Future Of Video Publishing And Implications On Core . - Deloitte
Future of video publishing andimplications on core monetization models
ContentsIntroduction 3Changes in consumer preferences 4Technology enablementBehaviors and expectationsFuture evolutionImplications for traditional video publishersChanges to the advertising market—and the impact on video publishers 8Digital publishers and the market-leading duoTechnology enablementBehaviors and expectationsFuture evolutionImplications for traditional video publishersEconomic pressure for video publishers 12RevenuesCostsBottom lineTransformative steps to refocus the video publisher business 16Ten-year strategic frameworkSix-month kick-start: Five immediate priorities for video publishersConclusion 20
Future of video publishing and implications on core monetization models IntroductionIntroductionIf there has been any one constant over the last 20 years, it is that technologyinnovation will continue to accelerate the media evolution. Consider themassive changes that have impacted print, audio, and filmed content over thepast several decades:Print: Under pressure for much of the twenty-first century, newspaperrevenues declined from 60 billion to 30 billion between 2005 and 2010.1This shift was not restricted to younger generations, given that a majority ofUS adults over age 50 now obtain news from social media, a channel that wasalmost nonexistent a decade ago.Music: In the mid-1970s, vinyl and 8-track tapes were the premierconsumer music ownership mediums. Both were obsolete by the 1980s,replaced by the cassette, which was overtaken by the compact disc in the1990s. Now, all physical mediums have been replaced by digital music andstreaming services.Film: In 1930, 80 million Americans—about 65 percent of the population—visited a movie theater weekly. By the 1950s, after the introduction of threemajor broadcast networks, just 30 percent of the population did so. By theearly 1960s, only 10 percent of Americans went to the movie theater weekly.2These examples illustrate that as technology advances, the way people accesscontent changes dramatically along with the underlying economics and valuechain of the media industry. This report will provide perspectives for howtraditional video publishers (the sell side) should think about the future—andthe transformation necessary to get there. We will examine:1. Changes in consumer preferences2. Changes to the advertising market—and the impact on video publishers3. Economic pressure for video publishers4. Transformative steps to refocus the video publisher business3
Future of video publishing and implications on core monetization models Changes in consumer preferences Changes in consumerpreferencesIn the mid-1990s, before the rise of the consumer internet, “Family Night” often featured a battle forthe TV remote—a confrontation that sometimes turned physical. The winner chose the TV programor movie that the whole family would watch. The options were limited to scheduled programs on eachchannel, with some better prepared families renting movies or TV shows at the local video store.In 2018, family members have access to content curated to individual tastes, on their own devices,available whenever they want. This is possible due to the acceleration of internet speeds, leaps inmobile technology, and the proliferation of over-the-top (OTT) content such as Netflix and YouTube.Collectively, the family has undergone a radical behavioral shift favoring personalized, on-demandaccess over the shared family TV experience. What does this mean for traditional video publishers?Technology enablementEnhanced internet connection speeds laidthe groundwork for streaming of highquality video content, irrespective of device.From 2012 to 2017, connection speeds inthe United States increased an average of 28percent annually after remaining relativelyflat in the four years prior.3 This increasedbandwidth allowed customers to streamvideo instantly over the internet insteadof waiting hours to download content—ordays for the delivery of a DVD. In 2011,Netflix began its meteoric rise by spinningoff its DVD business and fully committing tostreaming content.4Smartphones leveraged increased internetspeed to provide consumers with accessto video content on the go. Thoughsmartphone technology is about 10 yearsold, the average American now owns fourmobile devices capable of accessing videocontent.5 Experiences once confined to theliving room are now accessible anywhere,4in the palm of one’s hand. Furthermore, theapp-based operating systems on phonesand tablets (plus smart TVs and somelaptops) have provided OTT services andpublishers with direct access to consumers.These two advances have led to anexplosion in content to suit usertastes, both broad and niche, thusthreatening the established video players.Between 1965 and today, consumertelevision expanded from three broadcastnetworks to more than 500 cable providers.Now, these traditional providers are beingdwarfed in the OTT medium, where thereare hundreds of thousands of digitalchannels (e.g., YouTube, Vimeo).6 As theproliferation of OTT offerings continues,there will be some winners, many losers,and consolidation. Regardless of the futureof OTT, this technology has challenged thepay-TV bundle.
