Subscription models now extend into everything from the automotive to the supermarket industry and include everything from pet food to virtual spin classes. Alongside online advertising, subscriptions are a business model that has exploded in popularity, because monthly digital payments provide more long-term recurring revenue streams than one-off sales and generate long-term online customer relationships. 10 million people signed up for Disney+ within 24 hours of its November debut, and Salesforce.com is valued at around $140 billion, giving some illustration of the commercial success of the subscription model.
However, the model is now in danger of becoming a victim of its own success, with industries heading hard and fast towards a ‘peak subscription’ cliff edge. There is simply a finite limit to the number of services people and businesses are willing and able to subscribe to. Customer recruitment and retention is extremely difficult because subscriptions can be an expensive, long-term commitment; half of subscribers to e-commerce services cancel within six months. At the same time predatory practices such as those in smartphone apps make consumers increasingly wary about “subscription traps.” Finally, the subscription economy is excluding billions of people who cannot afford expensive long-term contributions. For the newspaper industry, this means not only shrinking the potential market but denying all but the relatively privileged access to the independent information that is vital for democracy to operate. It also means denying industries the ability to offer ‘low-hanging fruit’ of smaller, cheaper transactions for more limited services and thus denying them access to a far bigger customer base. Professor Aggelos Kiayias, Chief Scientist at IOHK, suggests how new technology could provide an alternative model.
There is evidence that ‘micro-transactions’, where people have the option of paying tiny sums, as little as a fraction of a penny, for individual services such as songs or articles, can cumulatively offer a rich revenue stream. Free-to-play mobile games generated $88 billion through other services such as ‘micro-transactions’ in one year alone. Mini-transactions also form a potential ‘gateway’ to a bigger subscription market by offering initial ‘taster’ services to a wider audience.
A key barrier to this has been that slow transaction speeds and high transaction fees make ‘micro-transactions’ unviable as a lucrative revenue model across all industries. Even the fastest, VISA, can only process some 24,000 transactions a second. The blockchain space has also hitherto offered little in the way of a solution because of the so-called ‘scalability problem’ which seems intrinsic in the protocol design of systems like Bitcoin. This makes transactions slower and fees higher, the more users are added to the network.
Free-to-play mobile games generated $88 billion through other services such as ‘micro-transactions’ in one year alone.
A New Model
A recently announced system based on a “proof-of-stake” blockchain discipline, dubbed Ouroboros Hydra, is set to challenge the subscription economy and enable a new payment model which has potential to revolutionise the financial services industry. The third-generation “layer-2” protocol will allow parallel processing of transactions to take place at the physical limits of the network without compromising security or relying on energy expensive “proof-of-work.” This could allow the blockchain to scale to process millions of minor to major transactions on cell phones, outpacing conventional payment systems used by current subscription services. Unlike conventional “layer-1” blockchains, its overall transaction processing throughput can get faster as the number of nodes in the network increases.
With revenue models based on digital advertising and subscriptions nearing a cliff-edge, such high-speed third-generation blockchains could allow new industries to emulate the mobile gaming industry’s ‘freemium’ model, allowing users to pay for extras to their basic service. Customers will be able to pay in cryptocurrency rather than fiat currency. A set of simulations conducted as part of the research announced, show the system demonstrates sufficient transaction speeds to minimise transaction fees, facilitating ‘micropayments’. This opens up the possibility of an alternative to the subscription economy.
Access for All
A genuinely decentralised and scalable blockchain protocol could create an economy based on millions of ‘micro-transactions’. On an individual level, online newspaper readers could pay per article rather than paying a set amount per month, or gamers could buy virtual items within a game for fractions of a penny. Companies can also engage in more fine-grained business-to-business exchanges. This new protocol can therefore open up online services for people who may otherwise be unable to afford them, opening up a bigger mass market to industries, or systems for which so far it was uneconomical to do so. ‘Micro-transactions’ provide a way to ‘on-board’ people as longer-term customers as well as providing an alternative revenue stream to subscription.
