BT Vision has received a flurry of attention in recent weeks, raising the possibility that it might, after a painfully slow start, be gaining momentum.
The digital TV service has been busily trying to build a portfolio of sports content in the wake of Setanta's demise. It has sealed a deal with ESPN to show top football matches, and is reportedly aiming to bring Sky Sports onto the platform next year. It has also bolstered its movies-on-demand package through a deal with Sony Pictures.
However, the attention paid to this activity has served to highlight BT Vision's brand weaknesses in comparison with pay-TV rivals Virgin Media and Sky.
BT Vision has a mere 430,000 customers, a tiny base compared with the millions signed up to both its major competitors, and a far cry from BT's own target of 2m-3m subscribers over the next two years.
The company's chief executive,
Ian Livingston, has defended its subscriber numbers by insisting that BT Vision customers are ‘quality' - they are paying for extra TV and film packages, generating more cash for BT from each household and offsetting low revenues from phone calls. He claims many BT customers spend longer watching on-demand content on BT Vision than watching the main TV channels.
BT Vision launched in December 2006, setting itself apart from rivals by claiming that it offers customers the ability to pay only for what they want to watch. It provides Freeview digital TV channels via its V-box PVR, as well as on-demand films and TV packages.
Its ad campaigns, created by Abbott Mead Vickers BBDO, have attacked the cost of rival pay-TV packages. The campaign features a character, ‘Adam', hassling a friend about the number of boring channels he pays for but does not watch on a fictional pay-TV service.
Sharon Wheeler, managing director of branding agency Turquoise, claims that BT Vision's ‘Only pay for what
you want' message does not have a strong appeal to customers who are confused by what it offers. ‘It should
be the clincher, and not the primary message,' she says.
Rhys McLachlan, head of broadcast implementation for media agency MediaCom, argues that BT does not register as a genuine player in the broadcast sector. ‘BT Vision has fallen flat as people see BT as a necessary evil, a utility you are obliged to have,' he says.
Such views from the media sector will, arguably, only discourage brands from advertising on BT Vision.
The service suffered another blow last month when it lost its chief executive, Dan Marks, after he expressed frustration at Sky's dominance of live football coverage. McLachlan counters that BT's complaints are hypocritical, given its fixed-line monopoly. ‘Sky invested in building its broadcast rights over a long period of time,' he says.
Moreover, BT Vision's competition does not stop at pay-TV services; ITV.com, the BBC iPlayer and 4oD all have strong video-on-demand offers, and Microsoft, too, is set to launch a service.
Jon Carney, chief executive of digital agency Marvellous, says must-have content is ‘fundamental' if BT Vision is to grow. However, he sounds a warning. ‘Setanta had good content, and look what happened to it. It also has to be about the way BT Vision is presented to customers as a brand,' he adds.
Wheeler agrees, adding that the BT Vision brand is invisible in the fast-changing broadcast market. ‘It is presented as an appendix to its existing array of services,' she says.
Despite having a captive nationwide audience, BT is clearly missing a trick by not marketing BT Vision more effectively to existing phone and broadband customers. The company must therefore either put resources into creating visibility for BT Vision, or separate it from the monolithic BT brand to create a credible broadcast player.