Thanks to a concerted effort and a lot of teamwork, Seren Innovations (branded as Astound Broadband) was the first Cable TV overbuilder in the United States to launch Video On Demand. Seren was also among the first VOD deployments in the country:
1. October 1999; Rockfort IL, Insight Communications (Diva)
2. December 1999; Columbus OH, Insight Communications (Diva)
3. December 1999; Honolulu HI, Time Warner Cable (Concurrent)
4. January 2000; Evansville IN, Insight Communications (Diva)
5. June 2000; Atlanta (Duluth) GA, Charter (Diva)
6. July 2000; Tampa Bay FL, Time Warner Cable (Concurrent)
7. September 2000; Austin TX, Time Warner Cable (Seachange)
8. September 2000; St Cloud MN, Seren Innovations (nCube)
9. September 2000; Pasadena / Alhambra / West Covina / Monterey Park CA, Charter (Diva)
10. October 2000; Concord CA, Seren Innovations (nCube)
11. October 2000; San Diego CA, Cox Communications (Concurrent)
12. November 2000; Anchorage AK, General Communications (Seachange)
13. December 2000; Atlanta GA, AT&T Broadband (Diva)
.
.
Primary Goals:
The primary goals of the Video On Demand launch included the folllowing:
· Partner with Demand Video, nCube, Scientific Atlanta and Convergys to roll out Video On Demand services.
· Refine business case with capital expenditures, payback, competitive analysis, sales projections, etc.
· Write Video On Demand product requirement document (PRD).
· Drive development and launch process and manage deliverables.
· Plan launch schedule, milestones and contingencies with team.
· Define product, including packaging, pricing, positioning, branding, content, number of titles, etc.
· Continue ongoing product refinements.
·
·
VOD Product Development and Launch:
January 2000
- Conducted market research
- Developed business case
- Reviewed contractual agreements and service level agreements (SLAs)
- Met with vendors (Demand Video, nCube)
- Drafted VOD launch plan

February 2000
- Assembled cross functional team of Engineering, Operations, Billing, Customer Service, Marketing, nCube, DemandVideo, Scientific Atlanta
- Outlined launch plan & goals with Executive management
- Planned Concord CA and St Cloud MN launches to be staggered by least 2+ weeks to effectively manage resources
- Defined legal and regulatory requirements with legal group
- Formulated pricing and packaging models with VP Products and Services
- Ensured nCube submit nVision 1.0 to Scientific Atlanta for certification

March 2000
- Removed Stellar One demo system from Minnesota site
- Upgraded to Scientific Atlanta's DNCS operating system System Release 1.2.7 (with VOD patch)
- Ensured nVision 1.0 and SA certification complete, commenced system testing
- Surveyed site and prepared head end for VOD systems installation (rack space, power requirements, air conditioning, etc)
- Developed billing spec for Convergys interface with Billing group, nCube and Demand Video
- Began branding efforts with Marketing team by providing direction and strategy
- Defined preliminary marketing messages and feature/benefits

April 2000
- Delivered, installed and integrated VOD server and backoffice systems
- Completed nVision 1.0 system testing
- Began incorporating marketing messages in internal communications
- Developed plans for VOD barker channel and interstitials with Demand Video
- Created manual billing process as contingency for Convergys billing interface
- Developed reporting systems for buys, licensing, etc.
- Updated billing spec for Convergys interface
- Drafted VOD product launch criteria

May 2000
- Completed end to end VOD system acceptance testing, eventually overload testing and iteration testing
- Provided initial talking points to operations and customer service groups
- Refined branding, pricing, packaging and communication efforts with VP Products and Marketing
- Developed outline with Marketing group for strategic marketing plans (launch plan, promos, PR releases, schedules, etc)
- Finalized plans for VOD barker and interstitials
- Sent franchise legal notifications
- Tested reporting systems
- Prepared Seren Innovation/Demand Video/nCube partnership press release at NCTA
- Finalized VOD product launch criteria

