MRG's IPTV Market Ranking Methodology
MRG, Inc., prides itself in being impartial and independent in its research and market rankings which are based on rigorous fact-finding using primary and secondary research. Therefore, our communication to the press and the industry is required to reflect our fact-based and rigorous methodology.
For example, MRG’s IPTV Market Leader Report (MLR) is a carefully researched and verified report based on actual deployed IPTV systems and subsystems that make up the main components of an end-to-end IPTV delivery sysem. The MLR is a time-sensitive report that ranks the major IPTV technology vendors by their component category/(ies) and region(s); it involves a twice-per-year process resulting in published reports in Spring and Fall. MRG is the only research firm that ranks IPTV market leaders and forecasts IPTV twice annually.
Our IPTV (component) definitions are very precise so that we monitor and count the same or similar IPTV technology used at hundreds of service providers worldwide. This allows our rankings to be compared on an ongoing and consistent basis. Our definition of IPTV is video distributed (mostly to TV sets) over a managed IP network, complete with QoS (and sometimes, QoE) built in.
Our primary data sources include in-depth discussions with the service providers, vendors, and the financial industry. Secondary sources include qualified financial statements, professional publications and company-issued information. Please note that the service providers must verify the actual data provided by the vendors as actual deployments and/or installed equipment. Trials, shipments, letters of intent, and inventory are not considered verified—instead we report actual IPTV deployment. This approach makes our rankings conservative in nature and requires the active cooperation of the vendor and service provider. We have been using this methodology for IPTV rankings since 2002 .
MRG prides itself in being a reliable, conservative, and fact-based IPTV market research firm—this is, in fact, our value proposition. The same methodology is used in other in-depth research done by the company.
Details and Definitions for the IPTV Market Leader Report
Definition of IPTV
We define IPTV for this report (and other IPTV reports) as video transported over a managed IP network, typically by a Telco or utility, whose management includes provision of Video Quality and end-to-end QOS (Quality-of-Service); this definition is consistent with the IEEE definition, worldwide. In this report, we only count video encoders for broadcast ("live") channels targeted at the home set-top box.
Included
- ACCESS: Deployed DSLAM and/or PON lines being used for IPTV.
- VIDEO HEADEND (ENCODERS): Deployed live (broadcast) encoder channels being used for IPTV.
- SET-TOP BOXES: Deployed IPTV Set-Top Boxes (note that we count hybrid boxes--digital terrestrial, satellite, etc.—so long as the IPTV component, whether it be broadcast or VOD, is delivered by xDSL or fiber over a managed network).
- VIDEO-ON-DEMAND SYSTEMS: Deployed subscribers to IPTV VOD systems.
- IPTV MIDDLEWARE: Deployed licenses.
- CONTENT PROTECTION/DIGITAL RIGHTS MANAGEMENT: Deployed licenses.
Not Included
- VOD Encoders
- CABLE or SATELLITE Headends
- MOBILE TV Headends (for mobile phone video)
- HOSPITALITY Applications like Hotels, Hospitals, Residence Inns
- ENTERPRISE operations like corporate, Government Installations,
Airports, etc.
- OTT (Over-the-Top) Internet Video, or Online Video applications
- OEM units already reported in an OEM (turnkey) installation
All of the excluded markets (above) are legitimate markets and, we feel, they need to be handled separately.
Counting IPTV Subscribers
We only count residential IPTV subscribers, not hospitality or airports or large venues like conference centers or sports events; and we do not count Internet Video (Best Effort Internet) recipients, which we put into another category we call "Internet Video." We rely on channels and subscribers as the basic metric for measuring market penetration.
Why use Subscribers, not number of Customers?
Our deployed subscriber-based accounting method is still the most reliable method to measure MW penetration, and we have been using it for over 5 years. While a greater number of customers is good, it still cannot be used to accurately reflect units and revenue (based on units) generated for the vendors. Subscribers are also the basis of calculating ARPU, which is critical to measuring the fiscal health of the industry every 6 months.
Generally, the industry understands if a company has a broad base or narrow base of customers, and it is usually reflected in the total unit count for that sector. For example, a middleware company having one or two very large customers in Europe or Asia shows up very differently in our report from one that has 20-40 customers distributed evenly across 4 regions. While the number of customers is interesting, in the eyes of most consumers of our reports, the size of the customers is more important, due to the upside growth potential for the large (Tier-1) operators. Therefore, we do count the number of Tier 1 customers for each vendor and report that (numerically).
How about "free" subscribers who do not pay?
Also, we only count paying subscribers or those that actually use the system, not potential subscribers or freebe subscribers. Hence, for example, we count only a portion of Free's subscribers (in France), since some do not or cannot use the IPTV Service.
|
