Ott services. A brief overview of paid providers of Internet Service Provider Independent IPTV (OTT TV). Transition to OTT

Good day Habrosoobshchestvo. Visited the idea to connect a good high speed internet for the home to watch IPTV independent of the Internet provider (OTT TV). IPTV from two Internet providers who were not satisfied. The first had 19 channels. The second has 38, but they could only be viewed through a browser. I wanted to find some paid independent IPTV service provider (OTT TV) (and not collect free playlists on the network that are banned daily) in order to upload its playlist to VLC media player and live happily, having high-speed Internet and paid independent Internet provider IPTV (OTT TV).

I found 4 such independent IPTV service providers (OTT TV):

About company:
Head office in London, and tech. support in Germany. In addition to the classic IPTV on the computer, it also sells its set-top boxes for TVs (the delivery of which you pay yourself).

It is possible to get a free trial access for 3 days (http://kartina.tv/glossary.php?id=17). If earlier it was sent to email (after authorization through social networks), now you need to get a scratch card, erase the protective layer and activate the promo code. Scratch cards are given only by promoters and distributors.

Number of channels:
145 channels, 17 radio stations + video library (which doesn't have a lot of movies and mostly not the top news)

Prices:
Annual subscription 174 euros (which is approximately equal to 7609 rubles per year / 634 rubles per month).
Plus another 54 euros (which is approximately equal to 2361 rubles) for the cheapest TV set-top box (if you need it).

What is the result:
There are three ways to view:
1) Through the browser

Spoiler screenshot:

But looking through the browser is somehow inconvenient in my opinion, the feeling of something is not right.
2) Via your own IPTV player for computer (KartinaTV Player)

Spoiler screenshot:

3) Through your own IPTV player for iOS / Android devices (moreover, after reading the negative reviews about it, we can conclude that there are only two ways to view it)

I wrote in those. support for Kartina TV, the question is how to open their IPTV in VLC media player, but they technically shaved me off: “Theoretically, this can probably be done, but you will need to configure the VLC media player yourself.”

About company:
Again, the company is not local, located somewhere in Germany.

Free trial access (though only for 5 channels).

Number of channels:
Approximately 32 channels + video library

Prices:
Annual subscription 92.88 euros (which is approximately equal to 4061 rubles per year / 338 rubles per month).

What is the result:
The number of channels is poor.

One way to view is through the browser only. At first I read the instructions for installing VLC media player "on their website, but this is only so that the browser picks up the plug-in from it. In a word, you cannot watch through the VLC media player.

Spoiler screenshot:

About company:
Located somewhere in the USA. The service is not provided on the territory of Russia (but those who want can bypass it - judging by the forums). Mostly vtyuhivayut their TV set-top boxes.

Number of channels:
According to advertising on the site - more than 500 + video library (but in reality, about 150 will probably be useful as well). The exact list of channels was not found.

Prices:
The cheapest set-top box + 1 year of viewing costs 326.63 dollars (which is approximately equal to 10484 rubles per year / 873 rubles per month)

What is the result:
Again, viewing only through the browser (without considering TV set-top boxes). Again, you can’t watch through the VLC media player (although they require it to be installed for the plugin).

Spoiler screenshot:

Perhaps there will be problems when paying from Russia.

About company:
The company is located in the USA in Florida. The service does not work in Russia, Ukraine and CIS countries. As the consultant girl said: "This is due to the problems of the legislation of your country." Of course, theoretically, you can use different proxy servers and redirect traffic, but this is already overkill.

Number of channels:
Approximately 200 channels (according to them, because complete list I didn't get to see it)

Prices:
The annual subscription is $143.99 (which is approximately equal to 4622 rubles per year / 385 rubles per month).

What is the result:
And again, the ability to view only through the browser (although the installation of VLC media player is required in order to install the plugin from it).

Addition 1) Rocket-TV

(http://raketa-tv.com) (Feedback from )

About company:
Works via ACE Stream Media (must be installed). There is free viewing through a browser (additional channels are added when registering on the site) and a VIP subscription (with it: 1 - all ads are removed from the site; 2 - it becomes possible to view on various devices; 3 - channel buffering is accelerated, i.e. they should not slow down).

Number of channels:
Approximately 200

Prices:
2.99 euros (approximately 134 rubles) for a monthly VIP subscription
35.88 euros (approximately 1617 rubles) for an annual VIP subscription

What is the result:
In fact, it is a torrent TV, where users themselves broadcast their channels (broadcasts) to each other. All this is buffered and distributed to the rest. When you purchase a VIP subscription, you can view it on various devices other than the browser one (VLC media player, Samsung Smart TV, Android, Apple (OS X), Linux, Dune HD, MAG 250/Aura HD, Dreambox). The playlist works through Proxy. Once every couple of minutes it slows down a little. Since I use free browsing through a browser, I can’t say if this slowdown will go away when buying a VIP subscription. But even just by registering on the site, you will have a sick number of channels.

Spoiler screenshot:

Addition 2) Pro-tv.net

(http://pro-tv.net) (Feedback from Colleagues from work)

About company:
Broadcasts streams of channels that are distributed by people or someone else through the browser.

Prices:
Free viewing.

What is the result:
View only through the browser. There are no other alternatives.

Spoiler screenshot:

Addendum 3) Zargacum.net

(http://zargacum.net) (Feedback from a colleague from work)

About company:
A colleague advised me, since they still have a free IPTV beta test. Need to register.

Number of channels:
68

Prices:
Listed on the site.

What is the result:
1) Works through the browser.

Spoiler screenshot:

2) Also works fine via VLC media player via playlist (generated on website).

Conclusions:

In the comments you can see "real" and "live" feedback from Habr users, in which there are many interesting and really good solutions. Unfortunately, there is almost no free time to consider them all. For this reason, I just added them to the post as a list below. To all who have commented, thank you very much.

Few people in the IT industry have not heard of OTT. In the last couple of years, this topic has worried the minds of both the TOPs of the largest national telecoms and broadcasters, as well as the owners of small regional providers and television companies. They added "fuel to the fire" and "lead from the fronts": the traditionally quick-to-hand markets of developed countries, where OTT services began their offensive several years ago, for the most part "reported" about the destruction of traditional value chains for the telecom and television markets, the need to develop fundamental new strategy for telecommunications, cable TV and DTH operators, as well as broadcasters.
Until recently, all talk about the Ukrainian market was more theoretical than practical. And then the ice broke. OTT services have also appeared in Ukraine. Will the strategies of content providers, broadcasters and telecommunications operators change dramatically?

Service Convergence

The world around is changing. Penetration of broadband access, technology for integrating the Internet and digital interactive services into modern TVs (Smart TV or "Smart TV") and home receivers, the emergence and popularization of user "smart" devices (smartphones, tablets, etc.), optimization of compression and transmission technologies video data, as well as the development of Internet services, blur the boundaries between traditional television and the Internet. The interests of television companies, telecoms, Internet and TV providers, content distributors and manufacturers of user devices are increasingly intersecting, forcing companies to actively develop and offer the market new, often previously uncharacteristic services.
This movement is based on the convergence of traditional telecom and TV services, Internet services and multi-screen technology, the provision of which is not limited to the network of a particular operator, or OTT services - as this process is now commonly called. Well, the engine of everything is traditionally the consumer, whose desires
mobility and independence from place and time, warmed up by the new functionality of consumer devices and spoiled by the unlimited possibilities of the Internet, have long gone beyond the limited set of several services offered to it by the "linear" telecom and TV markets.