June 2000
- Commenced friendly testing (50 participants)
- Formulated final go-to-market plan
- Firmed up marketing strategies for launch plan, roll out promotions, press release schedules
- Finalized approval of pricing, packaging, marketing messages, feature/benefits
- Initiated system training for operations, customer service, cable stores, etc
- Provided final talking points, features/benefits, objections/rebuttals
- Outlined future product roadmap
- Ensured Convergys completes billing system interface

July 2000
- Completed friendly test evaluations and necessary adjustments
- Decided on whether to implement "coming soon" marketing tactics
- Finalized testing for manual billing process
- Installed and test barker channel
- Finished systems testing
- Upgraded Seren's billing platform from Convergys' ICOMs 3.1 to 4.5
- Met for Go/No-go decision on commercial launch probability
- Projected first three month buy rates

August 2000
- Finalized system evaluations
- Commenced Go/No-go meeting on commercial launch
- Completed operational preparations
- Readied marketing tactics
- Initiated limited VOD service launch in St Cloud, MN
- Conducted ICOMs 4.5 billing interface systems testing between Seren and Convergys

September 2000
- Initiated limited VOD service launch in Concord, CA
- Decided on whether to expand St Cloud service launch and conduct marketing tactics
- Implemented Convergys VOD automated billing system
- Decided on VOD service industry press releases
- Initialized reporting systems evaluations

October
- Conducted preliminary VOD service evaluations
- Decided on full commercial launch decisions for St Cloud and Concord
- Continued VOD product migration path with nCube and Scientific Atlanta
- Explored integration opportunities with MetaTV, middleware providers and iSurfTV
- Evaluated SVOD options with nCube, Scientific Atlanta, Starz-Encore
·
·
Issues and Challenges:
Content - At the time, this was probably the biggest single problem facing the entire industry. Content providers, namely the big eight Hollywood studios, had many concerns about VOD. For one, they did not want to see their movies end up being passed around on the internet the way audio files were with Napster. Secondly, they were skeptical of the business models and really wanted to eliminate the middleman and deal with the consumer directly (and make more profit). Just as important, most studios did not want to upset the current business model they had with the video stores. The relationships with such huge money-making operations as Blockbuster were critical to their revenue numbers. Through DemandVideo, Seren was able to secure content deals with independent providers like Artisan. A few other titles were licensed to help provide a good inventory at the time of the VOD launch. About 500 titles were available. Still, contracts were ongoing with Universal, Warner Bros and Dreamworks. The remaining, 20th Century Fox, Disney, Paramount and Columbia Pictures were much less sure about their VOD intentions at the time. Aside from that, Seren was looking to obtain content from NBC for the rights to such programming as "Saturday Night Live", and Comedy Central for "Southpark". Seren was also looking at offering local content such as high school football games or even city council meetings. In that case, DemandVideo would charge a minimal fee for storage and encoding. Seren eventually signed on with TVN for it's content aggregation.

Scientific Atlanta proprietary system - Before the inception of the VOD product, Seren's engineer planners and director of products were looking at different options for conditional access systems (CAS). On one hand, there was a open system platform that was costly and much less supported, but which provided a variety of development advantages. On the other hand, there was the proprietary systems of Motorola and Scientific Atlanta (S-A), who's head end gear and infrastructure costs were less expensive, but who had distinct development limitations. Cost was the order of the day, and Scientific Atlanta provided the best possible option. Once tied to this platform, Seren had to ensure all accompanying products complied with the system. This required certification, whereby a vendor would complete lab testing in Scientific Atlanta facilities to ensure it was 100% compatible and stable. However, the cost of the certification was usually left to the vendor, which in some cases was burdensome considering it could cost up to $80,000-$100,000 or more. Moreover, the vendors had to look at the practicality of the expense and the payback. Scientific Atlanta had much less market share than Motorola, so many small suppliers decided that if they were to incur the expense, they would do so for Motorola instead. Either way, the real issue was that the proprietary system was closed. In order to add products such as VOD, systems needed to be compatible, development and other expenses had to be incurred, and payback needed to be ensured. For Seren's VOD service, this meant that all systems and services would be tied into the S-A environment, which served to dramatically limit the scope of Seren's ongoing options.