Future of video publishing and implications on core monetization models Changes in consumer preferencesBehaviors and expectationsConsumer adoption of video streamingservices has been broad, with manyadopters becoming super-consumers. Arecent Deloitte study shows 55 percentof US households subscribe to a paidstreaming video service, and close to 50percent of all US weekly video viewing(TV shows and movies) occurs throughstreaming services.7 Among youngergenerations, adoption is more staggering: 70percent of Gen Z (ages 14–20) householdshave a streaming subscription, followedby Millennial (ages 21–34) and Gen X (ages35–51) households, at 68 percent and 64percent, respectively (see figure 1).Unbundled streaming choices are puttingpressure on the traditional pay-TV model.US household pay-TV penetration droppedto 63 percent in 2017 after hoveringaround 75 percent for years. Amongsurvey respondents who no longer havea pay-TV subscription, 27 percent cut thecord in the last year. What’s more, 16 to22 percent of Gen Z, Millennial, and GenX households have never subscribed to apay-TV service—and are unlikely to do so.Although the traditional pay-TV model isbeing challenged, younger generations arestill paying for content: 17 percent of Gen Zand 14 percent of Millennials have a newsservice subscription, while 40 percent ofGen Z and 37 percent of Millennials havemusic streaming subscriptions.8 The way inwhich Americans consume video content isindelibly shifting away from traditionalTV, just as music consumption shiftedfrom linear radio to personalizedstreaming services.Consumer video consumption is no longerfocused on the TV, with users increasinglyenjoying a seamless video experience acrossall screens. According to a recent Deloittesurvey, mobile devices now account for 61percent of short-form and 35 percent oflong-form video plays.9Figure 1. Video streaming’s popularity bridges multiple generationsVideo streaming behavior, 2016–2017Do you stream television programming every day/weekly?70%2016201760%50%40%30%20%10%0%TotalGen ZMillennials Gen XBoomersMaturesSource: Digital Media Trends Survey, 12th Edition: A new world of choice for digital consumers,Center for Technology, Media & Telecommunications, Deloitte LLP, 2018.5
Future of video publishing and implications on core monetization models Changes in consumer preferences Future evolutionThe trends seen in content consumptionwill likely not slow down. Compellingcontent delivered through online videooptions will increase and attract close to50 million additional users in the UnitedStates through 2022,10 while traditionalvideo services will continue to experiencecustomer churn. Cord cutting will steadilyclimb, from 69 million to 95 million in thenext four years.11 Clearly, users are shiftingaway from the legacy model of bundled TV.In 2018, ratings for major awards shows,generally benchmarks for the health of liveTV, recorded significant declines—someto all-time-low audiences.12 In response tochanging consumer tastes, traditional videopublishers are introducing linear OTT andskinny bundles, which will double to morethan 15 million subscribers by 2022.13 AsTV unbundles, new habits will likely formaround total streaming services, and topOTT platforms will likely grow in importanceand adoption.Consumer technology, content delivery,and content discovery will likely alsocontinue to evolve. Augmented realityand virtual reality (AR/VR) and otherimmersive experiences are starting to pushthe boundaries of the consumer videoexperience, while digital assistants suchas Amazon’s Alexa and Google Home canchange consumer behavior when itcomes to content discovery. Incumbentsshould expect continued innovation anddisruption from rival publishers, bothtraditional and emerging. The winnerswill likely redefine how they interact withconsumers in the form of new, intuitive, andimmersive user experiences.6Implications for traditional videopublishersTraditional video publishers shouldacknowledge the evolution of contentdelivery and flex their efforts accordingly.To relate to customers, and especiallyto younger generations’ typical limitedtolerance for “commercially overt”advertising, publishers should activate“frictionless” advertising experiences thatreflect a more balanced value exchangebetween consumers and marketers.For example, select research has shown15-second ads to be more effective withconsumers than 6- or 30-second ads.14Search ads, native advertising, influencermarketing, and