Fear of telecoms

A few years ago, European telecoms (both mobile and cable) faced a negative outlook for core service revenues in the long term (see Figures 1, 2, 3):

• profitability from the provision of basic services (voice, SMS and data transmission) by mobile operators will decrease by 2.4% per year. The main trends are a 30% decrease in profitability over the entire period (from 2011 to 2015) from mobile calls without a decrease in traffic consumed due to price pressure from competitors, a steady decline in SMS revenue by 8% per year in the long term,
  penetration of smartphones in 2015 will reach 95%;
• profitability from the provision of basic services (voice communication and data transmission) by fixed-line operators will decrease by 3.4% per year. The main trends are a decrease in profitability from fixed telephony by 10% per year due to the development of VoIP. The number of households with "super-fast broadband" (over 24 Mbps) will increase from 3% to 16% of the total number of households in 2015;
• profitability from the provision of pay TV services will grow by 5.7% per year. The main trends are an increase in the number of households using pay TV services from 52% in 2011 to 58% in 2015. ARPU growth - 2% per year.

Both mobile and cable operators received an encouraging positive forecast of data revenue growth from analysts in view of a significant increase in the number of smartphones and, as a result, consumed mobile traffic, as well as a significant increase in the number of broadband households. However, the expected growth in data revenue will not be able to offset the decline in voice revenue.

Analysts also talk about heightened exposure to traditional telecom services such as “ phone calls"and" messaging ": three-quarters of the total number of calls made by subscribers and sent SMS in the foreseeable future can be replaced by cheaper and more functional IP counterparts:

Faced with a negative revenue outlook for their core services core, telecom operators have been frantically looking for opportunities to diversify their businesses. And many players began to consider the provision of various video services as an opportunity. According to studies, the role and popularization of services such as HDTV, VOD and PVR will grow from year to year.

However, the improvement of its networks in order to meet the growing demand for Internet access and the transition to full-fledged broadband access sufficient to start providing OTT video services, the operator (primarily mobile), exposes its traditional services to additional risks (the so-called "cannibalism"). services” from “telco-OTT”): under the pressure of Internet services, SMS services can very quickly disappear altogether, and voice telephony, especially those based on large margins, will also actively begin to be replaced by cheaper alternative IP services. And despite the positive dynamics of income growth from data transmission, without the search and implementation by the operator of additional OTT services, he risks turning from a service provider into a regular Internet service provider in the future. However, abandoning development and concentrating on the provision of traditional services can lead to complete capitulation in the competition.

Threat to television

Of all the ways of consuming media, television is still in first place, it is watched by about 95% of viewers, but the youth audience of television is declining. For the last 5 years, the average duration of daily TV viewing has been decreasing by 10 minutes annually. And the subscriber today is not at all the same as it was 5 years ago. His habits and interests have changed. New devices and services have appeared. Young people and middle-aged people began to spend less time in front of the TV, giving preference to a computer, smartphone, tablet that have access to the Internet.
While traditional television remains strong, audience fragmentation is growing every year and new screens are gaining attention. Broadcasters and TV providers have to pay more and more attention to multi-screen technology.
Data provided by Arthur D. Little shows that only 17% of the US population under the age of 25 use a TV only to watch TV, and about 30% of young people watch almost all TV content via the Internet. And their number will increase every year. For comparison: among the entire US population, 36% watch only
TV, and only 13% usually use the World Wide Web to search for TV content. And if traditional linear broadcasters do not take appropriate action, they may lose a whole generation of viewers.
Google's research shows that IP-capable user devices are used unevenly and differently throughout the day, which will certainly affect the workload of the OTT provider's broadcast complex and operator networks as OTT develops and popularizes:

• the peak of PC use occurs during working hours on weekdays with a gradual decrease in activity in the evening;
• the use of smartphones is stable throughout the day, regardless of the day of the week;
• tablets are mainly used in the evening on weekdays and on weekends.

Thus, every year broadcasters are increasingly pressured by the need to be present on the World Wide Web and provide multi-screen access. On the other hand, OTT opens up prospects for the media and film industry to direct access to the end subscriber, where they were previously denied access.

Services and monetization

Leading Western analysts, in particular Clemens Schwaiger, Head of Digital Media Strategy at Arthur D. Little, and Dean Bubley, Founder of Disruptive Analysis, who recently visited Kyiv to attend the first International OTT Conference -services: big opportunities or a real threat?” suggest not to limit the understanding of OTT only to video streaming of TV channels. In their opinion, the evolution of the whole complex of processes and services included in the concept of "OTT-service", i.e. that go beyond the network of a particular operator, should be considered through the prism of its two main components:

• OTT video;
• Telco-OTT.

Organization of business on the basis of OTT video is the driving force behind the technology, since it is video content that is associated with monetization. Annual growth in demand for video over the Internet with correct adaptation business model should become the main source of additional income for all players involved in the content production and delivery chain. The various variations of the OTT services offered by the world's largest players that currently exist in the world come down to the provision of two different services: linear broadcasting of TV channels over the Internet (Live streams and Catch up TV, the provision model is similar to IPTV, only without being tied to a specific operator network) and providing access to TV content (VOD).
The development of OTT is happening more organically than IPTV. According to the research company Informa Telecoms & Media, in 2013 the number of users of OTT services will be equal in number to IPTV, and already in 2015 their number will be twice as high - 380 million against 163 million.
Also in 2012, a landmark event for the film industry took place (see Fig. 4): in the United States and Western Europe, the consumption of online films (VOD + SVOD) for the first time in quantitative terms exceeded sales on physical media (DVD + Blu-ray). However, the average price of VOD is several times less than the cost of DVD (occupying half of the market in quantitative terms, OTT provides only a little more than 10% of its turnover in America and a little less than 20% in Western Europe), which allows experts to once again recall the "cannibalism" of technologies and the gradual replacement of less flexible, but more profitable traditional ways of selling video content with new OTT services.

The monetization of the business models used is based on three components, which are often used in various combinational variations:

• advertising model. Free access to content, and the monetization of the OTT service is achieved by attracting advertising money, primarily by broadcasting video ads during playback;
• subscription (SVOD, subscription VOD). Provides a fee for access to existing content for a certain period;
• pay per view (TVOD, transactional VOD). It is an online alternative to the DVD and Blu-ray segment in the content monetization ecosystem (in many countries, including the USA, the TVOD + SVOD model is used, see Fig. 5).

At the end of 2012, analysts at Informa Telecoms & Media estimated the global OTT video market at $10.6 billion (see Fig. 6). According to the forecast, in 5 years it will more than triple and in 2017 it will exceed $37 billion, which will correspond to approximately 10% of the entire global video services market.

The distribution of profitability of business models at the moment: the share of advertising accounts for 50%, the sale of content brings 14%, and the subscription - the remaining 35%. Over time, this distribution will not change significantly: until 2015, the share of the advertising model will rise to 55%, but over time, activity in the field of OTT telecoms will have a positive impact on the subscription model, which will allow returning to the current percentage by 2017. Analysts expect the revenue distribution pattern to be similar to today's pattern in traditional pay-TV services.