System Release - The System Release is essentially the network operating system for Scientific Atlanta's network infrastructure. Just as with desktop operating systems such as Windows, the System Release is continuously updated. Just the same, it also goes out of date. Thus, as time passes by and new products and services are introduced, they must be compatible with the current version of Scientific Atlanta's system release. This effected Seren's VOD launch several times. For one, the 1.2.7 System Release VOD patch was basically scrapped, and S-A decided to integrate the solutions into it's next operating system version, 1.2.8. This initially pushed out the VOD timeline by close to 3 months, but it ended up being longer. Secondly, as mentioned above, all vendor products have to be certified with Scientific Atlanta, meaning re-certification in many cases. Aside from that, the slow System Release schedule created other conflicts. For instance, out plan at Seren was to launch VOD with a limited number of single QAMs, the upgrade to the M-QAMs (quadruple QAMs) once they were available. The move was critical because it involved considerable cost savings. The catch was that the M-QAMs worked with the next iteration of the System Release (1.4), which meant that the next generation of the operating system would have to first be released, then implemented. In early 2000, Scientific Atlanta was planning to release 1.4 in the early fall, but the delays on System Release 1.2.8 pushed that timeline back. But once the testing on 1.4 was being conducted, the results were so poor that it became overwhelmingly evident that the version would not be released anytime soon. As a result, Seren was forced to spend a considerable sum on the single QAMs.

Integration bugs - Actually, system bugs that cropped up from integration weren't too bad. I am only mentioning it because it set our team back perhaps a month. We planned for extra time, so it wasn't too much of an issue. A few of the bugs were critical though. In one example, the QAM was losing its ability to transmit A/V, even though the session was already set up on the QAM. Another was the RTSP (Real-Time Stream Control Protocol) server on nCube's server would get placed into a broken state where it no longer responded to video requests. Whenever the network communication to the DNCS was lost either by a failed network connection or a reboot of the DNCS, the message sent to the DNCS for server registration was ignored by the DNCS and any further communication was not allowed. The real challenge to sorting through these problems was getting the resources of Scientific Atlanta to work them through. nCube was very dedicated from the onset, and after a little prodding, S-A came to the table with their special support team.

Exclusivity agreements - A natural course of action in a competitive environment is for service providers to make exclusivity agreements with vendors. In the Cable industry, this wasn't as much of an issue between MSOs because they generally didn't compete directly against one another. However, in 1998-99 when overbuilders where the rage, exclusivity agreements came into play. Among the pawns were set-top manufacturers such and interactive TV solution providers. It was an issue not to be taken lightly because such agreements can cause frustrations because service providers may end up having to choose one vendor for one market, and another for a different market. For small operators, especially like overbuilders who don't have as much industry experience, working with two vendors carries more challenges than working with one. During the time of the VOD launch, such exclusivity agreements were in play. Time Warner Cable had a digital set-top exclusivity agreement with Scientific-Atlanta Inc., which meant it had locked up that hardware in its markets. There were also non-compete agreements in place for video-on-demand hardware from SeaChange International Inc., in which Time Warner is an investor, and Concurrent Computer Corp. For Seren, the choices for some of the VOD server suppliers was limited for this reason.

IPG and product integration - In a forward thinking environment, I was very interested in developing a long term strategy for the TV Desktop. In essence, VOD was going to be but just one application of many, and there needed to be a central point were all the apps were tied together. A few companies out there had intriguing technology, such as iSurfTV and MetaTV, but neither were tested or deployed at the time. Furthermore, Seren had limited amounts of resources, meaning that to an extent, it had to rely on turn-key systems. This is not an ideal position to be in when you are trailblazing on the cutting edge. Even so, the more I investigated the environment needed to facilitate this kind of platform, the more questions that came about. As it stood, Seren's VOD application was not a resident app, meaning the software had to be loaded when it was called upon and then the DRAM was released once the app's session ended. Looking down the road, it was obvious that such systems needed to be tightly integrated, but aside from the proprietary issues of S-A and it's time consuming certification process, that meant solutions were going to be required that weren't developed yet. So while Seren had the advantage of being small, agile and open to new ideas, it didn't have the resources or funding to develop such leading edge technologies.