branded content continue toperform well, while a recent Deloitte survey15indicated that 83 percent of consumersprefer to skip an online video ad if allowed.Adding to that, for online movies and TV, 50percent of Millennials would prefer to pay forcontent to avoid ads.16If consumers continue to shift consumptionfrom advertising-based video towardsubscription-based video, many publisherswill be required to experiment withalternative business models. While thereis a general understanding of the eventualneed for this shift, many publishers areadapting slowly in hopes that viewership willrebound, which is unlikely. We believe thatthe 2018 year-over-year decline in traditionalTV subscribers will increase the urgency toadjust business models.Publishers should also adjust measurementtactics to align with viewership behaviors.As outlined above, consumers have anever-broadening range of viewing optionsfor video content. This has pushedvideo consumption patterns to becomeincreasingly fragmented and individualized.Original air-date viewership is no longeran accurate measurement of consumerengagement, considering the shift toon-demand streaming and away from thetraditional TV broadcast. According to arecent Deloitte survey, live programmingaccounted for only 42 percent of TV viewing,with remaining viewing occurring on digitaland time-shifted platforms.17 Instead,publishers should build capabilities tomeasure cross-device viewership at differentintervals (e.g., original air date, t 3 days,t 7 days).Expect the consumer-centric trend tocontinue to impact video marketingby driving the growth of user-friendlyadvertising, reducing ad loads, andleading to adoption of more subscriptiononly services.
Brochure / report title goes here Section title goes here 7
Future of video publishing and implications on core monetization models Changes to the advertising market—and the impact on video publishers Changes to the advertisingmarket—and the impacton video publishersIn the mid-1990s, consumer products companies like Procter & Gamble built their brands withthe families who were arguing over the TV remote. They engaged ad agencies to identify targetmarkets, build storyboards, run focus groups, finalize copy, and purchase spots with national andlocal broadcast networks. Today, these same consumer products companies develop customerprofiles and advertising-campaign content in-house, purchase inventory programmatically totarget specific consumers, and measure campaign results with deep data-driven insights frompublishers. Many argue that the market-leading duo of digital advertising—Facebook and Google—have redefined ad-buyer expectations with targeting and measurement capabilities that havesurpassed those of traditional publishers.In the first section, we reviewed external consumer pressures on traditional video publishers. Nowwe will examine the paradigm shifts taking place in the video advertising industry.Digital publishers and the marketleading duoAlthough interactions among players inthe advertising ecosystem are unlikelyto change in the near term (see figure 2),digital is becoming the preferred channel forvideo advertising. Traditional TV advertisingis still king, with its current baseline ofmore than 70 billion in the United States,but it is expected to gradually decline. Incomparison, digital video advertising isforecasted to nearly double between 2018and 2022 to more than 50 billion (seefigure 3). It will not be long before digitalvideo advertising revenues surpass those oftraditional TV advertising.The market-leading duo is currentlydominating the broader digital advertisingmarket: It is estimated these two companieswill control close to 60 percent of digitalad revenue in 2018 (see figure 4). In8addition to their current size, they alsocapture more than 60 percent of digitalad spending growth. The key driver ofsuccess for both Facebook and Googlehas been the development of incrediblysticky platforms that capture global, highlyengaged audiences and, as a result, cancommand high ad-selling unit prices, orCPMs (cost per thousand impressions).Aside from operating popular front-endplatforms, these publishers have armedtheir sell-side infrastructure with feedbackloops that become more powerful as theygrow. Their advertising models balancethe needs of consumers (personalizedexperiences), advertisers (efficiently meetingand measuring objectives), and publishers(staying “top of mind” with media buyers).