The US currently accounts for about three-fourths of the entire OTT video market. By 2017, this share will decrease to 60% due to the rapid growth of the market in Western and Eastern Europe, as well as in Asia. Thus, analysts predict that in 5 years (from 2012 to 2017) revenues from the OTT service in Eastern Europe will increase 12 times from $95 million to $1.174 billion (see Fig. 7).

Telko-OTT, whose arrival in the networks of operators with the transition to broadband access is difficult to avoid, unlike OTT-video, promises telecommunications companies only threats to their conservative businesses. Instant messaging over the Internet, as well as VoIP and mVoIP technologies, threaten the traditional sources of income for telecoms - SMS and voice communications. For example, the Omani mobile operator Nawras, after switching to LTE, reported about the "evaporation" in 2012 of $ 43 million for SMS due to the WhatsApp service. Another example - about 25% of the time of all international calls falls on Skype. Not wanting to lose their income, some telecoms, primarily mobile, with varying degrees of success, begin to block OTT services in their networks (according to data provided by Venturateam, the number of mobile operators blocking OTT services in their networks almost doubled in 2012 - up to 10.5% compared to 5.4% in 2011) and lobby for the adoption of legislative restrictions at the level of their countries (the usual wording in such cases is “threat information security"). However, such "military actions", although they allow to save part of the income for some time, but threaten the competitiveness of the operator's business itself. As well as postponing its development, such as the transition to LTE.
Another way is cooperation instead of "war". There are already many examples on the market when OTT providers and telecoms join forces for mutual benefit. Meanwhile, according to Venturateam, only 16% of mobile operators believe that their revenues will increase thanks to OTT.

Threats and Opportunities

OTT has significant disruptive potential, and all players in the telecom and media value chain are currently having to consider and weigh various business options.
Both traditional and new players, actively developing their business and providing new services, will rapidly capture new markets and territories, thereby significantly changing the existing ecosystem of the television and film industry. For example, content producers are moving towards multinational licensing and organizing their own technical distribution platforms. FTA channels are looking to move to new platforms and develop new revenue models. Pay TV operators are developing new unique technical means content delivery and access to new devices. Internet players are striving to make their software available on new platforms and devices, with an emphasis on better content aggregation. Telecoms are trying to expand and use the capabilities of their networks to provide access to better TV services. Cable operators focus on bundling TV channels and organizing their own OTT services. Manufacturers of user devices are striving for IP compatibility and integration of VAS services.
In the global market in the OTT segment, it is increasingly possible to observe various kinds of associations in order to provide a service. According to analysts, the most efficient way to work in the OTT segment is through partnerships: telecoms + content providers. Studies show that such associations are usually 30-40% more efficient than individual projects, and are also able to provide a more diverse and high-quality service.

Legal Policy and Regulation

According to Nokia Siemens, the profitability of OTT providers for 2010-2015. will increase by 40%, while the profitability of network operators is steadily declining. The latter, of course, are not very happy with such a prospect.
Services provided by OTT providers are not linked to the network over which they are provided. At the same time, Internet content, unlike broadcasting and telecommunications, is practically not subject to any significant national regulatory oversight. This gives pay TV operators a reason to complain that they are deliberately placed in unequal conditions with OTT providers, since the former are subject to strict regulation, while the latter are not.
Therefore, the convergence of services and their provision on any device through any network increasingly leads to the intersection of the interests of previously separate industries: telecommunications and audiovisual. Since OTT providers can operate across borders, then the only way their regulation - international agreements. However, in many countries legal framework has not yet had time to fully adapt to market changes. Most governments are very careful about regulating these industries. And they prefer to spend more time on research and analysis, without changing anything in the legislative plan, instead of making a hasty decision.
In addition, there are two polar opinions on what this regulation should be. The first of these is based on the idea of ​​"free access" and market relations between operators and providers of OTT services. The second is strict regulation of services and mutual settlements. Nevertheless, the ideas of liberalization have been increasingly prevalent all over the world lately. And some countries at the legislative level have already adopted it as a basis in their legal documents (Singapore, Australia and New Zealand).

Technologies and Solutions

On March 22, Kyiv hosted the first International Conference “OTT Services: Great Opportunities or Real Threat?”. A wide program of reports, participation in the event of the world's leading experts in the field of convergence of telecommunications and video services allow us to speak of the conference as the largest Ukrainian event in the field of OTT. A lot of attention within the framework of the conference was devoted to technologies and solutions for OTT services.

Benny Norling, CEO Business Development in Scandinavia, Central and Eastern Europe, the CIS of SES company spoke in detail about the communication protocol SAT-IP, which radically changes the philosophy of satellite reception, providing it with flexibility that was previously unattainable:

• multi-screen: content is available on multiple devices;
• multiroom: content is available in different rooms.

The technology makes the received DVB-S/S2 signal available via the IP network on all devices in the house capable of broadcasting a TV signal: smartphones, tablets, laptops, PCs, etc. The first generation of SAT-IP devices, which appeared late last summer, could provide simultaneous reception over an IP network of four satellite channels (both SD and HD, and in the future Ultra-HD) on four different devices.
Thus, SAT-IP made four out of one set-top box. Already in June of this year, the presentation of the first receivers capable of transmitting 8 channels to 8 different devices is expected.
According to Mr. Norling, SAT-IP technology should best connect satellite and OTT. The combination of OTT and SAT-IP can be the perfect combination that the viewer is looking for. It is better to use the Internet for services such as Catch-Up (“following the air”), VoD, etc. If the viewer wants to watch high-definition television without possible interruptions, then this is only satellite TV.
SAT-IP was originally designed to receive an unencrypted satellite signal (FTA) and then transmit it over any home IP infrastructure with or without cable. Therefore, the technology has received the greatest distribution at the moment in Germany. Mr. Norling also suggested that solutions based on this protocol will soon become popular in Ukraine.
There is no solution yet for encrypted channels. At the moment, negotiations are ongoing with the leading European pay-TV operators, but no final decision has yet been made with any of them. Mr. Norling assured that there will be a solution for pay TV operators, but it is not yet available. It will also imply the availability of 4 or 8 channels on various devices. But it is too early to talk about the timing of the launch of some ready-made solution on the market.
And most importantly - SAT-IP is not a specification for any particular product. It is an open standard that any developer can use. Ready solutions SES offers a free trial, after which the SAT-IP logo can be affixed to the product. We already wrote more about SAT-IP technology in this year's May issue of Mediasat (pp. 10-14).

He spoke about the use of OTT technologies for the implementation of legitimate business models for the provision of interactive video services. Andrey Rasseikin, Deputy Head of the Commercial Department of the Interactive TV Department, CJSC Business Computer Center (BCC). The speaker noted that his company has been working on the interactive TV market in Russia for a long time, and at the moment it is ready to offer its technologies and solutions to the Ukrainian market.
According to the speaker, modern market conditions force telecom operators to constantly participate in the race, offering the subscriber more and more content and services. You can, of course, be content with what you have, but, in the end, you will have to admit defeat to competitors. Therefore, a modern operator plans to grow by providing the widest possible coverage of subscribers with promising services, while optimizing both capital and operating costs for technological infrastructure.
Interactive TV can become such a promising service. It can work wherever there is Internet and provide a wide range of content, including unique ones. Numerous studies also speak in favor of the close integration of TV and the Internet.
The ability to have access to television services not only on the TV, but also from other devices will allow the subscriber to partially return to watching television, as well as increase his loyalty, which leads to an increase in ARPU and the subscriber's lifetime in the operator's network. Therefore, when bringing a service to the market, it is necessary to focus on all types of devices.
When implementing a project today, the principle should be taken into account - services on all networks and on all devices. And this is where OTT can help. It is the most versatile interactive TV technology on the market. this moment, which allows you to provide services on managed and external networks anywhere where there is Internet: on STB, mobile devices and Smart-TV without the need to re-invest in infrastructure. Anyone can use it - operator, content provider or Internet service.

