Unlike the shared home television watched for hours, trials show people spend between 15-30 minutes watching personal small screens and some 60 per cent do so at home. Videos tend to be short news, sports clips or made-for-mobile programmes. Users want known brands but are unwilling to pay over Euro 10 a month. Peak viewing is mostly before work, during commuting, over lunch and late evening.

Although there are some broadcast deployments, most mobile TV is delivered over unicast 3G networks. However these are optimised for brief voice, data or web browsing sessions, rather than sustained demand for one-to-one downloads to multiple users simultaneously accessing the same cell site.

“Television over 3G networks is not very good quality and won’t attract mass market customers,” says Mike Grant, global head of broadband/media at Analysys (www.analysys.com). “Finding and switching between channels is difficult and picture quality is not at a level to encourage mass market adoption. HSDPA (High Speed Download Packet Access), is needed to improve the overall experience.”

HSPA will raise speeds and the numbers supported per cell but may only delay the inevitable. Operators must eventually build, buy or lease broadcast networks where the business model is not dependent on the number of connected users; adding subscribers incurs no incremental costs; data rates can be increased without affecting network capacity and multiple channels are easily delivered.

Telcos are likely to run broadcast and unicast cellular networks using the former for live television and the latter for premium niche content, downloads and traditional mobile telephony.

Analysys expects Western European broadcast mobile TV service revenues to reach €1.52 billion by 2011 from €122.6 million in 2007 and adoption levels to rise from 1.8 million in 2007 to 18.93 million in 2011.

Outside Asia there are few commercial broadcast mobile TV deployments. Roll out is hampered by lack of spectrum and competing broadcast standards the technical differences between which determine network build costs. Technologies with higher capacity operating at low frequencies cover larger areas at lower costs.

The EU recently recommended DVB-H should become the Pan-European standard – a view widely contested by proponents of other technologies including DMB, T-DMB, TDtv and MediaFlo. Among the issues they raise are that the optimal UHF 470-862MHz frequency bands still used by analogue TV will be released at different times in different countries; operators must buy expensive spectrum and networks are more expensive. Analysys estimates DVB-H roll-out costs are between Euro 300-500 million and mass deployments will be delayed by the scarcity of premium UHF spectrum. L-band frequencies are available but expensive; support fewer channels and require more base stations.

Most UHF spectrum will not be available in Britain until 2012 when analogue television is turned off but by then most of Europe will have deployed services. “Ofcom is releasing L-band but this adds 40 per cent to roll out,” explains Windsor Holden, principal analyst at Juniper Research (www.juniperresearch.com). “There are on-going discussions between regulators and operators and calls for spectrum harmonisation at the European level although DVB-H is almost mandated.”

In Italy TIM (www.tim.it) and Vodafone (www.190.it) offer DVB-H mobile TV via wholesale agreements with broadcaster Mediaset. 3Italia (www.tre.it) acquired broadcaster La7 giving it the necessary spectrum and network. The South Korean service uses DBM, a variant of the DAB radio technology.

BT’s Movio (www.btplc.com) mobile broadcast TV service using DAB-IP was recently cancelled perhaps because lack of UHF spectrum forced the use of an alternative technology limiting handset choice to one.

Alcatel-Lucent’s (www.alcatel-lucent.com) DVB-SH is a satellite hybrid standard operating on similar frequencies to 3G so operators can re-use existing sites. In America AT&T and Verizon use Qualcomm’s (www.qualcomm.com) MediaFLO technology.

Developed by ipWireless (www.ipwireless.com), TDtv runs over the unused TDD 2.1GHz spectrum telcos already own. It supports chip level WCDMA integration on handsets and shares many software stacks and RF components. “In trials done within existing spectrum there were no co-existence issues and no service degradation regardless of how fast people travelled. Channel changes were 1.5 seconds,” explains Jon Hambidge, CMO for ipWireless. “In this price sensitive market the technology must support the business case: TDtv is a third of the price of DVB-H.”

Whether TDtv can compete with DVB-H depends largely on the availability of handsets however it may allow operators to deploy mobile TV ahead of UHF spectrum release.

Steve Blythe, head, technology strategy at Orange (www.orange.com) believes although it makes sense to deploy the same technology across Europe it won’t be practicable. “Spectrum is available for TDtv and manufacturers will have to produce handsets - if there’s commitment by operators, manufacturers will make devices.

“There are significant costs with DVB-H as operators must buy very expensive spectrum. If it is mandated by the EU, deployments will be delayed until spectrum is available and costs will rise. Britain cannot deploy DVB-H until 2012 forcing operators to look at other technical solutions.”

Blythe suggests that whatever the standard, service quality and reliability must be excellent which is partly down to devices and network data rates.

Given the economics of mobile TV different players may share the costs of rolling out, managing and operating broadcast networks and/or create managed services and wholesale agreements. T-Mobile (www.t-mobile-international.com), O2 (www.o2.com) and Vodafone (www.vodafone.de) are collaborating in Germany and will separately launch DVB-H services early 2008.

Telcos can improve indoor coverage without increasing the macro network load by deploying femtocells in houses and backhauling traffic via DSL. Mobile operators are negotiating local loop unbundling or wholesale agreements with fixed carriers and buying ISPs. “Indoor users are difficult to serve because they take more than the fair share of a cell’s resources,” argues Andy Tiller, VP marketing for ip.access (www.ipaccess.com). “Mobile TV needs high speeds for excellent video, easy usage, fast channel changes. The inside experience of high-speed mobile data is not good so putting users onto femtocells will improve the overall experience.”

Agreeing home hubs are a phenomenally interesting proposition which could give mobile operators a strong lead in residential markets, Grant believes femtocells combined with HSPA services have huge potential. “People want to use mobile phones at home and, if they can use them free, they will take other services especially streaming TV. Operators need DSL capacity but it’s important that the service bundle is offered by the mobile player.”

