MxMIndia

Tag: TV TRAIL

  • Is it so impossibly difficult to create a programme (daily, weekly, whatever) that only 4% of Hindi-speaking India watches, asks Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: Hindi GECs’ Latest Itch: 4% Rating

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    The ratings provider may have changed, but the definition of the central programme performance measure remains the same. Called TVR % (TAM) earlier, and Rating % (BARC) now, it is a time-weighted measure of the % of universe that watched a programme, effectively connoting the “viewership” of the program.

     

    In primitive days of measurement, TVR % of 25-30 was not uncommon, delivered by blockbuster films such as Hum Aapke Hain Koun. Through the decade of 2000, the best of daily fiction on Star Plus scored in the 13-20 range, led by the K triplet of Kyunkii, Kahaani and Kasautii.

     

    With time, touching 10% became harder, as more channels meant higher fragmentation. An odd film premiere like Main Hoon Naa or 3 Idiots would get close, but even at its most masterfully manipulated high point, a fiction show (I speak of Hindi here, down South is a different story), would hit a glass ceiling at 7-8 TVR.

     

    Over the last two years, the benchmark continues to reduce. No Hindi programme has crossed an average weekly rating of 4% over the last two weeks. For a huge film premiere, 7% is an excellent result, perhaps an equivalent of 10% not too long ago. Even big-ticket cricket doesn’t rate like old times anymore.

     

    In my opinion, GECs have not spent enough time understanding this area over the last five years or so. Yes, there are more channels and the consumer has more to choose from. Much of the trend till 2011-12 could be explained on account of this fragmentation. Digitisation further fuelled fragmentation, acting as a level-playing field for smaller channels, which would lose out in the analogue environment because of poor placement.

     

    But instead of looking at it as a trend, what if we just asked the question: Is it so impossibly difficult to create a programme (daily, weekly, whatever) that only 4% of Hindi-speaking India watches?

     

    For every show that goes on-air, at least five, often more, are considered. That means that there are more than 150 daily fiction shows alone that enter a stage of serious consideration in Hindi GECs every year, not to speak of the weekend options.

     

    A diverse set of producers, some of them channel employees in the past, churn out these concepts. The writer pool that is engaged to work on them is not too diverse though. It’s the same set of writers that freelance for multiple producers, sometimes working on 2-3 running shows, while working on pitches for another couple. The seamless movement of plot points from one show to the other is easy to catch for anyone who follows the category.

     

    It seems, then, that we have caught ourselves in a seemingly vicious circle of the current output becoming the input for future output, and thus, both the current and the future looking remarkably alike. For a consumer, that means “nothing new”.

     

    The Hindi GEC category has been steady at about 1,100 GRPs over the last two years. But no superhero shows have emerged in this period. Admittedly, there is no magic formula to churn out one. But the best bet will be to infuse fresh writing talent into the industry. It’s easier said than done, because a lack of understanding of the daily fiction audiences and its grammar can be genuine roadblocks, as seen in recent examples like Yudh and Everest respectively.

     

    I’m convinced we’ll have a consistent 4+ TVR show sooner than later. I’m curious to see what it will be and how soon it will come our way.

     

  • For every eight new channels launched in the long tail, only one breaks even in its first decade, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: The long tail of TV channels: An investor’s delight?

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    We are a country of many channels. At last count, more than 400 channels have enabled themselves with watermarking that’s a pre-requisite for them to be measured and reported by BARC. About 250 of these have a viewership of at least 0.1 GRPs.

     

    The top 10 channels contribute to 48% of the total TV viewership in the Hindi-speaking markets (HSM). Six Hindi GECs and four Hindi Movie Channels (HMCs) constitute this list. The Top 20 contribute 64% of the total TV viewership. Regional GECs and kids channels find a place in this extended list, along with Hindi GECs and HMCs.

     

    The Top 30 contribute 75%, and the new genres to enter this list are Hindi News and rerun-based Hindi GECs like Star Utsav, Zee Anmol and Rishtey. The tail flattens out here onwards, with the Top 40 contributing 81% and the Top 50 contributing 86%. There is no past data to draw a trend here (BARC vs. TAM is a fallacious comparison), so it is difficult to conclude if the long tail is getting longer. But even as the big guns fight their fierce battles, it’s this long tail that is going to be of increasing interest to potential investors in the broadcasting sector.

     

    Look beyond the Top 30 and you see variety in great measure. Regional channels feature prominently in this list, as do genres like sports, news, music and infotainment. However, there’s no ‘only-in-English’ channel in the Top 90, till the English Movie Channel (EMC) category makes an appearance.

