31.01.2013 Views

Pay TV phase three document - Stakeholders - Ofcom

Pay TV phase three document - Stakeholders - Ofcom

Pay TV phase three document - Stakeholders - Ofcom

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Pay</strong> <strong>TV</strong> <strong>phase</strong> <strong>three</strong> <strong>document</strong> – non-confidential version<br />

� VoD traffic will double every two years through 2013. Consumer IP<strong>TV</strong> and CA<strong>TV</strong><br />

traffic will grow at a 53 percent CAGR between 2008 and 2013, compared to a<br />

CAGR of 40 percent for consumer Internet traffic 458 .<br />

7.20 In summary, the markets of interest to us are part of a sector where there is<br />

considerable scope for innovation and profound changes in the consumer<br />

experience. But the scale and depth of innovation, and the technologies that will play<br />

the greatest role in the future of the sector, are at present uncertain. We must have<br />

regard to this broader picture in assessing the effects on consumers of the<br />

competition problems we have identified.<br />

Our position in September<br />

7.21 In our Second <strong>Pay</strong> <strong>TV</strong> Consultation, we set out our view that competition in pay <strong>TV</strong><br />

was likely to be weakened by restricted distribution of Core Premium channels. We<br />

argued that markets where competition is weak, and consumers are unable to<br />

exercise a real choice between suppliers, are unlikely to deliver the best outcomes<br />

for consumers. This might manifest itself in several ways.<br />

7.22 Firstly, we identified a risk that consumer choice and retail innovation will be reduced.<br />

The most obvious manifestation of reduced consumer choice is the restricted<br />

availability of Sky’s premium content on other platforms. Even where content was<br />

available on a platform, we argued that consumer choice might be restricted if that<br />

content were only made available via a limited range of content bundles. We noted<br />

that although Sky did offer a wide range of content bundles, the pricing of these<br />

encouraged consumers to trade up to a small number of ‘big mixes’. We believed<br />

that consumers would benefit from a wider variety of entry-level packages being<br />

more widely available for premium content.<br />

7.23 Secondly, we identified a risk that platform innovation would be reduced. We argued<br />

that innovation in areas less well suited to the strengths of Sky’s DSat platform might<br />

well have proceeded faster if wholesale premium content had been more widely<br />

available on other platforms.<br />

7.24 We stressed that the development of the pay <strong>TV</strong> sector was at a point when new<br />

platforms using new distribution technologies, such as IP<strong>TV</strong> and mobile <strong>TV</strong>, could<br />

offer significant benefits to consumers. Our general expectation was that such<br />

platforms would offer consumers greater convenience and enhanced service<br />

flexibility, by allowing them to access content on demand, or when on the move. We<br />

recognized a real risk that the development of these new platforms could be held<br />

back by limited access to premium content, thereby denying consumers the<br />

associated benefits.<br />

7.25 Finally, we said that there was a risk that prices to consumers would be high, either<br />

because of Sky’s ability to set high wholesale prices, or because of Sky’s ability to<br />

leverage upstream market power into downstream retail markets and set high retail<br />

prices.<br />

458 These are global forecasts; bearing in mind the current situation with regard to Sky’s approach to<br />

the wholesale supply of Core Premium channels, the UK could fall behind this.<br />

227

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!