

However,LTE will offer audio and video services not in a broadcast but in a point-to-point or multicast mode. In any case: such services will be present

However, let us be careful with the mobile data explosion– a word of caution

The “Internet traffic doubling every 100 days” tale … involved important business and technology leaders not only willingly suspending their disbelief, but losing the ability to do simple arithmetic.

Andrew M. OdlyzkoProfessor, School of Mathematics, University of Minnesota

Mobile Network operators would have to make massive investments, particularly in densest areas, to face data traffic

growth

Cost of delivering TV by broadcast networks is far lower than by unicast networks

And do not forget!

And TV is not the only rich multimedia content to be considered:

Electronic press Electronic books

These content will have to be delivered to a larger and larger variety of devices:

Not anymore only mobile phone will have to be considered, but all kinds of tablets, keys…

And it is not only a cost issue, but also a question of not using the right tool!

Use of spectrum has to be optimized

MNOs have different options to face exploding data usage: limit it, or cooperate with other networks

Broadcast networks

In other bands with another network architecture using high sites for downlink (c.f.: Qualcomm proposal for L-Band)

What can we conclude about LTE?

LTE is an excellent system for what is has been designed for, but not for doing everything

Giving more spectrum in 700 MHz band for the purpose of facing the mobile data explosion would be the wrong solution to a true problem

Good solutions are now based on cooperation between networks of various kinds operating in different frequency bands

Cisco emphasises the interest of making use of Wi Fi in 5GHz bandQualcomm proposes use of L-BandBroadcast networks have also a contribution to make

Cooperation with broadcast networks have a number of advantages for Mobile Network Operators

For Wireless environment

CONCLUSION

Cooperation between fixed and mobile IP networks with Broadcast networks( stellite and/or terrestrial) will be the win-win deal for facing the data explosion of the future

APPENDIX

Focus on HbbTV