     

    There has always been considerable investor interest in the television business in India, over the last two decades at least. With the advent of digitisation and the (somewhat overrated) phenomenon of non-linear television, this interest is increasingly concentrated on the long tail. It is not to suggest that the GEC category has no need gaps available, but the sheer investment in a mainline GEC can make even the most risk-prone investor think twice.

     

    Hence, the focus seems to be on differentiated ideas that can stand out in the long tail. A common problem, however, seems to be that many of these ideas have the potential of being a long tail champion, but the aspirations and funding requirements of one of the Top 20 players.

     

    Like in the films business, there’s no such thing in TV as a good channel or a bad channel. Every channel is as good or as bad as the ROI it can generate for its investors. The long tail has higher chances of creating such high ROI propositions, but with channels that control budgets to suit the long tail potential.

     

    Thinking regional becomes a smart choice in such a scenario. There are more need gaps in the regional spaces, and like-to-like content costs are 30-70% lower in regional vs. Hindi, depending on the market being targeted.

     

    For every eight new channels launched in the long tail, only one breaks even in its first decade. As we mature as a television market, we will see more long tail channels. But we also hope to see more success stories.

     

  • We are a big country and niches are available, contrary to what our mass television may sometimes make us believe, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: Online Fiction Content: The Promise, The Challenges

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    There’s been incessant talk over the last few years about non-linear and on-demand television replacing linear television viewing. By now, there’s enough evidence from across the world to suggest that linear television is not going to become irrelevant anytime soon, at least note for the next decade, even two. It still accounts for more than 85 percent of television content viewing in the developed markets. In India, it’s the only way to watch television for more than 99 percent viewers.

     

    However, percentages may not always tell their story. In 2013, Netflix premiered House Of Cards as its first original series. The conventional, linear television broadcast industry had to sit up and take notice. The Netflix Originals model is scaleable, and has since proven to find its diehard fans.

     

    In India, we got the first real taste of an equivalent, at a much smaller scale though, when The Viral Fever (TVF) launched their fiction series Permanent Roommates late 2014. The five episodes, available on YouTube and TVF’s own platform, clocked more than a million views each. Of course, that the content is free fuelled this reach. But the numbers are remarkable nonetheless.

     

    Encouraged by the success of Permanent Roommates, TVF launched Pitchers earlier this season, a quirky take on the corporate world and start-ups. Both the shows offer content that’s conspicuously absent on mainstream, linear television, which caters to the lowest common denominator of audiences. The characters you see in these two shows demand your attention. It’s not content for everyone’s palate, but it doesn’t aspire to be that either, which is why it can work in a world of its own. We are a big country and niches are available, contrary to what our mass television may sometimes make us believe.

     

    But it’s not been a smooth ride for TVF Originals either. The third episode of Pitchers has been delayed “due to production hassles out of our hands.” I’m not too sure what to make of the “out of our hands” part in this update on the TVF website. The moment you play the game of providing original content, you need to live upto a schedule. One episode a fortnight is not a good idea as it is, but one episode a month is a mini-disaster.

     

    The TVF Originals journey should help other aspirants of original online content learn a thing or two. On the positive side, you can make engaging and finite fiction series in reasonable budgets and not look tacky.

     

    But on the side of caution, you need to be consumer-oriented, like any other good offline business. There’s no harm in aspiring to break the rules of mainstream television production in India – endless episodes being shot the evening before telecast, and at times being uplinked almost in real time for broadcast. Those are problems of linear television. You have an FPC and you have to deliver to it all the time. But the absence of one in non-linear television does not absolve you of your commitment to viewers and their viewing habits.

     

    We want to see more content from TVF. We also want to see other content providers like TVF entering this space. Stand-up comedy, sketch comedy and spoofs are hugely popular, but real growth in any medium comes from fiction content, where storytelling is the hero.

     

    The online medium in India needs more stories of it own. But before that happens, there’s the small issue of the missing Pitchers Episode 3 to be taken care of.

  • In the merit list of probable FTII chairpersons, Gajendra Chauhan would struggle to make it to the first million, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: FTII Row: The Chauhan School of Delusions

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    The student strike at FTII, in protest against some key appointment, in particular that of Gajendra Chauhan as the institute’s chairperson, has found its way to primetime news, after almost a month of cursory headline coverage. It took a YouTube video by Ranbir Kapoor for mainstream media to take up the matter in all earnestness. It may not be a burning issue of national importance, given the killer scam that’s being unearthed in another part of the country, but with an unmistakable political slant, the FTII story should not be restricted to the entertainment sections either.