SVOD - Though unproven at the time, subscription video on demand was looking like a nice product. Que Spalding and Starz had approached me about conducting an SVOD test, but unfortunately, Seren was again at the mercy of it's software system environment. Two immediate issues had to do with the menuing and billing functions. There were also unknowns about the bandwidth implications. Starting with the menu issue, the nCube session manager could only work with two menus, both of which were tightly regulated under the PowerTV operating system in the set-top box. In this case, there would have been a pre-authorization issue whereby when a customer placed a SVOD order, they would have to face a specific menu page that verified the movie selection as part of the SVOD order. In reality, it would have made much more sense to the customer to have the selection "pre-authorized", where it is seamless and automatically gets recorded as a purchase and is placed in the "On Reserve" menu. None of that was possible with the Seren's environment. Secondly, in order to offer SVOD, the automated billing process would have to be upgraded to have a process in place to handle SVOD orders. While DemandVideo was looking at ways to send this information over to the Seren billing system, Convergys, there was no execution process in place to utilize that data once it was received. In essence, Convergys would needed the ability to correctly process the data and bill the account accordingly. In order for this to have happened, Seren would have to request Convergys to develop a solution, which was a 9 month process. There was also a question of whether the nABLE 1.2 VOD software would need to be upgraded and re-certified. Lastly, the products and engineering groups would have had to ascertain the impact of SVOD on the network. At the time, there was little to no information about this.
·
·
Results:
In September and October of 2000, thanks to dedicated team work from DemandVideo, nCube, Scientific Atlanta, Convergys and a number of individuals, Seren Innovations was the first overbuilder in US to launch VOD in St Cloud, MN and Concord, CA, respectively. This was a considerable feat at the time, especially given the relatively short timeframe to which the service went live. The VOD system worked flawlessly and provided Seren with a distinct competitive advantage in each market. In the first three months of service, 22% of the customers in St Cloud made at least one buy since the product went live. Buys were targeted to increase as content became plentiful and marketing kicked in. In addition to these results, a comprehensive product requirement document was completed in August of 2000. For Product Requirement Document excerpts, click here.
·
·
The VOD System:
Essentially, Seren's VOD deployment was based on a Scientific-Atlanta infrastructure using the nCube's n4 "Streaming Media Appliance" (server), the nABLE management system, ODAs (on-demand applications), back-office interfaces and a Convergys ICOMs billing interface. The redundant nCube VOD system was configured with DVB-ASI connectivity to the Scientific-Atlanta network and incorporated 256 QAM modulation. The Scientific Atlanta environment included the 1.2.8 DNCS System Release and the Explorer 2000, 2010, 3000, 3100 set-top boxes with PowerTV's 2.2fc operating system. Both Seren deployments were capable of providing at least 1,000 streams at bit rates varying from 3.75 Mbps to 4.6 Mbps over hybrid fiber coax 860mhz systems with small-sized nodes. The n4 servers had a 3,000 title capacity but could easily expand as needed. nCube's tightly integrated nABLE management application set up each session, managed the Scientific-Atlanta QAM modulators, and allowed Seren to define and bill for the available services with Convergys. DemandVideo, a service company seeded by Seren, purchased and distributed the nCube servers and offered various support functions including marketing and video encoding. Instead of relying on money generated from VOD equipment sales, DemandVideo gave the movie studios a piece of the revenue and splits the remaining gross revenue with Seren. nCube was a good partner because it conducted a comprehensive integration with Scientific-Atlanta’s DNCS server, QAM modulators, out-of-band network, broadcast file system, and digital set-top boxes. The advantages of the n4 system were its flexibility, scalability and functionality.
·
·
Industry Knowledge:
State of Industry
Video On Demand
High Definition TV
Digital Video Recorders
High Speed Data
Voice Over Internet Protocol
Interactive TV
Satellite
IPTV & Triple Play
Industry Links
Site Map