OTT allows you to be more flexible by:

• access to open networks;
• additional services on internal networks;
• entering foreign markets (with or without geo-blocking);
• Internet TV.

New technologies such as Smart TV and broadcasting to all kinds of devices are developing a new culture of TV viewing, shaping the future of TV, I'm sure Larisa Makarovskaya, Regional Sales Director of Conax AS, who gave a presentation on "Conax Xtend Multiscreen for OTT Services".
A cable operator today has a wide range of options for organizing the provision of additional video services to its customers. The question rests on the cost of implementation and, of course, the choice of an effective (profitable) business model.
Now the most rapidly developing video consumption is over the Internet. However, interactive TV is not yet profitable (with the exception of a number of services in the US). In most countries (and Ukraine is no exception) many legal aspects of the use of rights to video content on the Internet have not been resolved.
On the other hand, last year IPTV growth in Russia amounted to 38%. There are already dozens of applications for VOD and Live-TV on the App store and Google play. This is reality and this is just the beginning. Connecting to the Internet is a real revolution for TV, Ms. Makarovskaya believes.

The new rules of the game have changed the expectations of the viewer who today want:

• TV on all devices;
• safe and effective methods payment;
• reliable and stable service;
• easy access to content;
• full control over personal TV consumption.

And the operator that satisfies all 100% of the needs of the consumer will eventually win the competitive race. In this, new OTT technologies will come to his service, which will allow:

• reduce subscriber churn (through the provision of advanced services as part of premium packages, as well as additional services, which increase the binding to the operator);
• increase ARPU (due to VOD, Catch-up, nPVR and connection of additional devices for an additional fee, as well as higher bandwidth of the Internet connection due to the use of OTT, which will increase the income from Internet services);
• attract new subscribers (due to the service leaving the network, as well as connecting other types of devices, except for traditional TV).

When introducing new technologies, the most difficult task is to ensure the security of OTT services. It is about finding the right balance between control over content (the desire of copyright holders) and the convenience of using it everywhere on any device (the desire of the client).
Conax Xtend Multiscreen is a complete, pre-integrated ecosystem that can be deployed in just three months to help TV operators looking to transition to next-generation services.

He spoke about new challenges for companies broadcasting video over the Internet. Andrey Guryanov, Regional Sales Director for EMEA, Elemental Technologies. In his opinion, IPTV in the form in which it is understood now is no longer interesting to anyone. The subscriber wants to receive services not only in convenient time, but also anywhere on the selected device. As a result, the requirements for the content format (adaptive bitrate) and distributed CDN:

• lower bitrate with high quality encoding;
• support for various profiles to cover all available devices (iOS, MS, Android);
• high performance and coding density;
• sufficient flexibility with the scalability of the solution;
• reliability and fault tolerance;
• monitoring and control;
• all types of content (Live, TSTV, VOD) at an affordable price.

In the future, we expect: lower bitrate (due to the use of more efficient codecs such as HEVC / H.265) and more fast internet(organic development of technologies and growth of broadband penetration), which will certainly have a positive impact on the popularization of technologies such as IPTV and OTT. But the size of the transmitted video does not get smaller. The diagonal of TVs is getting larger, which requires an increase in screen resolution, and this, in turn, entails an increase in the quality of the transmitted TV signal, which will bring additional difficulties to interactive TV operators. These include an increase in the number of HD channels, and in the future - the transition to 4K. Therefore, the evolution of compression and the transition to HEVC / H.265 is no longer considered as an optimization, but as a necessity.
H.265 requires 3 to 5 times more processing power than the previous generation codec. According to Mr. Guryanov, Elemental's optimized CPU/GPU platform will help solve this problem by providing throughput required for H.265.

Andrey Silanchev, director of business development in Russia and the CIS at Irdeto, also spoke about the advantages of multi-screen and access flexibility. In his opinion, a well-built OTT solution should have the following properties:

• studio-grade protection to prevent abuse of premium content;
• have tools for flexible management and monetization of content based on the company's business models;
• deliver content to any device over any network while respecting all license rights.

The popularity of multi-screen solutions is rapidly increasing around the world. New OTT players are trying to take over the market with it, and in turn, existing operators have moved quickly, investing in multi-screen solutions to prevent threats from new OTT players and possible user churn.
At the beginning of 2013, more than 250 million flat-panel TVs have already been sold worldwide, and 40% of them are Connected TV, and by the end of the year there will be 50%. Thus, Connected TV is becoming a serious OTT platform.
Broadband is also the engine of OTT services. The larger the band and the greater the number of devices on the market, the greater the new opportunities. However, it also increases competition from new OTT offerings and pirates, and creates complexity and cost in implementing the desired business models, rights, process management, etc. All these factors allow us to talk about an avalanche-like growth in the popularity of OTT services.
Actually, the main purpose of this report was to talk about the Irdeto Broadband solution, which allows the operator to remain competitive by increasing brand value and monetizing digital assets by offering multi-screen video services.

Ukrainian OTT market

OTT service is a new concept for the Ukrainian market. In view of the underdevelopment of mobile broadband access in our country, the OTT video service is focused exclusively on access through the networks of cable operators. However, the widespread use of smartphones and tablets in the country already obliges it to be multi-screen.
In Ukraine, four national legal players have formed (having agreements with copyright holders for distributed video content) - Divan.tv, Volya (Volya Smart HD), Oll.tv and Megogo.net. Divan.tv and Volya services are primarily focused on providing linear broadcast of TV channels. Oll.tv and Megogo.net are mainly focused on providing video-on-demand.

Of course, Ukrainians have access to the videos of the world's largest container providers, such as YouTube. If desired, a Ukrainian subscriber can use the services of a dozen "gray" Russian OTT services. They do not officially develop their business in Ukraine, but Ukrainians have the opportunity to access their services. In addition, “illegals” (who do not have agreements with copyright holders) are widely represented, which, according to official OTT players, significantly squander the Ukrainian market both in terms of money and quality.

The development of all Ukrainian platforms goes in two directions - B2C and B2B. To be as accessible to the user as possible, Ukrainian OTT services try to be present on all devices from which the user can watch them by connecting to a broadband access. First of all, this Smart TVs-TV and interactive set-top boxes. Access via smartphones and tablets is also important. In addition, the Volya company is going to bring a hybrid set-top box to the market in the near future, where it will be able to accumulate additional services for users. Foreign practice shows that ARPU from such subscribers rises by an average of 30%.