     

    There aren’t too many layers to the story. It’s like the proverbial open-and-shut case. You have an actor who has played supporting parts or bit roles in about 300 films and 700 serials (I’m sure he means episodes when he says serials), and has no fraternity support worth talking about, no previous academic experience, not even writing or directorial experience. In the merit list of probable FTII chairpersons, he would struggle to make it to the first million. But here he is, a BJP hand, at the helm of the film school, with the blessings of the Government.

     

    Last night, on The Newshour, Gajendra Chauhan decided to make an appearance in person to field questions. He came up with some gems, which only worsened his position:

    1. You are questioning my body of work (which he also called ‘body of stature’). I’ve worked with Salman Khan. (I’m sure that doesn’t win him any support at FTII!)

     

    2. If a film is a hit, it is an A-grade film. (That hit Jungle Love was a silver jubilee was spoken with great pride too as an example)

     

    3. I refuse to answer that question (when repeatedly asked what, according to him, is good cinema)

     

    That he has never attended MAMI or any other International film festival was also admitted candidly, perhaps fearing another GK Test if he said he had. At the end of it all, Anupam Kher had clear advice to give Chauhan, asking him to just step aside with dignity. Just leave it, he said.

     

    Chauhan’s false sense of confidence on the show, as indeed over the last few weeks, is not surprising. The film and TV industry can be a delusional world, we all know. There’s little room for reality check when you have an ecosystem that’s populated with people telling each other how good they are.

     

    One can make some sense of the delusion if the big stars, producers or directors were to display it.But in all my experience, they are the most grounded, at least in relative terms. Perhaps because they have seen the highs and the lows. It’s the bit players who try and hide their insecurities, sometimes mediocrity, by portraying success, almost demanding to be respected at times. It’s an archaic idea that has little foothold in this day and age.

     

    I’ll be surprised if Chauhan can hold on for too long. He has nothing going for him. Stepping down from FTII and taking up a Bigg Boss invitation will be a good idea. But he may tell you that the former is not a pre-condition for the latter anyway!

     

  • It's become an industry in itself with the emphasis to perform (and hug!), writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: Are Reality Show Judges too Eager to Please?

     

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    The season of reality shows has well and truly taken off. It’s a typical phenomenon every year after the IPL concludes, but there seems that much extra on-air this year. Star Plus has Nach Baliye, and there will soon be Dance+. Colors had India’s Got Talent and there will soon be Jhalak Reloaded. One variant of DID on Zee has given way to a new season of the main DID show. Indian Idol Junior on Sony and The Voice on &TV complete the GEC reality list. So, if you have been tracking the category, eight reality shows have been in the mix, either on-air or in promotional stages. Not to talk about half a dozen others on youth channels.

     

    All the eight mentioned above have a format that needs a jury. So, we are talking of more than 20 different judges across these shows. Now, that’s an industry in itself. Choreographers, film directors and actors typically dominate the list.

     

    Watching a typical episode of one of these reality shows will make you feel there’s immense pressure on this lot of 20 to ‘perform’. It’s like a mini-competition on the sidelines of the larger channel battles. Everyone is out there to make an impact, without an understanding of the respect and awe that should accompany a jury chair.

     

    It’s cue-a-gimmick judging, where interspersed between performances (all eight are talent shows, though two of them are about celebrity contestants), a judge would take off on a journey that’s ridiculously disconnected with the show. Reading shaayri is the latest favorite. What Anu Malik and Navjot Sidhu started has now become everyone’s domain.

     

    Then there’s this sudden urge to hug contestants on stage that about a dozen judges should be medically treated for. It takes about 30 seconds of footage and barring rare exceptions, you don’t feel a speck of emotion watching it.

     

    The new favorite that’s emerging can be called ‘Let’s pull each other’s leg’. Admittedly, it’s a lot more entertaining than the shaayri and the hugs. But when it happens every seven minutes, you begin to wonder whether you should call it a talent show.

     

    Reality shows have been a core area of our work over the last seven years. There are three essential ingredients of what a good jury member should have, irrespective of the format of the talent show.

    1. Should be an expert in the field.
    2. Should encourage and motivate participants.
    3. Should come across as humble and rooted.

     

    The first one may seem obvious on the face of it, but go through the list of 20 and you would know there are at least five crosses on it. But it’s the second and the third where the real gap would lie. Fans of MasterChef Australia would know what these three points mean. The jury of that show embodies them. And yet, there is no trace of gimmick and showmanship on the screen. It’s a natural, free-flowing format that delivers emotions and entertainment within itself. Nothing needs to be ‘cued’.