Future of video publishing and implications on core monetization models Changes to the advertising market—and the impact on video publishersFigure 2. Representation of the advertising ecosystemAdvertisersDetermines amount of inventory to purchasePublishers look for inventory buyersTrading deskAudience segments sentfrom DMP to ad serverAdvertiserDMPDemand-side platformPurchases inventoryPurchases inventoryAd is sent to thepublisher's ad serverAuction marketplace(ad network, ad exchange)Direct buy/sellOffers inventoryOffers inventoryPublisherDMPSell-side platform/yield managementProvides availableinventoryProvides inventoryperformancePublisher ad toolsAdvertiserad serverCommunicated availablead inventory to be filledPublisherad serverProvides detailed inventory info& how mapped against segmentsAttributionAdvertisers look for inventory to purchaseAgencyAd is servedPublishersSource: Deloitte LLP, 2018.Figure 3. Digital video ad spending is approaching that of traditional TVUS TV and digital video ad spending, 2018–2022 ( B) 69.87 69.17 69.52 68.82 68.13 50.63 45.27 40.13 33.56 27.8220182019202020212022TV*Digital video**Note: * includes broadcast (network, spot, and syndication) and cable TV; ** includes in-banner,in-stream, and in-text; includes advertising that appears on desktop and laptop computers aswell as mobile phones and tablets.Sources: “Q3 2018 Digital Video Trends,” eMarketer.9
Future of video publishing and implications on core monetization models Changes to the advertising market—and the impact on video publishers Figure 4. Digital is driving more revenue growth than TV, due to success of the market-leading duoUS advertising market ( 201830%Digital ad revenue ( B)Ad market ( aditional video (TV)Traditional non-video% Digital vs. US ad. mkt02014Advertising focus areas from market studyAudience targetingRetargetingGeotargetingBehavioral targetingUse of first-party dataContextual targeting0%20%IncreaseSource: SNL 9465250%48%2016Sources: “Advertising Forecasts: U.S. Market Trends & Data for All Major Media,” SNL Kagan, 2017 edition; Deloitte analysis.Figure 5. Consumer targeting has become a competitive differentiator for advertisers58%54%263010Digital62%2017201846%Google Facebook %101Ad market %200OtherMarket-leading duo %9035%250Market-leading duo10040%300
Future of video publishing and implications on core monetization models Changes to the advertising market—and the impact on video publishersTechnology enablementBehaviors and expectationsFuture evolutionMany advertisers are leveraging digital anddata-driven capabilities to differentiatethemselves through targeting technology,with increasing emphasis on measurement,attribution, and analytics capabilities. Formsof targeting include audience targeting,retargeting, geotargeting, behavioraltargeting, use of first-party data, andcontextual targeting. These can enableadvertisers to acquire audiences that aremost receptive to certain products andstrategies. Regardless of the targeting form,the objective is increased efficiency andeffectiveness in moving consumers from“awareness” to “conversion” (see figure 5),driving greater ROI from campaigns. Themarket-leading duo have differentiated theirinventory to advertisers by leading theirpeer group with targeting functionality.The emergence of targeting technologyhas led buy-side advertisers to raisetheir expectations for traditional sell-sideadvertisers, specifically aroundpricing, targeting, and attribution.Today, expectations for sell-side videopublishers include:In the long term, the majority of inventorywill be transacted programmatically and relyon first-party data to drive efficiency andeffectiveness. In the short term, premiumpublishers will focus on content quality asbuyers are still accustomed to buying “age,gender, geo.” Contextually relevant, targetedresults to drive customer conversions:Platforms are expected to more effectivelyleverage first- and third-party user datato drive acquisitions and conversions,thereby improving marketing ROI andmeasuring cross-channel lead-toopportunity effectiveness. Engagement or performance-basedbusiness models (e.g., cost per click)to help reduce media buying risk:The use of performance-based modelsdistributes risk across advertisers andpublishers by charging only for actions.In contrast, impression-based, or CPM,models incur charges regardless ofperformance.Implications for traditional videopublishersNear term, the biggest challenge forpremium publishers is their ability tomaintain ratings while growing digitalexperiences. If the content is premium (i.e.,brand safe) and they can offer things likecompetitive separation and other buy-siderequirements, there will be many buyers.Long term, the challenge will be introducingnew business models to support theincreased content production costs. High reach across all majoradvertising sectors, with a singlebuy: Platforms (i.e., two-sided networks)aggregate audiences interested in a varietyof verticals by providing a wide range ofconsumer-focused products and services.Larger and more diverse audiencesbecome more appealing to ad buyersseeking broad marketing reach.11