[ymal]
Limitless Potential
Importantly, Ouroboros Hydra is not just a transaction processing system. It is capable of offering smart contracts as well which means it would be possible to encode and enforce various policies related to the ‘micro-transactions’ processed by the system. The result is a flexible design that can also accommodate any elements of the subscription model for those participants, users and businesses alike, who prefer it. Furthermore, taking advantage of suitably crafted smart contracts, novel business models can be developed hybridising between the two approaches and thus allowing innovative and highly tailored and personalised engagement between businesses and customers.
What Next?
This is only the start. Decentralised and scalable blockchain protocols could enable millions in the developing world to enjoy access to previously inaccessible financial services, such as remotely paying for vital services like utilities and healthcare. In this way, we can pave the way towards a more inclusive, truly decentralised, people-centric banking system, which can form the future backbone of financial services.
It is forecasted that mobile banking is set to be more popular than visiting a high street bank branch within two years. And as the banking industry continues its digital journey, Mark Grainger, VP Europe at Engage Hub, says consumers are coming to expect more control over their data, greater convenience, and “anytime, anywhere” accessibility.
Mobile-first consumers
So far, most banks worldwide have handled the mobile era in exactly the same way, simply shrinking down traditional bank accounts and putting them on a smartphone screen without offering real innovation or engagement.
But simply pouring millions into innovation hubs and piecemeal digitisation strategies isn’t going to deliver the kind of results that will win over those tempted by the challenger banks. Traditional banks need to shift gears and use the valuable information they already have to provide customers with seamless interactions across different channels.
At the same time, banks need to understand that the digital banking revolution is more than a mobile app. It’s about creating an entire experience. The implications of failing to facilitate a seamless cross-channel customer experience – one that lives up to growing customer expectations – is huge. Today, consumers have more choice than ever before, thanks to the rise of fintech start-ups and digital-only banks, and if they do not get the level of service they’ve come to expect, they will not hesitate to take their business elsewhere.
Subscription service model
Using a service model patterned after Amazon Prime or Netflix may seem odd to many retail banks, but challenger banks are already experimenting. Would consumers pay a subscription to get the same service they do with Amazon and Netflix? The answer is yes.
Revolut is already showing itself as a front runner in subscription-based banking. The challenger provides a ‘freemium’ model, which gives users a free UK current account and a free euro IBAN account that offers no fees on exchanging in 24 currencies, up to £5,000 a month. Revolut also provides monthly subscription plans with higher thresholds for no fees, as well as instant access to crypto-currencies, cash back, travel insurance, free medical insurance abroad, airport lounge access and priority support.
Research shows that in the UK 57% of people would be willing to pay an extra monthly fee for additional services from their banks. Most consumers – 45% – would like additional media services such as Netflix and Amazon while 40% prefer earned cashback and 37% would pay for overdraft facilities.
Considering that at present, 72% of customers don’t pay any monthly fees to their banks it’s fair to say that there is a great potential for financial institutions to leverage these services and elevate their game when it comes to competing against challenger banks and unconventional financial services.
[ymal]
Trust and value
Furthermore, traditional banks have a crucial asset compared to challenger financial institutions, and that is trust. Traditional banks have a much longer and seemingly more robust security record.
The paradox is that many people trust their primary financial provider but distrust the financial services industry overall. Therefore, banks that want to persuade their customers to adopt new models and pay a potential monthly fee have to prove that they have customers’ interest at heart.
One way to achieve this is through transparency. The financial services industry still lags behind other sectors when it comes to transparent policies, costs and customer data. This needs to change and they need to show that they are keeping pace with the market trends and customer expectations.
Another crucial aspect banks need to keep in mind when it comes to monthly subscriptions is the added value they would bring to customers. If they agree to additional costs, consumers will also expect extra benefits and not just the same things they used to get for free. Without additional value added, it will seem that banks are trying to simply make some extra money thus confirming customers’ distrust in financial institutions.
If they agree to additional costs, consumers will also expect extra benefits and not just the same things they used to get for free.