The emergence of a TV broadcasting OTT service from Volya should stimulate the process of integrating OTT services in the networks of Ukrainian Internet providers. According to market participants, both national and small telecom operators will have to decide in the near future which of the two content providers (Divan.tv or Volya) is more profitable to cooperate with. For an ISP, the integration of an OTT service will mean expanding the services offered to subscribers and increasing competitiveness without the need to negotiate with copyright holders and additional investments in technology. And the percentage of OTT subscribers offered to telecom operators in their networks under the revenue sharing scheme should stimulate their desire in a positive direction. It will be more difficult to reach an agreement with those who already offer pay-TV service in their networks, as the OTT service poses a serious threat to their business. But even in this case, there are great prospects for partnership, especially with small regional networks, whose ability to negotiate with copyright holders is much less than that of large players on a national scale.

For an OTT provider, cooperation with ISPs provides a guaranteed bitrate for OTT services in partner networks. In addition, the joint billing service for Internet and OTT services greatly facilitates access to the end user.

Cooperation with Internet providers is also interesting for two other Ukrainian OTT players (Oll.tv and Megogo.net). Such cooperation
is one of the key links in the subscription and pay-per-view monetization models. For Oll.tv, an additional incentive to seek cooperation is also the search for opportunities to improve the quality of live football broadcasts.

At the moment, competition is not so much relevant between services as with “illegal immigrants”. And improving the quality of services provided by OTT operators (thanks to technology and partnership agreements) is one of the ways to compete. Most people who subscribe to an OTT service from one or another provider display it on TV screens through Smart-TV or specialized set-top boxes. The real value of an OTT service for an ordinary person lies in how easy and simple he can watch the desired video content on his TV screen and how satisfied he will be with the quality of this service. And he will be willing to pay for this convenience. After all, in order to bring an “illegal” service to TV screens, it is necessary to carry out a whole procedure of “dancing with a tambourine”, and even if successful, no one can guarantee the quality of the content provided.

Also one of the most difficult questions for the Ukrainian market, this is a matter of rights to content and its prices. Here the model by which the majors work with cinemas (for a percentage of sales) does not fit. For their films, the copyright holders want a certain amount, and the amount, it must be said, is far from small for the Ukrainian market. Recently, the world's leading majors and distributors of TV content have become more accommodating and flexible in terms of granting rights to broadcast on the Internet, which was not even mentioned a couple of years ago. But legal video content is still expensive, and the Ukrainian viewer, spoiled by the availability of pirated content, is for the most part not morally ready to pay an adequate price for it. In this difficult situation, Ukrainian OTT players have to constantly maneuver between the possibilities and desires of the audience and the need to monetize their investments.

Each of the players has their own vision of solving this problem. But, as the heads of national OTT services admit, reaching the break-even point is expected no earlier than in two or three years.

PrevTrack

1 1 Andrey Metelsky, head of the OTT project at Volya

We are the largest pay TV operator in the country. The introduction of a new OTT service is a logical step in our development. We are the first cable operator in the region and one of the few in the world who present content not only to viewers of their own network, but also beyond it. Now it is about 130 TV channels in three thematic packages, with time their number will increase. Access outside of our network means that all our customers need to get OTT service is a broadband connection of 2 Mbps for SD content and 4 Mbps for HD content.
With the help of partners, we provide subscribers with access to films. This is not only Megogo.net and Oll.tv, but others as well. First of all, content owners, such as Sony, with whom we are already working on linear TV channels.
In the near future we will introduce hybrid set-top boxes, with the help of which both existing subscribers in our network and new ones outside it will receive additional opportunities. First of all, this is YouTube navigation on TV screens. During the year, new interactive services will appear, such as Cutch Up, with the help of which it will be possible to watch TV shows that have been on the air for a week or two. Multiscreen technology will allow to translate content from TV to smartphone. The potential for this service is huge. We have a technology development plan for 2-3 years ahead.

About the copyright holders

As for television rights, this is not an easy and very responsible issue. Linear channels have different conditions not only for the method of broadcasting, but also for which device is receiving. Rights holders have different conditions, and a very large part of our work was to understand all the legal nuances of each right holder and competently negotiate with them.

OTT is a project of several years. It takes at least a year to reach an agreement with all copyright holders, as well as to invest millions of dollars to implement it technically. It makes no sense for medium and small providers to do this. It is not acceptable for them to invest huge investments that will not pay off in two or three years.
On the other hand, you can take the world's technologies with all the rights from the OTT provider and offer your customers additional opportunities. Over the years, we have developed quite close and mutually beneficial relationships with many companies. Even before the launch of our service, we noticed interest in OTT from other Internet providers. The first client is "Datagroup".

Regulatory issues

There is a Law of Ukraine, according to which any organization providing a software service is required to have a license for this type of activity. It is normal when the services provided to the population should be regulated by the state. This will ensure the quality of the services provided. As for new technologies, there should be no discrimination in relation to this or that technology. In fact, the law does not say anything about technology. It talks about the regulation of the type of activity. Accordingly, the requirements must be the same for everyone, and the conditions for the provision of services must also be the same.
The National Council should clearly formulate its requirements, and there should be no understatement. At the moment, we are waiting for what the National Council will tell us about OTT technology.

1. Andrey Metelsky, head of the OTT project at Volya

2 2 Andrey Kolodyuk, founder of Divan.tv

Divan.tv is a Ukrainian company, one of the pioneers of the Ukrainian OTT market. We use our entire technological solution with a simple goal - to bring about 150 Ukrainian and foreign TV channels to our customers. We also work with films for which we conclude direct agreements with copyright holders. We use both an advertising model and a subscription model. We cooperate with retail chains, network operators and vendors.

About the copyright holders

We have viewers on one account for the same money can watch content both on TV and on mobile devices. But there is a problem here. The rights for TV content that are sold "for TVs" are different from the pure OTT rights for the so-called online. Some of our Ukrainian channels still cannot clear their rights to Internet broadcasts.
The price for TV content is determined for each subscriber in the subscription. In addition, we note the ever-increasing demand for the use of the so-called "constructor", when each subscriber independently forms his own viewing grid. However, many rights holders are very resistant to this model, as they want large packages for which they will receive guaranteed money. Although certain OTT rules have already been formed in the world, when TV channels are paid for the actual viewing of their content by subscribers, however, unfortunately, this logic of the game is not yet accepted by a significant number of TV channels represented in Ukraine, which, in my opinion, greatly hinders the development of our market. The distributor wants to get his money here and now. But this is contrary to the interests of the consumer, who wants here and now what he wants and on what he wants. Therefore, the concept of large packages is no longer relevant, but in Ukraine it is still the only possible one.
As for the VOD market, Ukrainian consumers can conditionally be divided into two categories. Those who are willing to watch ads for a free service, and those who are willing to pay to not watch ads. But today, 70% of the film distribution market is Hollywood majors who do not want to give away their premium content to the advertising model. It is important for the end consumer to understand that the most requested content will not be free. It will be a subscription or pay per view. Another question - for what money?