Future of video publishing and implications on core monetization models Economic pressure for video publishers Economic pressure forvideo publishersShifts in consumer tastes and the advertising market have unsurprisingly affected the bottomline of traditional publishers (see figure 6). The race to develop programmatic systems, targetconsumers, and chase premier content has often strained both sides of the publisher’s P&L. Asthese pressures ramp up, publishers should evolve the status quo profit model.RevenuesTraditional video publishers have historicallybalanced advertising revenue with carriagefees, evidenced by the near-50/50 splitbetween the two revenue segments asrecently as 2007 (see figure 7). However,effectiveness of digital ads and shifts inviewing habits have pulled ad spending andsubscribers away from pay TV. Both trendsare putting pressure on revenue generation: From 2000–2005, publishers increasedaffiliate fees by up to 15 percent annually.Since then, the annual growth rate of feesdropped to 6.4 percent due to pushbackfrom multichannel video programmingdistributors (MVPDs).18 Advertising revenue growth during thissame period was flat—excluding politicalyears and major sporting events such asthe Olympics.19 Year-over-year CPM/rate increases, whilerelevant, are starting to be outpaced byratings declines—especially in local TV.2012The impact to revenue contribution isconsiderable: affiliate fees now contributemore than 62 percent of cable programmingrevenue.21 Combined with the annualdecline in subscriptions for even the mostpopular content, such as ESPN (see figure8), this imbalance is likely unsustainable,and publishers should eventually generaterevenue in ways other than increasingaffiliate fees on a smaller user base.Some publishers have reacted by carvingout content and developing owned-andoperated subscription video on demand(SVOD) properties, yet this requires yearsof strategic vision and high investment. Areasonable short-term solution may be tofocus on protecting advertising revenuewith advances in advertising products,such as data-driven, targeted advertising.A proactive business model shift to refocuson advertising capabilities can help stem thetide of revenue declines.
Future of video publishing and implications on core monetization models Economic pressure for video publishersFigure 6. Publisher margin illustration, including recent trendsPublisher marginRevenueCostsAdvertisingContentSG&AGrowth is dictated bynegotiated contractsCompeting with digitalfor advertising dollarsBig budget productionsattract audiencesMinimize SG&A toinvest in other areas 6.4% CAGR 3.5% CAGR 6.7% CAGR 1.5% CAGR2000–2005: 15%–17% CAGRToday: Mid-single-digit CAGR2000–2005: 10%–15% CAGRToday: Low-single-digit CAGRCost of producingscripted contentdoubled since 2012Cable networks issuedsignificant layoffs over past3–5 years due to restructuringAffiliate feesSource: Deloitte Market Study, 2017.Figure 7. Revenue from affiliate fees outpaces advertising incomeCable programmer revenue mixThe upsidedownThe goldenageGrowing advertisingrevenue, but decliningaffiliate feesGrowing advertisingrevenue andaffiliate feesA quiet placeToday’s stateDecliningadvertising revenueand affiliate feesGrowing affiliatefees, but decliningadvertising revenueCable programmer revenue mixAdvertising CAGR45%55%199753%47%200762%38%20170%0%Affiliate feesAdvertisingUnlikely affiliate fees will continue to offset slowingadvertising growth ratesAffiliate fee CAGRSources: Deloitte Analysis, SNL KaganSources: “Economics of Basic Cable Networks,” SNL Kagan, 2017 edition; “Advertising Forecasts: U.S.Market Trends & Data for All Major Media,” SNL Kagan, 2017 edition; Deloitte analysis.13
