Like trying to guess the number of sweets in a jar I was looking
at Channel 4's 4oD service earlier this week and wondering how many
programmes it has available, on-demand, at any given time. Five
hundred? Eight hundred? For the sake of argument, let's say it's an
even thousand. Multiply that by the number of platforms 4oD appears
on - web, tablets, smartphones, connected TVs, games consoles,
set-top boxes - and we're talking about tens of thousands of
individual assets that the guys at Channel 4 have to keep track of.
For each video, C4 has to schedule when it appears, on what
platform, on what device, for how long and in which geographical
territories. An accompanying metadata file containing things like a
description of the video, original broadcast dates, cast and crew
details, duration and categories also needs to be attached to each
asset. You can see how this could be a complex job.
So how do they do it? How is VOD scheduling done? I've spoken to
the British terrestrial broadcasters, Channel 4 and Channel 5 on
the record (as well as one off it - you'll see why below) and the
vendors BeBanjo, ODG (On Demand Group), Red Bee Media and Xstream
to learn a little more. If you're publishing video content to
multiple platforms here are your four main options with some pros
and cons.
#1. Use Excel Spreadsheets
Low-tech but cheap, using Excel spreadsheets - or even simple
databases like Access - is a tried and trusted way to organise and
manage your video assets. Paul Thornton-Jones, Head of
Digital Media at Channel 5, told me that his team used
Excel spreadsheets until just three years ago. They waited as long
as they could before the size, stability and scalability of their
operational needs meant that they decided to buy in a specialist
piece of scheduling software from BeBanjo
(see below).
One big European broadcaster told me, off the record,
that even just a year ago their VOD schedule was run by students
who administered the whole thing using post-it notes
At its simplest, your spreadsheets could include fields like
name of video, description, platform the asset should appear on,
start date, end date, duration and any special instructions. And if
you think that using Excel still sounds like too much work take
heart: one big European broadcaster told me, off the record, that
even just a year ago their VOD schedule was run by students who
administered the whole thing using post-it notes!
Pros
Cons
- Lack of scalability, audit trails and version control
- Depending on the number of assets and platforms can quickly
become unmanageable
- Needs a lot of human intervention: Paul Thornton-Jones said
that if Channel 5 was still using Excel they'd probably need a team
of twenty VOD schedulers by now.
#2. Build your own VOD Scheduling system
When Channel 4's video-on-demand service, 4oD, launched in 2006,
"there wasn't really an off-the-shelf VOD scheduling package
that did quite what we wanted it to do", according to the
company's Chief Architect, Orpheus Warr.
"We already had systems in place for our
broadcast management chain like a DAM (digital asset management),
CMS and rights management function so we decided to build a
parallel chain for our VOD service".
Six years later, and now serving up to fifteen platforms
including web, tablets, connected TV, smartphones and games
consoles, it's still in use at C4 so I asked Warr about some of the
advantages and disadvantages of this method and whether the company
would ever consider using third-party software.
"I think it would be irresponsible not to
look at the market periodically and check, whether in terms of
operational efficiency or competitive advantage, there's an
opportunity to move to an off the shelf package. What we've found
over time however is that the scale and complexity of what we do is
such that - and it's the same with several aspects of broadcast
management - the gap between the products available and the
customisation we'd need to do is quite large.
Because of the degree of integration that our
system has with our existing broadcast management systems we don't
need a certain percentage of the functionality that a third party
system might be able to offer - for example managing distribution
rights or linking up with a series of encoders. There are parts of
it that we would simply never use.
It is of course a matter of opinion, but in
my view there is not a simple relationship between cost, agility
and bespoke build. Whilst the up-front cost of developing a system
yourself is likely to be higher than using an off-the-shelf
solution, the on-going enhancement costs can be managed to suit
your own specific requirements, meaning that you are able to
prioritise the features that matter most to you over those that may
be more generally requested from the industry as a whole. As such,
bespoke development not only allows for tight control over areas of
product investment, but often also enables us to move faster than
if we were subject the a third party supplier's enhancement
roadmap."
Pros
- Bespoke so should be totally fit for purpose
- Deep integration possible with other legacy systems
- Can be evolved to cater for unique requirements
Cons
- Potentially expensive in terms of manpower, resourcing and
effort
- Third-party systems may be able to supply most equivalent
functionality more cheaply
- As with all legacy projects, may not be able to keep up with
rapid pace of change
- The usual risks involved in any bespoke development project
including scope creep, late delivery, budget overspend etc.