     

    The original Dance India Dance jury (Geet Kapur, Terence Lewis & Remo D’Souza) met this brief very well. They had no star value at that time, and yet, would count in my book as the most successful jury combination in the two-decade history of reality television in India.

     

    The India’s Got Talent jury for the last two seasons (Kirron Kher, Karan Johar & Malaika Arora Khan) top the current set of juries. There was a lot of free flow in the judging process, especially aided by Kher’s disarming persona, and the gimmicks, while they were present, rarely interfered with the format.

     

    But at a larger category level, it’s time for producers and channels to question their penchant of ‘over-writing’ reality shows. Let the ‘reality’ prevail, and we may have better content!

     

    And a note to the hosts: When you ask for state capitals to test a contestant’s knowledge, it is not called an IQ Test.

     

  • The focus of our news media has shifted progressively over the last two decades from reporting the news to owning the news, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: Lalit Modi: A Scam-Starved Media’s Saviour

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    The first 11 months of the Modi government at the Centre haven’t been the most eventful ones for the news media. In UPA-2, the media had the problem of plenty. One after the other, new scams would emerge, competing with each other for attention and news space. But that dried up May last year, after Narendra Modi came to power.

     

    The Delhi elections and the exciting, sometimes dubious, brand of politics by the Aam Aadmi Party ensured that there was some fodder for news channels to provide their viewers with their daily dose of political voyeurism. The occasional foot-in-the-mouth statements from the fringes in the ruling party also helped. But overall, it has been a lean, scam-free year.

     

    Till last week only, though. Starved for scams, the news media took to the Lalit Modi story like fish to water. It was like a homecoming after being away for an extended period of time. Five days down, the relentless coverage continues across channels and newspapers. And we know we haven’t seen the end of this ‘scam’ yet.

     

    Compare this controversy to 2G, Coalgate, CWG and other such big stories from UPA-2 and you would agree that this one is much weaker in content. There’s no real sense of loot after all. And lobbying and politician-corporate nexus have existed from times even before any of us were born. But, as they say, never let facts come in the way of a good story. Or in this case, never let facts decide how big a story it can be.

     

    There are many elements that make the Lalit Modi-Sushma Swaraj-Vasundhra Raje revelations newsworthy and highly entertaining too. First, the protagonist itself. Lalit is a media character in his own right. He’s not exactly the most pleasurable listening experience, but his unapologetic display of defiance makes it tough to ignore him. He gets journalists to fly to far-off Montenegro to interview him, and while a couple of them are in-flight, tweets that he will have to cancel the interviews because his ‘UK Lawyers’ advised him so.

     

    In many ways, Lalit is the face of crony capitalism that the Prime Minister has been accused of encouraging. It’s difficult for the Congress to launch a full-blown attack given the Robert Vadra precedent, but the controversy offers a delicious opportunity to the opposition nonetheless. I’m surprised no one has connected the common surname of the two Modis yet and tried to create a story out of it. Or may be I missed it.

     

    That the other two protagonists are women who have risen to powerful positions gives the story even more teeth in a country where politics is still a male bastion. This is a heady cocktail of powerplay, IPL, family ties, women empowerment, lifestyle of the rich and the famous, and even cancer. Our media would have to be too naïve to not lap it up.

     

    How this story has developed is also a good commentary of the state of our news media today, where the focus has shifted progressively over the last two decades from reporting the news to owning the news. There is bound to be impact and a head or two may roll in this case. And since the next scam may not be in sight, this story will be dragged for as long as it can sustain.

     

    So you know which industry you want to join if you want free trips to Montenegro and the likes.

     

  • Even as new fiction struggles, non-fiction continues to make some impact. The latest season of India's Got Talent is by far its best and the first two episodes of The Voice India were impressive, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: Getting Used to BARC

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    The new (BARC) ratings are settling in and individual-level data is now available as well. As the market adapts to a new measurement system, there is a hint of confusion in the air. And there’s one dominant reason for it – the constant comparison between the old (TAM) and the new measurement systems.

     

    No two designs of a large sample study give similar results, especially when there are several conceptual changes in their design, like that of the NCCS being adopted instead of the SEC system. At best, one can compare ranks. For example, it is reasonable to expect that the No 1 channel in a category would not be different in the two systems, especially if there was a wide gap between the Top 2 in the old system.

