Saturday, December 21, 2013

Of Boris Bikes, Cycling Economy and Gross Cycling Product (GCP, a la Gross Domestic Product-GDP)


During my recent London visit, I took the opportunity to ride what is known in the city as ‘Boris Bike’, named after city's illustrious Mayor Boris Johnson who first introduced the idea of 'bike sharing system' to the city.

For the starters, Boris Bike is part of London’s newest public transport system called Barclays Cycle Hire (BCH) scheme (launched 2010) named after Barclays Bank, who has committed to sponsor it through to 2015. BCH is a self-service public bicycle sharing scheme that gives Londoners the chance to use bikes to replace trips on foot, bus, tube, taxi or car taking pressure off London’s crowded public transport system. As of now, this scheme entails 8000 Barclays branded bicycles for hire in Central London and almost 570 docking stations offering over 10,000 docking points. Recent survey points to the project generating roughly @ 45000 extra cycle trips each day in central London

Biking is certainly not a new phenomenon but given all the transport management & vehicular congestion related issues that megacities face these days and also because of growing awareness among citizens of ‘lifestyle diseases’, it has assumed greater significance for both- city management authorities as well as for ‘aware’ ordinary citizens. 

London’s experiences in propagating & popularizing biking, whilst creating a sustainable revenue stream for the ‘City Authority’, is worth emulating. More so, for a cash-starved Urban Local Bodies (Municipal Corporations and Nagar Panchayats) in a developing country like India. 

This brought me to exploring/understanding the business model of the Barclays Cycle Hire scheme in greater details. How does it operate? What are the components of the BCH value chain? Importantly, how does it make a sustainable revenue stream for Greater London Authority/Transport for London (TfL)? These were some of the obvious questions I set out to seek answers for.


Value chain for BCH is shown below. This involves three major blocks Build, Operate and Maintain consisting of critical processes such as building infrastructure (i.e. cycle tracks, terminals and docking stations etc.), running operations and maintaining infrastructure. Few key suppliers involved with TfL in the value chain are Conway (cycle track building), Bixi (cycle, docking station& terminal), Premier (contact center equipment), alke (electric utility vehicle) and Serco (operations and maintenance)


(Click to enlarge)

Besides Barclay’s sponsorship (in lieu of branding) and London Councils / borough funding, the revenue accrual for BCH has been through membership fee payments (people can sign up online and pay fees resulting in a member being given a plastic key fob for accessing the cycles) and also through access & usage fees charged to casual users, who use cycle release code generated from the 'terminal' at the on-street docking stations.

Launched amid much fanfare in 2010, BCH is yet to make money for TfL. The figure released to ‘Mayor Watch’ by Transport for London (TfL) following a series of Freedom of Information requests (similar to India’s RTI) highlighted that as of March 2012 the scheme had cost more than £119mn, in fact £106mn more than what Barclays had paid up to the end of FY12. BCH Y-on-Y income for 2013 grew by @ 20%, still not sufficient for the scheme to cover the existing funding gap.

Cycling Economy & GCP
In 2010, London School of Economics (LSE) attempted to define the size of ‘cycling economy’ in the UK and coined a new term‘Gross Cycling Product’ (a la Gross Domestic Product GDP) representing total £ (pound) value of all cycling-related goods and services produced over a particular time period. LSE estimated gross cycling product (GCP) of £2.9 Bn (~£230 per cyclist, per annum) for UK in 2010. The key GCP contributing segments are cycle manufacturing, retail sale of bikes and accessories and cycling infrastructure development and maintenance.

The UK cycling manufacturing sector today is represented by only a handful of names such as Brompton, Stratford upon Avon based Pashley and Mercian, although a number of smaller ‘artisan frame builders have also emerged in the market.

The UK retail bicycle sector is highly polarized with a limited number of larger independent and corporate chains such as Evans Cycles or Halfords controlling a large proportion of the market.

Cycling infrastructure and maintenance encompasses employment that builds and maintains dedicated cycling infrastructure. A major player in this space is Sustrans, which is responsible for the construction and maintenance of the National Cycle Network in the UK.

UK GCP is split in the ratio 20:50:30 among these three segments mentioned above

India is the 2nd biggest cycle producing nation in the world (after China) and produces approximately 12% of the world annual bicycle production, which is estimated at 125 mn units. India’s domestic bicycle industry is oligopolistic, dominated by four players: Hero Cycles Limited (Hero), Tube Investments of India Limited (TI), Avon Cycles and Atlas Cycles (Atlas). These players account for over 90% of the country’s total bicycle sales. Besides, all the big global names such as Giant, Trek, Merida, Canondale, etc. are also present in the country. Of the 15 mn bikes produced in India @2-3, mn are exported to MEA region. Ludhiana alone produces 25k bikes per day. Based on publicly available information from industry sources such as AICMA & UCPMA, India’s GCP could be safely estimated at @ $1.5Bn which includes manufacturing, retail sales and cycle track infrastructure build, etc.