Bank of America, for example, learnt this lesson the hard way when they wanted to charge their customers a $5 fee for using their debit cards for purchases. The backlash was swift and strong, and the bank had to cancel the plan within six weeks.
To avoid such situations, banks need to focus on their customers’ financial health and create personalised and holistic value propositions that will provide a competitive edge against challenger banks and convince millennials that they can provide safe and innovative solutions for life’s complex challenges.
By understanding these strategies and embracing the changes in consumer buying behaviours, financial institutions will be able to create new ways to generate recurring value for their customers and new sources of predictable income.
Key skills
However, in order to transform their approach to digital transformation and subscription models banks will also need the right skills and capabilities.
A new CBI/TCS report highlights the UK’s rapidly accelerating digital talent gap as new technologies transform the way we live and work. Currently, the UK is losing out on £63bn a year as companies struggle to find people with digital skills. Areas of banking that need to be a focus for investment include the use of AI in customer profiling, money laundering detection and improving customer services. All of these investments require emerging technology to be implemented, and employees with the skills to manage it. Banks will need to implement training programmes, smart hiring strategies, and strategic digital transformation programmes to attract tech talent and implement a customer experience to rival challenger banks.
And whilst providing subscription services to their customers might require considerable resources and a significant shift in strategy and policies, engaging the new generation of digital-first customers is paramount if traditional banks want to remain relevant and fend off challenger financial institutions. Harnessing this opportunity will provide a critical competitive edge, inspire loyalty and make customers feel valued.
Many industries have already adopted this system and have reaped significant benefits already. It’s high time for traditional banks to challenge the current status quo as well and reap the benefits of a subscription model.
Video streaming services such as Netflix and Amazon Prime have now been reported to have more subscribers than traditional pay-per-view TV services in the UK, according to new figures released by Ofcom. This of course also applies on a global scale, in the US and beyond.
This week Finance Monthly asked experts in the media industry, communications sector and markets experts what they thought of the proliferation of online streaming services and their impact on traditional TV.
Luke McDowell, Context Public Relations:
Netflix is a brilliant example of a business that adapted and reinvented itself to become not only a giant of the streaming world, but the television and film industry as a whole. It is of no surprise that streaming service subscribers now outnumber the traditional pay TV subscribers.
British television has lagged behind the streaming services for a while now, it’s no longer enough to make your programming available on catch-up, you must now realise the market need for ‘binge-watching’; as this is where Netflix and Amazon Prime have cut their teeth. Users want to be able to experience a whole series in a matter of days or even hours, and as attention spans dwindle, so do the returning viewers on typical week-by-week scripted programming. I think the next big trend we will see is studios closing the gap between seasons, so we may even see one or two seasons of a show in the same year, in order to offset the inevitable audience number drop.
We have already seen some of the traditional broadcasters sell programming to streaming giants, either after the initial air date or in other non-native territories, which has been a step in the right direction. However, in order to future-proof themselves, traditional pay TV providers must cater to a new generation who want to watch content whenever and wherever they are, without the arduous wait for the next episode.
This generation also want the ability to pick and choose subscriptions, with one individual possibly having accounts with multiple services. In my experience of working with streaming services over recent years, this is something that was recognised by early contenders such as Roku who created a set-top box built for streaming that was smaller, more portable and more user-friendly than your typical offering, and offered compatibility across a range of services. Offerings such as TVPlayer have also started to bridge the gap between streaming and traditional British television by bringing live TV to younger, more mobile generations through their app; this is something traditional pay TV institutions should take note of.
John Phillips, Managing Director, Zuora:
It’s no secret that the media industry has changed. A few years back, it was in crisis. The shift towards digital meant advertising spend was predominately diverted to the tech powerhouses such as Google and Yahoo!, resulting in a widespread fear that consumers would never again pay for online content.
A few years later, we started to see a few media houses take control and implement basic paywalls in order to access premium content. This slight adjustment jumpstarted revenue, and for the first time since the crisis, brought growth in through their respective subscriber basis.
Since then, the wider media industry has caught on and subscription services have evolved tenfold. Today’s subscription services have morphed into flexible and adjustable models, where media brands have the power to create unique, effective and profitable plans.