About cooperation with Internet providers

We offer the market a working business model based on the revenue sharing scheme popular in the West. In cooperation between a content provider and a telecom, everyone is responsible for their own issues. We take care of all issues of the legality of content rights, and the Internet provider is responsible for the quality of the network it serves, and especially the solution of the issue of the quality of the "last mile". Broadcasting quality content requires a certain guaranteed bitrate throughout the network.
For people, it doesn’t matter why the service doesn’t work or doesn’t work well. It is important for him to work. And only in close cooperation with the Internet provider, it is possible to guarantee the provision of high-quality and legal OTT content.
All payment for the Internet remains with the provider. Payment for our content (there are different schemes, the user can transfer money to us or pay in the general check to the Internet provider) monthly, and while the client is with this provider, we will pay the provider a certain percentage. Its value depends on the number of subscribers, etc. Those. every month we pay the service provider a part of the money we receive for content from a subscriber in his network.
A year ago, we drew the attention of players in the telecommunications market to the fact that the model in which the content provider works in close cooperation with the telecom operator is the most effective at the moment on the world market. After all, firstly, VOD is not affordable for any regional telecom player. This game is not even a national, but a supra-national scale. Secondly, why should telecom fight and pay big money for technology and rights to content, if in cooperation with an OTT provider, without additional investment in technology and content, without investing a penny in rights, it can create a competitive market for the market on legal terms? offer and retain the loyalty of its subscribers by providing them with an additional service. And still earn money. According to this model, we are already working with more than 15 operators.
We have only one problem in this regard - piracy. It's no secret that many of our ISPs offer Internet access in a bundle with IPTV, without paying a penny for the rights to the broadcast content. Another question is that they do not earn a penny on this, providing access to TV for free. We offer them to earn more on this. It's all about the mentality of some players who can only consider legal broadcasting after a visit from the police. But this mentality is slowly changing.

About competition

With the advent of Volya's service, we have formed two OTT offers for Internet providers. On the one hand, this is Divan.TV, and on the other hand, Volya, Oll.tv and Megogo.net, which offer a kind of joint service. This is good for the market. Now he has a choice. I think that the market will get excited and in the near future will be divided into those who will work with Divan.tv or Volya. The main advantage of our service is that we are not an ISP, so we have no conflict of interest with them. Everyone will choose what is closer to him. There are certain risks both in working with Divan.tv and in working with Volya.
Therefore, we can talk about the beginning of competition in the Ukrainian OTT market. But this is to our advantage, because together we can create a legal market.

Regulatory issues

My opinion is very simple. TV services in our country are regulated by the National Council, which should formulate clear rules of the game. However, today the presence or absence of a license does not in any way limit the "pirates" in providing illegal services. We're ready to get a license when it's available, and we'll be the second to do so, after YouTube. This is our clear position.

About monetization

There is money in the market, and there is a lot of it. So, last year, Ukrainians left $100 million in cinemas, and that's not counting popcorn and Coca-Cola. This means that people are willing to pay for quality content.
Another question is why they do not leave them on the Internet yet. People are willing to pay certain amounts for access to quality content at home, but this money is now ending up with the "pirates". For example, in many of our villages, “card-sharing” with a monthly fee has been developed.
In addition, when people realize that the money will go to their favorite heroes, this moment of realization should persuade them not to use pirated services, but to pay for legal ones. Such a trend has now emerged in the world and, I hope, will soon come to Ukraine.

2. Andrey Kolodyuk, founder of Divan.tv

3 3 Evgeny Abramov, director of Oll.tv

Oll.tv is a classic VOD service. We provide our services both as an advertising model and as a subscription to films. We also charge per view. We showcase a fairly wide range of films and feature several majors such as Sony and Miramax. Also, starting from Euro 2012, we broadcast live the main football events.

About the copyright holders

The breakeven point is expected within 3-4 years. This is due to the high price of the content, as the licensing rights are very, very expensive. The model of content distribution in the market depends on the conditions and price of rights. Some of them we launch on an advertising model. There is some content that we buy only for subscription, as most of the world's leading majors are extremely reluctant to sell the rights to the advertising model and demand any fee from the user. And in another way, these rights cannot be acquired and are unlikely to succeed in the near future. And the third type of rights that can be purchased are the rights to premiere films, which can only be sold on TVOD for each viewing. We also have this type of right. As a rule, the rights are initially sold on TVOD (which allows you to charge only for viewing), then on SVOD (content is distributed by subscription), and only then distribution through the advertising model is possible.
Now there is a clear understanding of this movement in the global rights market, which was facilitated by the world's leading OTT services. The largest copyright holders have a clear and transparent grid, and they are quite clear about how much it can cost.
However, there are no clear time frames on the Ukrainian market yet, and the rules of the game still completely depend on the right holders. There are a number of companies that open access for us as early as 2 weeks after the premiere. First of all, this applies to Russian content. In most cases, this period is calculated one or two months after the premiere.
Thus, the main and only problem of our business is the need for quite significant investments in rights.

About cooperation with Internet providers

Our company works in two directions: both on the B2C market and with Internet providers. The main ways of our development are integration with a large number of devices (Smart-TVs, interactive set-top boxes, Apple mobile devices, etc.) and agreements with providers. For example, we also participate in the integrated service of the Volya company.
Internet providers with the help of additional services can offer new services and attract new subscribers. We also place our caching equipment on the partner site to facilitate the provision of services in the network of a particular partner. Therefore, there are practically no difficulties in negotiation issues. The difficulty arises when billing is integrated into the partner's service, which is carried out so that the user has the opportunity to pay for our services through a single check for the Internet. For us, this greatly facilitates the entrance to the service.

About monetization

We are not going to take the last money from users. Our subscription now costs 40 UAH. Based on the cost of rights, these are incomparable amounts. Based on market research and expert opinions, we have every reason to believe that the amount we charge for a subscription is not prohibitive for users. In addition, we work with many providers under a scheme that allows them to embed our subscription into their tariff plan which also contributes to monetization.
The main problem is "illegal players". Therefore, we believe that the market should develop in the direction of some kind of legalization. We consider ourselves completely legal and offer our services for the amount that we currently consider acceptable.

3. Evgeny Abramov, director of Oll.tv

4 4 Vladimir Borovik, CEO of the Megogo.net project

We launched in November 2011. The leitmotif was the presence on any device. Our main concentration is theatrical releases and serials of the CIS countries. We work in 15 countries of the former CIS and give part of the content to the whole world. The maximum number of unique users per month is 21 million, of which 5-6 million are from Ukraine.
In Ukraine, Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan, we are developing the OTT advertising model more. And we focus on subscription and pay-per-view in the Baltics, where we rely more on partnerships with telecommunications operators. These are more civilized markets where DVDs are on the shelves en masse and people are still buying them. They still haven't had a period of massive content depreciation, and people there understand that everything in life is paid, including watching movies. Of course, there is also some kind of illegal market there, but there is no our scale.
Speaking about other countries (Moldova, Central Asia and the Caucasus), the markets there are still underdeveloped, and people still need to be accustomed to online, which is likely to happen in the next year or two.
On the territory of the former USSR, we try to buy all three types of rights in order to be as flexible as possible in the provision of our services.

About the copyright holders

The issue of acquiring rights became the main one for us when, being a Ukrainian company, we began to develop in 15 countries of the former USSR. In 2010, at the Cannes Film Festival, we approached many majors with the words “sell the rights to Ukraine”. In response, we heard "Ukraine - is it somewhere in Russia not far from the Urals?". As a result, it turned out to be expedient for us to buy the rights to a wider and more understandable territory of the former USSR for the copyright holder.
The project is now in a very deep investment stage. We invest a lot of money in rights. And, I think that we will reach operational break-even within 2-3 years and hardly earlier, because the rights are very expensive. And for an OTT service, you need a lot of them. TV channels are easier in this regard. After all, if you are making a TV channel, then you need to fill in a certain broadcasting grid. If you are making an OTT service, then ideally you need to reach not only all devices, but also offer the user as much content as possible, as your viewer expects from you. It's like some kind of unattainable maximum, to which you are constantly moving, spending a lot of money on it.
Those OTT services that provide video on a licensed basis have a long-term perspective on the market, but this is a very expensive pleasure. In dollars, this is a figure with at least 7 zeros.
In addition, we also had to write a separate rights management system, since the video content of different majors not only differs in availability in a certain territory. Many rights are also sold for a certain period.