     

    BARC has been built on the premise that it is more robust, secure and future-ready compared to the old system. It was created because there were widespread concerns about the old system. A comparison exercise, then, becomes a contradiction in itself. Hopefully, the dust will settle soon, and the focus will shift on the new data than its comparisons with the old. And there will be enough and more to unravel.

     

    The Hindi GEC programme ratings of the latest week (as well as recent weeks) tell their own story. The Top 5 programmes last week were Saathiya, Ashoka, Sasural Simar Ka, Balika Vadhu and Yeh Rishta Kya Kehlata Hai. Except Ashoka, which launched earlier this year, the other four are old horses, with an average lifespan of five-and-a-half years!

     

    There’s a clear consumer statement in this rather simple, back-of-the-envelope data point. More than 150 new fiction shows have launched over the last five years. Yet, the audiences have stayed with their staple primetime diet over half a decade! That’s less a comment on the high quality of the staple and more a comment on how the new attempts have not managed to take the offering to the proverbial next level.

     

    Even Diya Aur Baati Hum, which would have made it to the list in another week, is a 2011 show. What exactly happened to Hindi GEC fiction content in 2012-14? Equally importantly, because large proportion of viewership of the top shows isdriven by habit and nostalgia, wouldn’t there be viewership attrition (if and) when these shows are off-air? We would need many more Ashokas to keep the fiction flag flying high.

     

    Meanwhile, even as new fiction struggles, non-fiction continues to make some impact. It may not feature in the Top 5 this week, but the latest season of India’s Got Talent is by far its best. There’s little to fault in this reality show that combines outstanding talent with great production, and a jury that should get full marks for their chemistry alone.

     

    I was also impressed by the first two episodes of The Voice India. The format is strikingly different from other singing shows, and the casting of the four coaches makes it a near-coup. I’m curious to see how the show shapes up, especially once the team selection process, the current differentiator, is over.

     

    Yes, there’s enough to talk about on the content front, once we shift focus from TAM vs. BARC.

     

  • There is no such entity as "the Indian media". It is a mere collection of individual businesses, engaged in cut-throat competition, often taking jibes at each other, through promos and readership claims and counter-claim ads, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: Salman Verdict: If GECs won’t entertain you, News Channels will

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    Wednesday was a day of high drama for news television. It was the day of verdict in the Salman Khan hit-and-run case. Thirteen long years after the incident in question happened, it was finally the Judgement Day.

     

    No news channel worth its weight in the business was going to squander this delicious opportunity. Most promoted their plans of a day-long, non-stop coverage. It was much like Election Results Day – those rare occasions when a news channel actually knows well in advance that a particular day is going to be a day of big news.

     

    As the day unfolded, channels realised they were getting even more than what they bargained for. First the conviction, then the sentence and then the bail, it all happened within six activity-packed hours. As I write this on Friday morning, another chapter in this dramatic book could be written later today.

     

    Our news channels have mastered the art of ‘non-stop’ coverage even when there is no content to speak of, in real terms. Cameras are not allowed inside the courtroom, so all reporting was based on accounts of those inside. There were sizeable time gaps during the day, when nothing much happened, but news channels kept themselves busy by showing the ‘excitement’ outside Galaxy Apartments, trailing Salman’s car and speaking to anyone who cared to come on record. And then of course, there were tweets to fill in the time that was still left.

     

    By the nature of it, this story has essentially no inherent longevity. It could be forgotten in less than a week. Its importance lies in the moment in which the story is unfolding, and news channels are savvy enough to know that. Not to say that print and online media is too far behind. I have received almost a dozen calls over the last two days requesting for a quote on the impact of the verdict on the film business. Most such calls start with roughly the same sentence (no pun intended): Everything that could be written has already been written, but I still have to do a story on it.

     

    In a fortnight in which it came under attack for its conduct in Nepal, the Indian media proved (yet again) that it does not care much about its reputation. And certainly not when it is out to further its business interests (read viewership or readership).

     

    And why blame the media for it? After all, there is no such entity as “the Indian media”. It is a mere collection of individual businesses, engaged in cut-throat competition, often taking jibes at each other, through promos and readership claims and counter-claim ads.

     

    I, for one, am not complaining. We are in an era where weekdays entertainment television is increasingly failing to offer any real entertainment value at all. If news channels have to pitch in to fill the gap, so be it.

     

    PS: I’d doubt if Salman Khan would host this year’s Bigg Boss, even if he’s out on bail, in the event of the hearing on his appeal dragging over the next couple of years. That, to me, will be the most significant impact of this verdict on mass entertainment.