Content is still king and will determine success. As well as branded programming there is a growing industry in made-for-mobile clips but developers are cautious as market size is uncertain. Some are adapting existing content for mobiles rather than creating new and it is easier and less risky to market known brands. The big studios may see mobile TV as a valuable extra channel and an opportunity to add revenues but telcos will supplement brands and franchises with unique content.

Digital rights issues will vary between countries suggests Holden: “Two years ago when mobile content wasn’t included in contracts some owners wouldn’t talk to operators. There are still tensions between what are two totally different animals trying to find the same language. It’s still early days and will take time to iron out differences.”

Operators either deal direct with content owners or use aggregators who may handle rights issues. Mike Short, VP R&D at O2 Group (www.o2.com) sees no reason to change from using aggregators although he believes big broadcasters wanting to make content available through all channels will offer standard terms and separate agreements.

Mobile TV throws up major challenges for handset manufacturers who must produce sophisticated devices which seamlessly work across networks and technologies but which compromise neither traditional telephony functionality nor design. Several handsets are available but there must be a range of reasonably priced big screen mass market devices.

Battery life must be within acceptable limits and the man/machine interface easy to use. Finding and switching between channels must be fast and simple – longer than four seconds and users become impatient believes Deepak Mehrotra, head, mobile business unit, Aricent (www.aricent.com). “Organic LED displays with lower power consumption, bright screens and a larger viewing angle are coming and man/machine interfaces are changing. Homogenisation of standards is needed for economies of scale.”

Chip set costs are falling and new technologies make it possible to fit more functionality and processing into small form factors without increasing power consumption. Multi-standard chips are already available – essential given the uncertainty over whether one or any will dominate.

“Handsets support unicast TV at up to 30 frames per second giving a DVD like quality and high-range phones have 8Gbit/s memories,” explains Harri Mannisto, director, multimedia at Nokia (www.nokia.com) who says new technologies are solving energy management.

Screens are getting bigger but users may still want the familiarity of a physical keypad. The Apple (www.apple.com) iPhone’s virtual keyboard is likely to be copied as handsets become mainly screens with intelligent operating interfaces. “Using slides allows a compromise between the display and keyboard. High definition displays use less power and new chip sets are very power efficient,” explains Andrew Till, senior director at Motorola (www.motorola.com). “ Battery technology is lagging and there is a need to upgrade power management and service prioritisation.”

Yet costs are still high and volumes small says Carolina Milanesi, research director at Gartner (www.gartner.com) who adds fragmentation works against economies of scale. “Devices are mainly phones and that cannot be sacrificed. People don’t want to carry bigger handsets. The key is to add mobile TV to existing devices which people always carry.

“Uptake will not be driven by consumer demand so much as by operators including TV in basic bundles as a default service so it appears free.” Gartner estimates 30 per cent of mobile TV subscribers will ask for it but 70 per cent will receive it as part of a service bundle.

The big questions, says Herbert Mittermayr, VP, marketing, mobile broadcast at Alcatel-Lucent, are what end users will pay and want; the business case and the pre-conditions to deploy networks. “The majority of users are willing to pay between Euro 6-10 per month for viewing mainly mass market channels at home, work and out-and-about. Operators need to reduce costs as the business case is not totally obvious. Perfect indoor coverage is disappointing now but key to success.”

He suggests the number of networks required depends on service take up and may be built and/or managed by broadcasters or new players. Although traditional broadcast networks are not suitable to deliver TV to moving small screens and smaller antennae, broadcasters may buy spectrum, update their networks and sell capacity to mobile operators.

It is still very early days for mobile TV however mobile operators will certainly want to avoid the costly 3G licensing experience.

PANEL

Everybody knows how TV works. You sit in front of a box and watch what you are given occasionally flicking around to see what else is on offer. Wrong!

That isn’t the way mobile users watch TV, says Bruce Renny, marketing director of UK based mobile TV pioneer ROK TV (www.rok.tv). They watch just a few minutes at a time in between carrying on with the rest of their lives, he explains, and they want to spend that time viewing what they want not what they are forced to watch. As a result, he says, broadcasting, sharing whatever everybody else is watching, is out, and unicasting, watching what you want when you want, is in.

With over three billion handsets out there and a billion new or replacement ones being bought a year, the mobile phone is likely to become a force to be reckoned with in TV. “There are more potential mobile TVs out there than all the home TV sets, personal computers and cinema screens in the world put together,” says Renny.

ROK TV was founded five years ago specifically to offer mobile TV. Unlike many other mobile TV technologies such as DVB-H or MediaFLO, it uses existing mobile phone network infrastructure so avoiding the need for a huge investment in masts, spectrum or management. It doesn’t even require 3G. 2.5G is quite adequate, says  Renny.

A number of operators have already implemented mobile television services based on ROK. These include India ’s BSNL (www.bsnl.co.in), Malaysia ’s Celcom (www.celcom.com.my), Thailand ’s AIS (www.ais.co.th), Pakistan ’s Telenor (www.telenor.com.pk), South Africa ’s Vodacom (www.vodacom.co.za) and Turkey ’s Vodafone (www.vodafone.com.tr).

In Europe support has been less forthcoming. Renny believes that operators there have to put their faith in new infrastructure technologies for commercial reasons (eg differentiation to non carrier mobile TV offerings). At the same time, he believes it will be commercial reasons that will make them change their minds.

Carriers in Europe are suffering huge churn, he says, as their customers leave them in droves for the next better offer. The only way to retain them is through subscription based services of one sort or another, he says, and the best of these is ROK’s no capital expenditure required instantly available streamed mobile TV solution.