From the standard rate plans for weekly, monthly or quarterly subscriptions, to flexible charge models - per article or per download - the ability to adjust has allowed media leaders to test and try what clicks with their subscribers. As a result, they’ve created a successful and reliable revenue model independent from advertising.
David Ciccarelli, CEO and Co-Founder, Voices.com:
Before I got married, we cut the cord to the TV. This was likely predicated by growing up in a household where there was a one hour limit on the amount of television we could watch. When considering starting a family of our own, my wife and I agreed that books and the Internet would be the primary source of news and knowledge entering the home. Since then, we’ve never been a cable subscriber, and I think I know why.
What Netflix does well is facilitating the act of discovery. First, by allowing viewers to create their own profiles, the platform recalls the shows that you watched, but also those in progress that you likely want to finish. By analysing the viewing habits of the individual, Netflix can make recommendations seemingly tailored to your unique preferences.
While recommendations are a good means of discovering new content, it’s equally enjoyable to navigate the categories of both movies and TV series’ in hopes of finding something new. Surely, TV networks could better organize their content using a similar structure. Let’s move beyond the timeline and give the viewer alternative paths for discovering what’s on right now, and in the future.
It’s well understood that TV is advertiser-supported. However, perhaps it’s time to innovate beyond standard ad formats, the ubiquitous 15 and 30-second spot. Shorter spots may be one option, or subtle overlays may welcome new advertisers looking to reach audiences in fresh new ways. While I certainly don’t claim to have the answer on this one, I’d like to encourage broadcasters to consider this space ripe for innovation.
Both Netflix and the movie theatre experience are very immersive. In our household -- and I’ve heard of others doing the same -- sitting down for a show on Netflix, even one as short as a single episode, involves getting snacks, drinks, and blankets on a cold day. When visiting others, I have yet to see or hear of a similar ritual when flipping through the channels on TV for an indefinite period of time. Live sports may be the rare exception. Nonetheless, programming could be designed in such a way for the viewer to suspend their disbelief. Constant interruptions ruin the flow of the experience. Networks should consider new ways to keep the viewer watching and engaged.
Chris Wood, CTO, Spicy Mango:
British TV will have to change the way it operates if it wants to compete with internet giants such as Amazon and Netflix. OTT providers are under still under no obligation to adhere to the usual broadcast guidelines, giving consumers access to content whenever they want it. On the other hand, the linear world is still heavily regulated, particularly around watershed, and this essentially positions OTT at an advantage and has allowed those businesses to innovate faster.
Increased regulation, processes and rules are proven factors of reducing innovation, which the Broadcast sector has seen a lot of in current years. When boundaries are allowed to be pushed, technology has space to innovate and becomes more attractive to different businesses. The fact is, that internet giants free from regulation have completely captured the market and audience today and consequently the traditional broadcasters have been left behind. But how could we introduce regulations that apply to all and how would it work? How would a watershed rule be enforced in catch-up OTT? Would it require credit card verification to prove age? Is PIN enforcement enough? Or should it be enforced at all? Rather than locking everyone in, why don’t we open the doors?
Providers like the BBC need to be freed from constraints like this in order to innovate. With less and less Millennials tuning into live TV and more opting for paid for streaming services like Netflix on a device of their choosing, there is little value for this demographic in their TV license fee if they are only going to watch odd World Cup match or the news. OTT products and services have grown rapidly – primarily because of the flexible nature of viewing that is offered. For British TV to grow its user base and capitalise on these benefits – it’s time to remove the shackles.
The result would give viewers more platform choices and enable content developers to create more relevant programmes for their audiences.
Chris Lawrence, Head of UK Communications, Media and Technology Consulting, Cognizant:
In many ways, we are living a golden age for television. Technology giants, like Netflix, have raised the bar, spending more than ever before on high quality shows. It has become clear that to keep up, broadcasters need to make sure that they are investing more money on producing shows and films that draw in audiences. But in order to spend additional budget on production, cost savings need to be made elsewhere.