     

  • Replicating existing success stories through variants (called 'formula' in our industry) is fine to a point, but when that becomes the only way of working, you are in for long-term trouble, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: Wake up to a World beyond Formulaic Entertainment

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    We are 12 weeks down in 2015, and it’s not been the most action-packed year on the entertainment business front. If you discount the Cricket World Cup, which just happened to be scheduled in this period, and the cautious excitement around BARC, there’s little that the TV industry has to show at the end of the first one-thirds of 2015.

     

    &TV’s launch has been one of the highlight events, but the channel has subsequently stabilised around its launch numbers, now waiting for the next push that could take it into the big league. There have been the regular show launches on Hindi GECs, and some of them have emerged as financially-sound propositions for their channels with above-par ratings, but none of them have made an impact that could fundamentally change the nature of programming in the category.

     

    Ironically, the most exciting programming news of the year so far was around foreign content. HBO brought Game Of Thrones Season 5 to India at the same time as the rest of the world. Despite catering to a niche, it was a move big enough to be taken note of.

     

    But look for other such moves and you would struggle to find much in these four months. The news, the regional, the movie and the kids genres continue to dish out their regular fare. No ideas have been powerful enough to shine through and make an impact.

     

    Star’s immensely successful launch of the Hotstar app is perhaps the biggest television success story of 2015 so far. But if content innovation goes missing, no platform would help over time.

     

    The story is not very different on the Bollywood front. In fact, it’s worse by a margin. Four months down, no Hindi film has crossed the 100 crore mark, which was being seen as ‘too easy’ till a year ago. The only film in line to achieve that benchmark is a foreign film, Furious 7, which has opened and sustained better than any Hindi film this year. And with the next Avengers movie lined up for April 24, we will soon have Hollywood taking the top two spots, while Hindi releases struggle to stay afloat in what is turning out to be the worst period for the industry in about a decade.

     

    At the heart of all these symptoms is the problem of not innovating enough. Replicating existing success stories through variants (called ‘formula’ in our industry) is fine to a point, but when that becomes the only way of working, you are in for long-term trouble.

     

    The audience taste, and exposure to content online and worldwide, is evolving faster than ever before. So while mainline channels struggle to innovate, we have TVF’s Permanent Roommates clocking more than a million views per episode. Before we know it, another couple of online ideas work and we could be talking of a potential dent in television viewership that’s visible on the left side of the decimal point.

     

    Wake up, people. Show us something new, something that stands out as original and exciting, something that truly breaks the clutter, as you like to say.

     

  • We have half a dozen sports channels besides Star Sports, and all of them have ignored the World Cup emphatically and whole-heartedly, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: World Cup Coverage: The Ticks & The Crosses

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    It’s the World Cup season and cricket is back into the forefront, leading conversations and consumption across media. The ratings of some of the key India games in this year’s World Cup have proven that the issue with declining ratings of ODI cricket in recent years is not about a loss of interest in the sport as such, but a rejection of meaningless cricket series that are played to generate revenue for the sport.

     

    A lot has changed on the broadcasting and technology front since the 2011 World Cup. The host broadcaster (Star Sports) has four sports channels, and for the first time, watching cricket online has been promoted as a genuine viewing option. Commentary feeds are available in multiple Indian languages, and more than 50 ex-Indian cricketers have been gainfully employed by Star Sports to cater to India’s linguistic diversity. All matches are available in High Definition, and we even have the 4K-technology option available.

     

    So, all’s well when it comes to live telecast of cricket. Despite match timings not being primetime-friendly in India, Star Sports has done a fair job of putting across a clinical performance on-air.

     

    But there’s a lot left to be desired outside the live hours. And here, I go beyond Star Sports. We have half a dozen sports channels besides Star Sports, and all of them have ignored the World Cup emphatically and whole-heartedly. In a healthy competitive environment, you would expect other sports channels to do strong guerilla programming around a big tournament such as the Cricket World Cup, to capture viewership in the non-playing hours.

     

    Star Sports attempted that in the 2003 World Cup. They had no access to match footage. But they created pre- and post-match shows for the purists, who would rather watch Ravi Shastri and Sunil Gavaskar discuss the game with Harsha Bhogle, than watch the Mandira Bedi show. The idea may not have a runaway success, but it was an excellent attempt at building equity around a big sports event within a reasonable cost.

     

    That we have no such ideas this year is the collateral damage of a monopolistic environment. Star Sports has gained every inch of the sporting turf over the last five years, acquiring all possible rights that have come their way. If they manage to bag the IPL rights when they come up renewal next in a couple of years, their dominance of sports broadcasting in India will be complete in every respect.