About cooperation with Internet providers

Of course, money in this market is generated in partnership. This is confirmed by the example of our cooperation with Volya's OTT service. We see several more promising partners for us. But so far I am not ready to talk about the distribution of the revenue sharing budget.
In addition, under the vast majority of contracts, all our future income, which we are talking about and do not yet see very much, we will be obliged to share in half with the copyright holder.
Of all the Ukrainian OTT platforms, we are least interested in the issue of cooperation with telecommunications companies. We certainly welcome any partnership proposals. There are many people in the market who want to do business with Megogo.net. However, the advertising model, which we mainly develop in Ukraine, needs joint billing least of all.

About monetization

We expect to take money everywhere. First of all, these are advertising budgets that will follow the audience. We also count on the monetization of users. We had a period of unregulated market, but we hope that together we will be able to bring order to it. We have all three models of monetization. But, as already mentioned, in Ukraine we are mainly developing an advertising model.

4. Vladimir Borovik, CEO of the Megogo.net project

PrevTrack

At the dawn of cinema, it was predicted that it would replace the theater. However, this did not happen, and they coexist perfectly together. Still, the cinema does not provide direct communication between the actors and the audience, that is, there is not enough interactivity.

Not so long ago, the idea was circulating in some minds that television could completely replace the film distribution. Thank God, he survived and received a new development. The difference between film and television today is no longer technology. Cinema became “filmless”, and television “tapeless”, everyone switched to digital. Television, unlike cinema, is a home-delivered product.

Now, in the game of content producers with consumers, a new participant is a worldwide network that forms a global information space. At the same time, the Internet itself does not seem to be considered a mass media, although there are discussions on this subject. Of course, this is a very convenient environment for distributing anything.

It makes no sense to oppose the Internet to television - it's the same as comparing a vessel and its contents.

So what is television, and what is its place on the Internet? To understand this topic consistently, we will argue, as they say, from the basics. Let's start with dictionary definitions.

TV- the field of science, technology and culture associated with the transmission of images of moving objects over a distance using radio electronic devices. (Big Encyclopedic Dictionary)

TV- a type of telecommunication intended for the transmission of changing images of stationary or moving objects. (Radio Regulations)

Mass media- a periodical printed publication, an online publication, a TV channel, a radio channel, a television program, a radio program, a video program, a newsreel program, another form of periodic distribution of mass information under a permanent name (title) (Law on Mass Media, Art. 2)

Online edition- a site in the information and telecommunications network "Internet", registered as a mass media in accordance with this Law. (Law on Mass Media, Art. 2)

TV channel, radio channel- a set of television, radio programs and (or) other audiovisual, audio messages and materials formed in accordance with the broadcasting grid (programme) and published (on the air) under a permanent name (name) and with a specified frequency. (Law on Mass Media, Art. 2)

Every television broadcast, with a few exceptions, is protected by copyright. Moreover, the program guide of the TV channel is also subject to the copyright of the broadcaster.

In January, at the exhibition-forum CSTB-2016, the problems of the development of interactive television in Russia were discussed. The TV audience is gradually moving away from traditional linear viewing and getting content on the Internet. On any device - be it a computer, TV, smartphone or tablet, game console - and anywhere, as long as there is a good connection.

In Russia, the level of broadband access penetration outstrips the penetration of digital cable TV and IPTV.

And although all television on the Internet is distributed over the Internet protocol, initially IPTV is understood as IP Multicast - a service for delivering television channels to a subscriber by an operator using its own local networks. That is why the idea came up to transmit Over the Top (OTT) television content, that is, over the networks of various providers in a public environment. We emphasize: the service is publicly available, and the content can be paid.

This state of affairs gives a significant starting advantage and greater potential for the development of OTT-TV compared to the capabilities of the IP Unicast service (that is, VoD - Video on Demand - video on demand, a system for individual delivery of television programs and films to a subscriber via digital cable, satellite or terrestrial pay TV network). The growth in the number of users of OTT-TV and VoD services is determined by the availability of legal, high-quality and in-demand content, primarily films and TV programs, for various screens.

The following types of video on demand are distinguished:

• FVoD (Free Video on Demand) - a type of VoD that provides almost unlimited access to video (free of charge and without showing ads);
• AVoD (Advertising Video on Demand) - a type of VoD in which access to the video is provided along with advertising that is shown in the video at regular intervals;
• SVoD (Subscription Video on Demand) - a type of VoD in which access to video is provided by purchasing a periodic subscription;
• TVoD (Transactional Video on Demand) - a type of VoD in which access to video is provided on account of paying a certain amount, while there are restrictions either on the number of views or on the time during which the content needs to be viewed, after which access is terminated;
• EST (Electronic Sell-Through) is a type of VoD in which access is provided on account of paying a certain amount, with practically no restrictions (only if they are not introduced by the video copyright holders).

Video-on-demand (SVoD, TVoD, EST) video-on-demand (SVoD, TVoD, EST) usually have special DRM (Digital Rights Management) protection, which intentionally restricts or makes it difficult to perform various actions with video in electronic format(copying, modifying, viewing, downloading to media, etc.).

The regulatory framework in this area has not yet been developed.

Changing the rules during the game is not good for the market.

A new trend in the OTT market is the growth of Smart-TV penetration and audience. Modern televisions are equipped with a function direct connection to the Internet via cable or Wi-Fi. In fact, Smart-TV is a computer specialized for TV. Many models are equipped with feedback and monitor what the consumer is watching. Monetization of services on this site should give a significant boost to the development of the pay TV market.

Almost all players in the television market seek to offer their services and monetize the audience of television content on the Internet. In addition to linear broadcasting, it is offered to watch programs that have recently aired (catch up, “following the air”), recording from the air, as well as libraries of films, series, and programs. For a fee, they offer a preview of what's coming next week.

Today, users of OTT services make up less than 10% of the audience. Moreover, even if 10% of viewers suddenly switch from terrestrial and cable broadcasting to Internet TV, our backbone networks will simply collapse. Generally speaking, the division of the audience is very conditional, since the same person watches TV as it suits him - on the road via a mobile device, at home via cable on a big screen, and so on. He has the right to simultaneously turn on both two and three screens, for example, during sports competitions. The main thing is to look. And for this, as in all times, you just need interesting content.

OTT Over the Top. What it is?

Business model of interactive digital television built on the basis of OTT technology offers real-time viewing of audio and video content from content aggregators without the participation and control of ISP providers.
Over the Top (OTT) is a technology in which content is delivered to any user directly connected to the Internet, via the http protocol.
OTT services provide uninterrupted viewing to the viewer and content protection to the provider. At the same time, the OTT service provider guarantees support for a certain list of subscriber devices (STB, set-top boxes), which gives him the full right to monetize it (through an advertising model, by subscription or by introducing a pay-per-view).