That is why broadcasters are using technology to streamline back-end operating costs. Automating back-end operations is a crucial step towards greater agility, enabling broadcasters to maximise revenue from content. A good example of this is UKTV’s investment in a new broadcast management system to provide greater flexibility to schedule and manage content across its channel brands and support Video on Demand viewing.
Broadcasters also have a chance of winning back customer loyalty through providing a slick customer experience and reducing any friction along the customer journey. Reacting to this challenge, last year the BBC announced it would be using artificial intelligence (AI) to “better understand what audiences want from the BBC". The initiative, launched in partnership with eight UK universities, will take the learnings and directly apply them to the BBC’s UK operations. The use of AI to boost the customer experience and streamline services will crucially enable broadcasters to invest more heavily in the front of screen services. Because ultimately, content is king.
James Gray, Director, Graystone Strategy:
As technology has changed so have subscription models and hence we now have a shift towards Amazon Prime and Netflix from pay TV. There was a time when TV content was consumed by a family with one subscription per household and only one device - a TV - in the house to watch it on.
Now individuals consumers have multiple content subscriptions and many different devices so they can access programmes on the bus, in the park, at the station, by the pool on holiday, and in a different room to another family member. Smart phones and tablets have enabled this, as well as the availability of wifi and more recently better rates for data and data roaming.
But there are some real polar differences as to which customers take which TV service. Graystone segmentation analysis shows that older customers “Settled Seniors” have the lowest take up of Pay TV, with 53% having Pay TV like Sky or Virgin and only 17% taking internet TV models like Netflix or Amazon. Unsurprisingly the Technology Trailblazer segment, which is much younger, has the highest adoption rates - 65% and 56% showing that they are taking multiple subscriptions. It’s a clear indicator of where the market is going and where providers need to place their bets.
The younger segments are also far more transactional, so for example if a show moves from Prime to Netflix they will move too. Amazon’s move into football will no doubt cause some ripples in the market. It illustrates that as well as offering convenience, the content has to be right too. You must know what your customers like and provide more of it - Netlfix is very good at producing original drama for this reason.
What fascinates me is where the subscription economy is going. I can pay for shaving products, gin, dog food even socks on a monthly subscription. We can’t be far away from a time when all subscriptions can be managed under one mega bundle - TV, mobile, broadband, gas, electric, gin, socks, car access, and who knows what else.
As millennials care less about ownership and more about experience and access, we will see more and more subscription models managed via smart phone apps. And for companies that has to be a great thing, particularly if consumers manage their subscriptions like my gym subscription - 36 monthly payments to date and just 5 visits! (But next month I am definitely going more regularly!)
Alistair Thom, Managing Director, Freesat:
With a raft of new entrants in the market and increasing choice for consumers driving change in viewing habits, there’s no argument that TV services in the UK and elsewhere are facing tough challenges. Whether that’s competing for content rights against global companies with huge budgets or facing up to new distribution opportunities offered by online services.
Yet from a Freesat perspective, we believe that Ofcom’s report suggests that new entrants offer a great opportunity for subscription free platforms like ourselves. While On Demand services offer new choice and flexibility for customers, they do not offer all of the content customers want, nor can they offer the same level of shared experience as the “appointment to view” TV moments found on traditional broadcast TV; whether that’s amazing sporting events like the World Cup, global spectacles like the Royal Wedding or this summer’s “OMG TV” in Love Island.
Our research[1] has shown, that the most watched programmes are consistently those available on free channels, even in homes signed up to a pay TV subscription. These pay platforms must now face up to the additional challenge to their business models offered by new entrants with lower monthly fees and no long-term contracts.
I strongly believe that the UK has the best free-to-air TV in the world and while methods of entertainment consumption are clearly evolving, especially amongst younger viewers, there will still be a place for more traditional viewing in the changing media landscape for many years to come.
[1] Freesat carried out omnibus research with OnePoll in May 2017, surveying 2,000 TV subscribers on their TV habits.
It seems like every business is now charging a monthly subscription, but, if done right, that’s not always a bad thing.