     

    Sports broadcasting has not been the most profitable business in India, and it is understandable that a giant like Star can pump in the investments which stand-alone brands like Ten or Neo struggled to.

     

    But the one area where Star Sports too may have missed the trick is the non-playing hours programming. All four channels play the same shows every night, which are essentially based on over-analysis of already over-analyzed games. The ancillary programming content in magazine formats is not more than 15-20 hours, I suspect. And a lot of this is content that’s not even fresh.

     

    Star Sports currently resembles a multiplex when a Salman Khan film releases. You may have six screens, but all you get is one film, one type of content. More channels don’t always mean more variety!

     

    News channels, meanwhile, have gainfully employed another 50-60 ex-India cricketers, including some very obscure ones, to run the same format which Star Sports runs on its channels – talking heads discussing today’s game and then tomorrow’s game.

     

    Come 2019 World Cup, that’s one change I’d hope to see, whereby the non-playing hours experience of a viewer is a more enriching one. And if some other channels don’t stand up to get their pound of flesh from the event, I hope there will be online options beyond ESPNcricinfo that would achieve the same.

     

  • I hope the early success of &TV encourages more GEC launches, writes Shailesh Kapoor, adding: Sound business models can ensure good profitability at even 80-120 GRP levels.

    Shailesh Kapoor: Hindi GECs: There’s Space For More… &More

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    March 2 saw the launch of &TV, the second mainstream GEC from the Zee stable (not counting the highly differentiated Zindagi and the rerun-based Zee Anmol). The first ratings yesterday confirmed that the channel has managed to make its presence felt within its first week. It launched at 42 GRPs, making it one of the best channel launches in the last decade, close on the heels of Colors, Life OK and Imagine.

     

    The ratings universe has widened since 2008. &TV’s 42 GRPs would easily have been 55+ in a pre-LC1 environment, in which other GECs mentioned above launched. Also, the ratings are based on five-and-a-half days of content, which means a natural growth next week is expected anyway. We should see the channel comfortably crossing the 50-mark next week, and with a sizeable reach potential still untapped, it may be looking at the century over the next quarter.

     

    What interested me even more was to see if &TV got its initial numbers from other GECs or if it could grow the category. The top six GECs lost only 21 GRPs this week combined, which &TV got exactly half its viewership by growing the category. Its early days yet, but one could safely assume that in a more stable state, at least 30% of &TV’s ratings would be category growth, which could mean that channel would have managed to grow the already dominant Hindi GEC category by 3-5% by the time it crosses the 100 GRP mark.

     

    Yet, there has been persistent talk around there being no space available for one more Hindi GEC. Every time someone comes up with the idea of launching a new Hindi GEC, promoters or investors treat the thought with immense skepticism.

     

    It’s not a surprising response, however. You won’t expect most investors to be core GEC viewers themselves, and from the outside, it would indeed seem that all the GECs are essentially dishing out similar programming. I have voiced my concerns regarding lack of innovation on the GECs over the last two years, but lack of variety has never been an issue. The consumers see genres and sub-genres in what the non-viewers can just pass off as “daily soaps” or “saas-bahu serials”.

     

    Identifying strategic need gaps in the Hindi GEC space can be a tough ask today. But tapping the right genres and creating new sub-genres within them can indeed push the category viewership ahead. The size of investment may also be a deterrent, but for someone with deep pockets, a well-planned GEC business has a far lower risk than, say, a news or a niche channel today.

     

    The rise-and-fall stories of 9X and Imagine have often been used as an example of how a GEC business is high on risk. But there have been the success stories in Colors and Life OK too, the former a lot more significant than the latter. I hope the early success of &TV encourages more GEC launches. Sound business models can ensure good profitability at even 80-120 GRP levels.

     

  • After the high of the World Cup 2011 finals, watching any other limited-overs cricket in a stadium seemed pointless, writes Shailesh Kapoor

    Shailesh Kapoor: Ranking The World Cups: 1983-2011

    By Shailesh Kapoor

     

    We are a day away from the 11th edition of the Cricket World Cup. The 1983 World Cup was the absolute initiation into cricket for me, at the age of eight. The eight World Cups from 1983-2011 have left lasting memories behind them, driven by two strong factors – India’s performance and the media experience they created.

     

    Here’s my ranking of these eight World Cups, from the worst to the best.

