Case Study

Massillon Cable, which services 47,500 customers in and around Massillon, Ohio, deployed its video-on-demand service in January 2006. The launch included a wide variety of design, technology, engineering and deployment issues that needed to be addressed before the system could be fully rolled out. The technology needed to launch the VOD system, and integrate it into an existing cable system, presented some daunting challenges.

Multichannel News contributor Craig Kuhl spoke with Massillon president Bob Gessner and head technician Mike Meeks about the various hurdles they had to overcome before launching what has turned into a successful VOD service. An edited transcript follows:

Gessner: We’ve always tried to stay on the leading edge of technology and have grown organically by extending the system, so the design and decision to launch VOD were actually pretty easy.

We evaluated the systems available at the time and chose the one we felt best suited for us. This will change from system-to-system due to size and other factors, and I’m sure a lot has changed since our decision. We also needed to install our own Digital Addressable Controller [DAC]. In fact, this was a major delaying factor.

We tried unsuccessfully to be the first HITS [Headend In The Sky] system using National Addressable System and VOD. We just could not make it work. So, we stopped our rollout, even though the VOD equipment was already installed, until we could install a DAC and convert to it. We struggled valiantly for several months.

Today, I probably would have started by using different [quadrature amplitude modulations] and servers, but only because times have changed. So, [when Massillon evaluated technologies], circa late 2004, I probably wouldn’t have done anything differently.

Gessner: Integration has been the key for VOD. Our biggest problems were trying to coordinate the various vendors and avoid finger pointing. There are a huge number of different options and settings that are all inter-related. It is important to make sure everyone knows what everyone else is doing, or one vendor’s 'fix’ becomes another vendor’s 'broke.’

Meeks: We had four different modules of software to make the set-top box function. The challenge was determining what we needed on each box type, and if it was compatible and tested with VOD software. It was a domino effect and a steep learning curve. So, we just followed the footsteps of other systems.

And, integration doesn’t just mean upgrade or install. We were surprised how involved the entire network is to get a stream out — from return to forward path, the whole ecosystem. It’s not just about a few racks of VOD equipment, it goes through all of your network equipment.

Now, we’re upgrading our hard drives to larger sizes because of HD content, which requires four times the space. We really want to ensure a good customer experience.

Gessner: Engineering required a thorough examination of the system to determine the number of service groups and then balance them to roughly equal size. It also required some increase in headend equipment to deal with the new return path traffic. But technologically, our system was ready

It really isn’t that complex from the RF perspective, and the vendors have enough experience to provide good advice. We also needed to plan for a billing interface, which was accomplished quite easily. It seems complex to old, analog and linear cable guys like myself, but it’s pretty straightforward from VOD to billing.

Gessner: I think our greatest challenge right now is our user interface. It is a separate application, so users experience a long delay when they switch from the on-screen guide to the VOD guide. This delay is long enough that it makes VOD the last thing most people check, instead of the first. I think that has a significant impact on our usage rates. We’re working with Aptiv to launch ShowRunner, which should make a huge difference in our usage.

The VOD system also creates complexity in terms of set-top firmware. The VOD system becomes another application that must be considered among all the other applications. This expands the matrix of codes being used and means more testing before upgrades.

Gessner: Our combined VOD and [pay per view] revenue has increased significantly in the past two years. We had only a 3% increase in PPV revenue in 2005 [the last year of PPV only operation]. The first year of combined VOD/PPV [2006] saw our gross income increase 48% over the previous year. Last year showed another 28% increase in combine VOD/PPV income.

Another benefit of our VOD launch is the recapture of some analog spectrum. We have reduced the number of linear PPV channels significantly and plan to eliminate more.