Joint ITU - AICTO Workshop on
“Interoperability of IPTV in the Arab region”
(Dubai, UAE, 20 – 21 September 2011 )
IPTV and Broadcast networks
cooperation :
a necessary win-win deal
Bernard Pauchon
Chairman BPCI
Chargé de Mission TDF Group CEO’s Office
Chairman Broadcast Networks Europe
Chairman DigiTAG Task force on Digital Dividend and future of DTT
Dubai, UAE, 20-21 September 2011
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
Dubai, UAE, 20-21 September 2011
2
TV : from where we have started
to where we are today
Source: Arthur D Little(2009)
Three types of Networks as of today
Broadcast
Terrestrial
Satellite
Unicast
With or without IP
Fixed or mobile
Cable
Broadcast 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 IP
ADSL&Fiber : difficulty to have good QoS for HD and
now 3D TV
3G&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 problem
Hypothesis of a TDF study(1)
POP Covered
DTT Network costs
12 m
18 m
48 m
57 m
0,7 m€ /yr
5 m€ /yr
16 m€ /yr
30 m€ /yr
SD ( 2,5 Mbps)
70
520
1 600
3 100
HD ( 6,5 Mbps)
180
1 350
4 300
8 100
SD ( 2,5 Mbps)
0,6
2,9
3,3
5,4
HD ( 6,5 Mbps)
1,5
7,5
9,0
14,2
Mux Cost
Cost for 1 MUX (m€ / yr)
(a)
Cost / channel (k€/r / channel)
Cost / POP/channel (€ cts / yr)
Notes & Hypothèses
(a)
1 Mux = 24 Mbps; Source ; TDF standard rates for France; coverage is rooftop antenna
Cost is the problem
Hypothesis of a TDF study(2)
CDN Network costs
SD
HD
2,5 Mbps
6,5 Mbps
1,1 GB
2,9 GB
3,5 hr / day
3,5 hr / day
3,9 GB
10,2 GB
Volumetrics
Encoding rate ( Mbps)
Data volume / hour of video (GB)
Avge Usage
Daily Data volume / user
CDN costs if al traffic on CDN ( Note CDN doe NOT cover local loop costs)
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
2,4 €/mth
6,2 €/mth
29 €/yr
75 €/yr
assumed CDN price
monthly cost / user
yearly cost / user
(a)
CDN vs DTT ( average approach)
assumed fat tail in user volume
cost of carriage for fat tail (/ user)
80%
23 €/yr
number of chanels in fat tail
60 €/yr
15
153 €cts/yr
399 €cts/yr
low
0,6 €cts/yr
2 €cts/yr
high
5,4 €cts/yr
14 €cts/yr
carriage cost / channel / POP / yr
cariage cost DTT / channel / POP / yr
Results of the TDF study
CDN vs DTT cost ratio
low
high
263 x
266 x
28 x
28 x
CDN vs DTT ( de-averaged)
Audience of High audience channel
CDN cost high audience channel / user
23%
7 €/yr
Population to be served (mhomes)
Carriage cost High Audience channel
as a mult of DTT cost (national)
27
178 m€/yr
464 m€/yr
33 x
33 x
Audience of Low audience channel
CDN cost LOW audience channel / user
0,7%
0,20 €/yr
Population to be served (mhomes)
Carriage cost low Audience channel
as a mult of DTT cost (national)
Notes & Hypothèses
(a)
Source ; TDF analysis on standard CDN market price
17 €/yr
0,52 €/yr
27
5 m€/yr
14 m€/yr
1,0 x
1,0 x
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. Odlyzko
Professor, 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
In other bands with another
network architecture using high
sites for downlink
(c.f.: Qualcomm proposal
for L-Band)
Broadcast
networks
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 band
Qualcomm proposes use of L-Band
Broadcast networks have also a contribution to make
Cooperation with broadcast networks have a number of
advantages for Mobile Network Operators
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