There is a lot more that goes into a media distribution deal...

There is a lot more that goes into a media distribution deal than just premium content. Indeed, content is a major factor when choosing a platform. The fact remains that many are forced to buy packages with 80 channels but end up watching less than 10. That was one of Foxtel's problems.

Beyond content, one has to factor in other aspects, like the technology platform (performance, scalability, rendering quality, etc), the network capacity and speed accessing it (for example, many are still using a 3G network or low speed ADSL <4Mb), especially where some expect Ultra HD streaming to their screens. Above all, the major consideration is the price one has to pay.

You have an increasing range of technology platforms all over the world. Most, like Fetch TV's platform, covers many distribution technologies, such as set top boxes, web browsers, and mobile apps. These platforms can also distribute a variety of media such as free to air, premium subscriptions, video on demand, and pay per view. TV2U is still behind in some of these areas although they seem to be working on them. Of notice, all the technology components TV2U uses are commercial products and available to others to package and/or operate. For example, Globo's OTT platform in Brazil is using Elemental, a TV2U provider and gets its VOD from Google. Telefonica's Vivo uses Verimatrix, etc. etc. The difference can be made by how these components are integrated to work together seamlessly and deliver a better service. There are rumours that Apple and Google are working on such platforms (both have already major components), if so, they may become serious competitors and have the clout to negotiate deals with any national/local major provider.

The cost aspect is also a key component. It involves both the one the provider has to pay to license, operate and distribute as well as the cost to the consumer/price a provider believes the end user is willing to pay to access the service. In other words the customer's propensity to consume a given service at a given price, hence the impact on the provider's revenue and profit margins. There is fierce competition in that space and sweet deals and incentives end up making the difference, not the technology itself.

Some Telcos tend to avoid major players. They prefer a small niche player over which they have some control than large companies with huge demands, expectations, and contractual obligations. I suspect the Indonesians explored other opportunities, maybe even with Fetch. Remember that Fetch is Malaysian controlled and that may also affect the national pride of some!

The value of some components is also debatable. Features that TV2U is promoting, such as consumer analytics and targeted advertising, sound great in a presentation but can be dangerous if oversold. They are of no interest whatsoever to the end user. In fact, the last thing I want as a paying customer is someone monitoring my viewing habits and bombarding me with ads while I'm watching, and phone calls and text messages later. I would have a tendency to quickly switch provider. Providers on the other hand make their money from advertising and analytics. There is a delicate balance to maintain in that space if a provider wants to keep its customers. Hence, the value these tools represent in real terms.

Personally, I wouldn't compare TV2U to Fetch, Netfilx, or Foxtel. I would benchmark them against Filmon.TV (http://www.filmon.com/). They are mainly serving European customers (the US situation is on shaky grounds) and stream about 500 HD channels including FTA, all major intenational providers, VOD and PayTV for US$149/year (US$14.99/month + 2 months free for each annual subscription) on any device (PC, tablet, TVBox, supporting Windows, iOS, Android, KODI, ...) (https://www.filmon.com/subscriptions/).

I am hoping that TV2U develops and be able to offer a Filmon-like service, better even, in the markets they are targeting.