     

    8. The Cup That Ended Before It Started: 2007

    I still thank my stars that I decided against a West Indies vacation for the Super Sixes at the eleventh hour. I suspect if there was a list of the worst World Cups, 2007 will top it even 100 years from now. It had nothing going for it. And as it turned out, late night match timings, no crowds and poor television viewing experience were only the smaller problems. Both India and Pakistan were eliminated in an ill-thought-out qualification format. When a coach’s (Bob Woolmer) mysterious death is the lasting image of a big tournament, you know it didn’t go as planned at so many levels.

     

    7. The Something-Was-Missing Cup: 1999

    England is a good venue for a World Cup, except that rain can spoil the fun far too often. 1999 was the introduction of the Super Sixes format, which died a death after the 2007 fiasco, with ICC going back to the safe 1996 format. After 1983, this was the World Cup I was least engaged with. Our team was not exactly consistent (that loss to Zimbabwe seems bizarre after all these years too) and I was settling into my first job. The classic tied semi-final was followed up by a damp squib finale, which started Australia’s World Cup dominance. The famous story about Tendulkar flying to Mumbai (for his dad’s funeral) and back, and scoring that century, is going to endure. Not much else from 1999 may stand the test of time.

     

    6. The Small-Nations-Can-Win-Big Cup:1996

    The sub-continent hosted this World Cup, which I have to admit, looked rather tacky on television, much in contrast to 2011 which had superlative production. The knock-out format (where only seven games effectively decide who wins the title) was introduced here, and then brought back in 2011. It’s a format so evidently lacking in logic. But commercial interests, especially after 2007, have ensured it stays. 1996 was Sri Lanka’s World Cup in every respect. It changed their cricket forever. The India-Pakistan game at Bangalore was entertainment of the highest order, but it was followed by our semi-final defeat at Eden Gardens was perhaps the most torturous cricket game I have ever seen. If only we had batted first after winning the toss…

     

    5. The How-The-Hell-Did-We-Win Cup: 1983

    To be honest, I have little memories from this World Cup, except listening to the commentary of the finals while on vacation in Srinagar, and then reading the papers the next morning. 1983 was also the last World Cup that had limited media coverage in India, including a broadcaster strike that meant Kapil Dev’s 1983 not out at has no video footage available.

     

    4. The Long-Forgotten Cup: 1987

    Very little has stayed from the 1987 event. It was the last white-clothing World Cup, and the footage looks un-broadcast-able on TV by today’s standards. I’m not even sure if anyone has the rights to it. There were some gems, like that absolutely superlative batting performance by Zimbabwe’s Dave Houghton in an early match. But it was Graham Gooch sweeping India out of the cup that would remain the lasting memory for me. The 1987 edition ranks high on my list because it was my first World Cup as a proper cricket fan. It was also my second experience of the sheer devastation a fan can feel, the first being the Australasia final (the Chetan Sharma match) a year before that.

     

    3. The Cup-That-Got-It-All-Right: 1992

    I have to confess I absolutely loved the 1992 World Cup, and if India had done any better, it could have been right at the top of my list. The format was to kill for. Everyone plays everyone and the top four go through. You can’t beat that on fairness and excitement. It was the first cricketing event I watched on satellite television, with world-class commentary, nothing short of a luxurious experience back then. It was also the Cup that had the best jerseys. Take that laughable rain rule out (really, what did they smoke up while deciding on it?), and you have what a World Cup should be. That Pakistan won it, after being on the verge of elimination, in many ways sums up the spirit for the 1992 event.

     

    2. The So-Near-Yet-So-Far Cup: 2003

    Memories of that excruciating final at Wanderers still haunt many of us. But the 2003 World Cup was a lot more than that for India. After a slow start that included decimation by Australia and a scrape-through vs. Holland, India got into its own and showed a streak of dominance that one had not seen since the 1985 World Series. I remember the loss in the finalleading to a mixed sense of dejection and pride, the latter for having played the way our team did, under Ganguly, over the previous three weeks. This was also the MandiraBedi World Cup, for the record.

     

    1. The Yes-We-Can Cup: 2011

    The 28-year-long wait had to be end at some stage. The three matches – Australia at Ahmedabad, Pakistan at Mohali and Sri Lanka at Mumbai – that led to the title were individual celebrations in themselves. I was there at the finals at Mumbai. After that high, watching any other limited-overs cricket in a stadium seemed pointless. There’s so much to remember from 2011, yet so little needs to be said, because it’s all fresh in everyone’s memory, like it happened last week. Hope the wait doesn’t last another 28 years.

     

    I’m off for a cricket vacation to Australia and this column will take a two-week break, to be back on March 6.