Lastly, I see significant opportunities for Urban local Bodies (ULBs) in the large Indian cities (Pune included) to promote cycling schemes (a la BCH) in a big way, thereby developing a sustainable revenue stream for themselves and contributing positively to nations GCP.




Wednesday, January 2, 2013

HOW DIGITIZATION IS IMPROVING THE CABLE TV BUSINESS MODEL IN INDIA




What is broadcast industry value chain?

As per the TRAI (Telecom Regulatory Authority of India) Consultation paper dated Nov’11, number of TV households in India is approximately 148 million. More than 800 channels have been registered with I&B ministry out of which @165 are pay channels.


Figure 1 depicts the value chain for Indian broadcasting industry. Content producers and manufacturers being on one side of the value chain catering to a market of 145 mn content hungry households through various distribution channels. Depending on the technology leveraged, there are four major ways of distribution prevailing in the Indian market




Figure 1 Broadcast Industry Value Chain (click to enlarge)



Aerial and Terrestrial distribution is the most basic form of content distribution. Doordarshan has pioneered this in India with analogue terrestrial channels. However, recently, Doordarshan has also embarked on digitisation and has come out with Digital terrestrial channels. As per the recent statistics from Prasar Bharati (parent body of Doordarshan), DD’s channels can reach 86% of the total population of India


Direct to Home (DTH), High Speed Broadband/IPTV and Cable are other channels through which the content is distributed to the viewers. The channels seen on Cable TV (pay channels or free to air channels) are created by different broadcasters such as Zee or NDTV etc. and transmitted from satellite to receiving stations (head ends) owned by MSOs (Hathway, Incablenet etc.). The MSOs in turn re-transmit these signals through cables to the LCOs, who have their last mile cable network to individual homes.

Bottom-line is- India has around 88mn TV household subscribers who are being served by the analogue cable TV systems.

What are the issues with Analogue Cable TV?

Analogue cable TV suffers significant challenges such as capacity constraints, under-reporting of the subscriber base by the LCOs resulting in revenue leakage for MSOs and broadcasters and less than expected tax returns for Govt of India, poor quality of transmission, inefficient usage (4 times higher consumption for analogue vis-à-vis digital) of spectrum leading to lesser number of services and hence lower revenue for the spectrum consumed.

How digitization is changing the business model?

Given this, Indian parliament passed Cable Television Network (Regulation) Act in December 2011 spelling out roadmap for digitisation of the Cable TV by 2014 and in process setting the stage for the transformation of Cable TV business model in India.

From broadcasters perspective digitisation is expected to bring about full addressability, thereby eliminating the menace of under-reporting of subscriber base by LCOs. This clarity around customer base will result in an increase in subscription revenues for broadcasters. Further, the increased capacity of digital distribution channel is likely to spur greater investments by broadcasters toward niche, targeted and HD content and lead to diversification of their revenue streams. The carriage costs paid by broadcasters to distributors, which currently remain high in view of the limited bandwidth of analogue cable, may decrease post digitization. However, the extent of correction would hinge on the growth in the number of channels going forward - a high growth is likely to maintain high carriage costs for broadcasters.

From an MSO perspective, there is a significant opportunity to increase the ARPU (average return per user) from current INR 160 to > INR 200 in a short period of time primarily due to efficient usage of the spectrum due to digitisation and being able to configure and push value-added services to their customers. At the same time, there is also a risk of customer churning towards other technology platforms such as DTH or IPTV.  



Figure 2 Emerging Business Model After Digitisation (click to enlarge)



Figure 2 shows emerging business model for Cable TV industry in India. MSOs have the biggest opportunity in this entire value chain and in the emerging business model they are fast becoming the centre of gravity. Given the requirements for 80mn plus new Set Top Boxes (STB) to be installed at the customer end as they convert, MSO are finding themselves in the centre of emerging eco-system with Telecom Equipment Manufacturers (TEMs) to Value Added Services (VAS) providers to Content Providers all vying to associate with them. Freeing up of the spectrum opens up the possibility of pushing triple play bundled offerings (Voice, Broadband and TV) to the customers increasing ARPU and bettering customer experience. This model has stemmed from the need for diversification thereby increasing the APRU and reducing the churn to other platform technologies.

Set top box also opens up the possibility for MSOs to introduce sophisticated user data analytics and identify different trends locality wise. These can then be monetised by the MSO by selling it to advertisers or broadcasters.

Global trend is for the MSOs to integrate backwards and create an integrated business model. Ziggo from Netherlands is a case in point. Ziggo started off as a cable operator in the Netherlands, now diversifying broadband internet, and telephony services to both residential and commercial customers