Future of video publishing and implications on core monetization models Economic pressure for video publishers Figure 8. Annual subscription declines and associated affiliate fee increasesESPN subscriptions (M) vs. affiliate fees ( )*105 8 7100 6 595 490 3 285 180200720092011Subscribers (M)20132015 0Affiliate fees*Monthly affiliate fee per subscriber per monthSources: SNL Kagan.CostsCosts have also increased considerablyas several key technology players such asAmazon, Google, and Apple invest in contentand programming to engage customerson their platforms. Combined with Netflix,which is estimated to have a current annualprogramming budget of close to 10 billion,22the arrival of highly liquid tech companies inthe programming market is driving up costsand pressuring the budgets of traditionalvideo publishers:14 Since 2012, the cost of producing scriptedvideo content has nearly doubled, whilethe number of scripted shows hasincreased 34 percent (see figure 9). The amount of long-form content(greater than 20 minutes) processed infirst quarter 2018 was 189 percent higherthan a year earlier.23 Viewership continues to concentrateon the top properties; for cableprogrammers, 80 percent of operatingrevenue goes to the top quartile (seefigure 10); for OTT, 80 percent of revenueis accounted for by SVOD and its three keyplayers: Netflix, Amazon, and Hulu.24These cost trends point to a highlyfragmented market in which the topcompanies garner most of the spoils. Asexpected, this has led to an arms racefor premium content. We anticipate thatcompetition for high-quality content willaccelerate over the next decade.Publishers can attempt to counteractcontent cost increases by reducing othercosts such as integrating programmaticcapabilities into the ad-buying process.Programmatic has been shown to reduceSG&A associated with selling spots, withadoption likely to increase in the future asthe industry moves toward more automatedand tech-driven solutions.
Future of video publishing and implications on core monetization models Economic pressure for video publishersBottom linewill become weaker and they will concede ahistorical advantage. As a result, viewershipwill likely decrease, and publishers will nolonger be able to demand the carriage feeincreases that are keeping revenue afloat.A self-perpetuating cycle will likely ensuewhere carriage fee declines limit capitalavailable for content spending.We see no reason to believe that decliningcarriage fees, mounting subscriber losses,and increasing content creation costs willabate. While profitability pressures shouldcontinue to grow, most concerning is thepossibility of a significant reduction in linearTV content quality. If traditional publishersare unable to compete with tech titans oncontent costs, it is likely that content qualityPublishers seeking to circumnavigatethis trend should focus on the other sideof the revenue equation: ad revenue.Recommitting to generating advertisingrevenue by improving the ad-buyingexperience (e.g., programmatic purchasingand targeting) and commanding higheradvertising prices (e.g., through bettertargeting) can help stimulate revenue that isotherwise decreasing.Figure 9. Increase in content costs, 2012–2018Increase in content and costs 602012–2018CAGR 5.5%500 50400 40300 30200 20100 1002012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018BroadcastPayBasicOnline 0Cable programming costs ( B)Number of shows600CostThe number of scripted shows has increased34% since 2012Production budgets have nearly doubled in thepast five years20122017 1.5–3million 5–7million1 hour on premiumcable and streaming 1–1.5million 1.5–3million30 minutes on broadcastand basic cableSources: SNL Kagan, Variety.Figure 10. Concentration of programmer revenue% of total running sum of operating revenue, net (000)Operating revenue by US programmer254 180200210220240250Running sum of distinct count of TV network60 of the top 254 programmers ( 25%) contribute to 80% of total operating valueSources: SNL Kagan.15
Future of video publishing and implications on core monetization models Transformative steps to refocus the video publisher business Transformative steps to refocusthe video publisher businessTo evolve with consumer tastes and technological capabilities while optimizing profitability, sell-sidevideo advertisers should lean in to change. Specifically, they should prepare to strategically refocustheir business on digital capabilities. This is not an overnight solution and requires an emphasis onboth the long and short term. One can equate it to being asked to build a new plane while still flyingthe current one—all while meeting quarterly revenue targets and margin goals. We believe this startswith a ten-year strategic framework that arrives at digital fluency, while also following a six-monthkick-start plan of five distinct actions leaders can take today to compete tomorrow.Ten-year strategic frameworkWhile it is prudent to manage the incomestatement with an eye on the future, manypublishers are either behind or unableto shift their focus to digital immediately.Further, while trends support realigningbusinesses