#3. Use Specialist Software
Whilst it's entirely possible to build your own VOD scheduling
system, Orpheus Warr of Channel 4 also made a good
case for buying third-party software to handle the job:
"If we were coming into the market today
without any legacy around VOD or online publication then your first
logical port of call would have to be an off the shelf system. Even
if you're operating on a fairly low scale I'd absolutely consider
doing that long before worrying about tactical approaches to using
Excel spreadsheets because they bring with them fairly basic
features like audit trails and version control. Things can very
quickly get out of hand when you're using just spreadsheets whereas
a specialist system does a lot of the housekeeping for
you."
Paul Thornton-Jones of Channel 5 agrees.
Despite running a small unit ("We have a VOD Ops team of just
three people"), C5's achievements are impressive. 'Demand 5'
was the first video-on-demand service on the Xbox and Sony Bravia
platforms, is now available on Sky and YouView and, almost uniquely
at this stage in the product development cycle, manages to make a
profit.
"Up until three years ago we were using Excel
spreadsheets to administer our VOD services," Thornton-Jones told
me "but we now have over 10,000 assets on twelve platforms and we
report, quarterly, to over 200 rights owners so we hired a company
called BeBanjo to handle our VOD scheduling and workflow. We were
their first 'Movida'
customer three years ago ['Movida is the name of BeBanjo's VOD
Management solution software] and, over time, we've helped define
their products with our requirements."
BeBanjo is one of only a handful of specialists operating in
this space (the other big one is Pilat Media) and, its client list
includes Sky, BT Vision, Telefonica and AMC Networks. One of
BeBanjo's founders, Bastian Manintveld, explained some of the
advantages of using its products:
"The first thing is that BeBanjo is
platform-agnostic. We supply the tools you need to manage content
rights, scheduling, metadata and workflow across platforms,
regardless of the technology you use elsewhere in your chain. We
integrate through open APIs with third-party vendors such as OVPs
(online video platforms), set-top box networks and asset management
systems. This provides you with continuity of service even if you
decide to change technology partners. All our products work
through a web browser, making deployment and support easy. Added to
that, everyone in your team is always working from the same
information; there are no duplicates in different silos. There's
less probability for errors, and departments can instantly find out
what other teams are doing, whether they're in-house or
sub-contracted. No other system gives you that visibility across
the entire workflow."
And what about the disadvantages?
"Investing in something like BeBanjo only
makes sense if you have a certain amount of scale in terms of
number of video assets and platforms. If you don't have the volume
I can see how an investment could seem fairly expensive".
Pros
- Flexible, scalable, team and platform independent
- API integration possible with linear scheduling, rights and
workflow systems
- Specialist products evolve with the needs of the market without
you having to keep track of industry development
Cons
- Potential cost if you don't have the volume of assets
- Relative inability to shape product compared to in-house
solutions
- Natural disruption if you're moving from legacy to third-party
service
#4. Use Media Management Services from Existing
Partners
If you run a video-on-demand service you may already use one or
more technology partners to help ingest, encode or deliver your
content. Do any of these companies provide satisfactory (if not
specialized) scheduling services? The short answer is yes.
The Danish OVP, Xstream, for example, includes a
scheduling module within its MediaMaker system from which you can
administer VOD programming in different territories and different
platforms. Brightcove's Video Cloud also contains
similar functionality. Red Bee Media handles content management for
ITV amongst others and ODG (On
Demand Group) offers a range of services from managing
metadata to media processing, royalty and business insight
reporting. It also services 6,000+ hours of content to 240 formats
for 30 customers every week.
The take-out is that it may be worth having a conversation with
existing suppliers. While their solutions may not be as focused as
building your own dedicated system or buying something off the
shelf and customising it they may be able to give you a perfectly
adequate and usable product.
Pros
- You may already have a relationship and / or be using other
services from the supplier
- Potentially little new integration needed
- May serve as a useful stop-gap between low-tech and specialist
scheduling solutions
Cons
- Won't be as bespoke as internally developed / customised
software
- May not be scalable
- May not serve non-web platforms (e.g. set-top boxes, operator
services)
What do you think? Are there any VOD scheduling / workflow
methods missing or any advantages / disadvantages you'd like to
talk about? I'd love to hear your thoughts in the comments box
below.