Some of the most sought-after and best-selling interactive OTT features include Video on Demand (VoD), delayed viewing (Time Shift), pay TV over the Internet (Web TV), streaming content to mobile devices (multi screen), and recording programs for delayed viewing. (PVR).

What does OTT look like in practice?

OTT Video on Demand service is offered by Youtube, Netflix, Hulu. It uses an advertising model and a subscription to bundled services.

OTT service specializing in pay TV via the Internet is provided by Yes, Kartina TV, Planeta TV.

The OTT service for broadcasting content to mobile devices is offered by Sky Go, BBC iPlayer, Yes, Cristal.

From the point of view of both the operator and the end user, OTT has significant advantages over IPTV. First of all, the fact that this type of content transfer is not tied to one specific operator.
OTT services are available to any Internet user, wherever he is.

Not only an IPTV or OTT operator with direct access to subscriber accounts, but also almost any content owner is able to broadcast in OTT.

In this case, the easiest and most proven way to get on the screen to the viewer is available: the copyright holder must integrate access to his content into the interface of a popular, widespread and real technical support subscriber device.

OTT vs IPTV

The advantages of online TV, be it IPTV or OTT, over traditional broadcasting are obvious: the ability to choose what, when, and in what quality to watch. As for the choice between these two technologies, the choice is not so obvious. The main advantage of IPTV over OTT is an established quality control system. Unlike the bitrate reduction algorithm typical for OTT media content transmission, the use of an intelligent delivery priority system for IPTV broadcasting is more acceptable for a demanding client. However, considering high cost equipment for IPTV broadcasts, most providers consider the introduction of this service as a fashion solution, so the range and quality of services can only develop in parallel with the material and technical base of the provider.

OTT is less demanding on hardware and software, so its development is limited, for the most part, by the speed of subscriber access to the network. The audience is not limited to one provider, unlike IPTV, and it does not require installation of additional software to view, with unique settings, since only a web browser is needed to view. An adaptive content transfer algorithm allows using an access channel of less than 4 Mbps (when compressing video content using the H.264 codec, the minimum speed is 2 Mbps). At lower speeds it is possible to use the download with subsequent viewing. Such flexibility of traffic delivery algorithms significantly distinguishes OTT from IPTV.

As for the advantages of these two technologies, we can safely say that OTT is the undisputed leader, judging by the convenience and accessibility for the end user. As already mentioned, OTT is not tied to any specific operator, and is available anywhere in the world where there is Internet access. High quality content, plus the ability to view on mobile devices, adaptive bitrate (a technology that adapts to a specific Internet channel speed), and a wide range of interactive services - all this distinguishes OTT from IPTV. Broadcasting can be carried out not only by an operator with access to subscriber accounts, but also by any owner of media content. In order to be able to sell content to the viewer, the copyright holder must take care of integrating the content access system into the subscriber device. In Ukraine, the most advanced alternative to such devices is the Aura HD media player. The main advantages of this device are support for all major media formats and codecs, and moreover, the device is accompanied by a lifetime technical support: software update, functionality expansion, and the list of supported services.

As for the disadvantages of OTT technology, it should be noted that the content is delivered over an unmanaged network. This means that the content owner cannot control the width of the subscriber's channel. Consequently, the video may slow down during buffering moments, and be of poor quality. However, this problem can also be solved. Since the main task of the operator is to provide the user with a continuous media stream, without delays and slowdowns, the bitrate of the stream must adapt to the speed of the Internet connection. Thus, the subscriber receives a continuous broadcast, the quality of which changes at every single moment when the connection speed rises or falls. This principle avoids buffering and associated image delays, ensuring optimal image quality. And yet, it is worth noting that the image quality may deteriorate, although not for long, and slightly. And, even despite this shortcoming, OTT technology can be considered the best way delivery of media services to the user, and increase the loyalty of subscribers, especially those who cannot afford a high-speed Internet connection, or use outdated equipment.

The common disadvantage of both technologies is related to the inconvenience of watching broadcasts. Mobility and interactivity make IPTV and OTT ideal for viewing on a computer screen, tablet or smartphone, however, for full viewing on a TV screen, the user will need, or set-top-box.

prospects

The main problem in the provision of OTT services is considered to be the implementation of user subscriptions, and judging by the latest trends in the development of this segment of the TV market, this will most likely lead to the fact that, most likely, the advertising model will become the main way to monetize OTT. And given the growth rate of OTT technology, it is becoming more and more attractive in the eyes of advertisers, and OTT advertising may, in the near future, reach the same volume of impressions as television. Plus, this will open up additional opportunities for subscribers: with an advertising subscription model, users will have access to a wide range of high-quality content, which will only play into the hands of operators and providers.

A high-quality subscriber device will put a big point in the IPTV vs OTT dispute. Having at home the aforementioned AuraHD Internet media player, or an analogue, a person is unlikely to make a choice in favor of IPTV if he already has access to free content. And, according to the wisdom of marketing, the primary trust between the client and the service provider is much more important than making a profit, which, with a sufficient level of trust, is only a matter of time.

In the language of metaphors, IPTV can be compared to an unscrupulous taxi driver who takes a client in a circle for a long time, and then takes a three-way trip for the distance traveled. OTT, in turn, is a guide that explains that the desired address is just around the corner. From this point of view, OTT is an incredibly promising and convenient way to develop and monetize the services of providing high-quality media content. Moreover, it is convenient for both providers and users. The advantages of this technology include the ability to broadcast to many types of devices, whether it is a digital TV receiver (STB), iPad, or a smartphone, directly to the user, bypassing intermediaries. A wide list of devices is explained by the ease of integration and management. Moreover, content can be reliably protected from copying, and the efficiency of technology can provide cost-effective maintenance of network and other resources. Users, in addition to a wide variety of receiving devices, will also appreciate a high degree of interactivity and a user-friendly interface that will help you not get confused in the lists of TV channels and video archives. In general, we can safely say that OTT is considered the main direction in the development of media services, which dictates new rules for the market, business, and the development of tastes, expectations and preferences among users.

According to research by US marketers, the consumption of OTT services has been continuously growing over the past few years. Even though the launch of detailed services is not always beneficial for providers, the trend dictates its own rules, and they have to adapt to new rules and trends. Unified Services, which combine the convenience and interactivity of OTT, are gradually capturing the market of media services. Among them are Amazon.com, Apple, BlockBuster, Comsat, Disney, BBC (I-Player), Google/Youtube, Hulu, Miicrosoft, Netflix, Sony (OTT Service), TiVo, Yahoo, etc. On the territory of Ukraine it is oll. tv, MEGOGO.NET, Divan.tv, and others.

Unfortunately, not all modern TVs can correctly perceive the video and audio codecs that encode the OTT stream. So, our experts noticed that Panasonic TVs lack the necessary codecs for decoding audio tracks, Samsung TVs, H series and lower, and do not support video streams with some codecs at all. All these issues have been studied technical specialists SmartTV company and therefore we use two types of OTT stream encoding for our users.

This allows you to provide high-quality Internet OTT TV services to customers with outdated smart TV models, as well as low Internet speeds, and, accordingly, subscribers with MAG, Aura, Dune HD, U2C, Smart TV set-top boxes. latest models and with high speed Internet.