to focus on digital, traditionallinear TV should continue to contributeample returns for the near future. Tobalance these forces while progressingtoward digital fluency, publishers shouldtake a gradual but regimented three-stepapproach (see figure 11):1. Optimize linear: Examine the currentlinear operating model and SG&A todetermine potential areas of efficiencyand incremental cash flow. In manycases, this includes adopting newcapabilities, such as automating thebuying process (e.g., programmatic).2. Align across converged video:Blend traditional and digitally orientedinventory (e.g., TV Everywhere appsallowing authentication to watch linearon mobile). Bridging the traditional andmobile TV experiences can enable aseamless advertising product supportedby unified sales and ops organizations.3. Build digital: Fund digital projects (e.g.,programmatic) at the same level as thetraditional linear business. Many of thelargest US publishers devote only 10percent of their investment budget todigital. Battling the market-leading duoand other emerging digital platforms willlikely require more.Earnings potentialFigure 11. How publishers can support their current business while building for the digital futureOptimize linearAlign across converged video Develop advanced TVcapabilities to enhancelinear value proposition Take a holistic productdevelopment/management approach Increase sales andoperational efficiencyto maximize cash flow Converge sales and opsprocesses across linearand digitalSource: Deloitte LLP, 2018.16Build digital Develop portfolio
Consumer adoption of video streaming services has been broad, with many adopters becoming super-consumers. A recent Deloitte study shows 55 percent of US households subscribe to a paid streaming video service, and close to 50 percent of all US weekly video viewing (TV shows and movies) occurs through streaming services.7 Among younger
Using Cross Products Video 1, Video 2 Determining Whether Two Quantities are Proportional Video 1, Video 2 Modeling Real Life Video 1, Video 2 5.4 Writing and Solving Proportions Solving Proportions Using Mental Math Video 1, Video 2 Solving Proportions Using Cross Products Video 1, Video 2 Writing and Solving a Proportion Video 1, Video 2
How to edit the imported video on Mac Leawo Video onverter for Mac can also serve as a video editor to help users make a unique video. This page will tell the detailed steps of how to edit a video on mac. Five main video editing function will meet all your basic needs to edit a video. 1. Edit video on Mac . Import the file
viii Resources VIDEO Video 0.1 Alphabetic Principle xvi Video 0.2 Concept of Word in Print xviii Video 0.3 Importance of Organizing Phonics Information xix Video 0.4 Active Phonics Instruction xix Video 0.5 Phonics Strategies xix Video 0.6 Explanation of Temporary Spelling xx Video 0.7 Temporary Spelling xx Video 0.8 Why a One-Size-Fits-All Approach Is Less Effective in Kindergarten xxii
Creating a Video quiz is very simple. First you'll need a video that you want to create the quiz in. Don't worry; creating the Video Quiz will not change the video itself! Making a video Quiz will actually make a copy of the video in your My Media area. (A "Chapter 1 Overview" video, for example, would have a duplicate video titled .
Video-on-Demand - Technologies, Systems, and Applications 15 1.2 Types of Video Services Jack Y.B. Lee True Video-on-Demand Video Server Request Video Data Independent channel Full interactive controls, like pause/resume, seeking, fast forward, etc. One video channel per user required. Video-on-Demand - Technologies, Systems, and .
Polycom, Inc. Subject: split video conferencing solution for medium and large rooms with more flexibility Keywords: enterprise video, video solutions, video communication, video applications, ip video, high definition conferencing, high definition communication, hd video conferencing, video content management Created Date: 8/7/2007 7:22:23 PM
To publish a new video, the video provider uploads a sin-gle high quality version of that video to the storage cloud of the CDN. Then, the CDN uses its transcoding cloud to transcode the video to all the bit rates requested by the video provider and stores the transcoded output in the stor-age cloud2. The video provider then makes the new video
CHAPTER 6: DESKTOP PUBLISHING Introduction to Desk Top Publishing Desktop publishing (abbreviated DTP) is the creation of documents using page layout skills on a personal computer primarily for print. Desktop publishing software can generate layouts and produce typographic quality text and images comparable to traditional typography and printing.
