 Well, moving on to the last and the final session for the day and it couldn't get better when the next speaker absolutely needs no introduction. He's an Indian executive who's the current CEO India media branch managing the second largest media agency group. He's also actively involved in the various industry bodies such as the advertising standards Council of India, the advertising agencies Association of India the broadcast audience research Council India. He's also an honorable member of the prestigious Facebook India client Council and alumni of IIT Kanpur and IIT I am Bangalore where he was recently conferred the most distinguished alumni award. An industry veteran with over 30 years of experience he's somebody who's built a highly awarded team of professionals and organization that today form the country's leading media network. Please join me in welcoming none other than Shashi Senha CEO India media brands. Thank you so much Mr Senna for joining us and giving us valuable time it's great to have you and great to see you after one of the recently attended over to you. So, thank you first for everyone extra for media, and all of you, you know, I'm not too happy here, so it was a pleasure to talk, even more excited to talk about television in the digital world. I'm a big believer of television and happy to see that your sponsors and colors and TV and ABP both are television networks, first of all, they're just networks. So, without much ado, I will get going. I don't have a presentation but I want to make a few thoughts which I thought I would quickly speak and present to the audience there. The other way is I'll be direct I've known for speaking my views out clearly. So I will. So you know this whole thing, the topic itself says that the buzz around is TV as a medium in the digital world. So, the implication is that we already moved to a digital world, and TV just happens to be part of it and I don't know how I'm saying that because I tell you why a couple of reports, which are industry enough retinue is put out in the last one month. In the page Madison report which says that even my teams are saying that that digital will go past television in terms of addicts this year. And that's a very big news for the first time the countries and cities will be bigger. But there is a bit of a fallacy and a bit of a catch in that, you know, so it's well, firstly, these are all approximations no one has their numbers TV of course people can monitor through back but digital is very difficult to so fragmented difficult to monitor. Having said that let's assume the numbers are indicative and right. The limited point will make is that digital is many things it was not some office master many things to it, but if I was to break it up into two clear parts. The first part is performance, and the second part is the brand building part and just purposely for simplicity, they need just two parts would be many more parts. Now, performance is something which I personally feel is a sizable part of digital is a long term future is very good and really works we run a lot of CRM there. But that's not what it is all about, you know, so what will happen to performance as we go and I'm this is our television so I'm not talking about it. But two years down the line when the cooking less word comes in, what will be to you know PIS APS all that that's a discussion on another day. And therefore companies are building their first party data coming back to television so if you look at the brand building part of television or the advertising or the display part as they call it of digital is still very small compared to television television is still far bigger. If I may hazard I guess maybe television is double the size of that so called brand building display part of this if not more. And I tell you, I believe it will remain that way, and that's a strong statement I'm making at the risk of sounding old fashioned, but let me tell you there is enough juice and meat left in television. The reason I say that is as follows, you know, so first is today, television even today, the, you know, you have not reached full potential. As all of you know, television is about 67% penetration, which means approximately 78 79 crore individuals 72 crore individuals who watch television, you know, weekly basis. And if you break this up on some data provided with the advantage of being in the industry body that they provided they know they're probably 3233 crore individuals only watch on television, and maybe more 39 crores who watch only television. They've got 33 crores who watch TV and digital together and digital by itself has about eight to 10 crore individuals who watch only digital television. So the fact is sort of the 72 crore individuals on TV who watch television, half of them, of course to half of them or more than half of them are only TV viewers. There is a sizable chunk before I build my case for on quality of factors, let me say, there is a sizable chunk of people who are only looking at television India the large country, growth of India will come growth in urban is relatively low compared to don't go by the last 12 months, but overall through faster, which is where chances are a lot of these TV homes standalone TV individuals are. So there's a lot of juice as as they penetrate as categories penetrate as distribution becomes important for many many categories, you will find that television will be the only way to reach these people. That's one point which I'm making. The second point which I'm making which I think is a critical point to make is that you see all prices in India mean very low, the TV guys were the first to suffer the entire business was 70% 80% on that pricing model. Money was made on distribution nothing you know, and possibly because of the government intervention to end you and otherwise, you know, you found that the prices were very low for consumers and you don't expect prices to work dramatically. So, cost of getting a cable connection is not very high in that sense. And that would remain stable. So it may go up and down by that remains stable. Another point is penetration will not be as difficult as one for addition, I mean wonder why I'm saying this. The reason is today India because of Joe has one of the cheapest, you know, prices for internet in the world. If you apply even if you buy purchasing power parity, it is the cheapest in the world no one is there. The question the wood question is how long will it remain. And especially for video where the consumption of bandwidth is very high. So will they be, and this is a question I'm posing. It's a rhetorical question. My answer is probably there will be inflation which will be far, far higher than television in terms of, you know, internet subscription and internet costs. And when that becomes, you know, India is a very value conscious country. Will that start pinching question I'm asking myself, will that start pinching will that slow down. It will slow down penetration of internet has many other advantages, but will it slow down video consumption consumption of content on internet. So that's a question I posed. So my to my friends who think you know that we wiped out TV we wiped out. It's a long, long away, a long, long way away. So that's the second thing which I raise one is the numbers, there are a sizable number of people who are on TV alone. There are people who are doing TV position, which is about three kilo individuals will they sustain this heavy consumption which is happening, even because because of the prices of internet going up the next two to three year window. The third point is, even today, look at the consumption. So Bob, most people don't know Bob has some pilot panels already in place where there's much TV position consumption for 9000 homes or so. And even today if you see in those homes, the data which is coming that on a weekly on a daily basis, two and a half hours of TV consumption in about 30 minutes of 30 odd minutes 32 minutes of utility consumption. I'm keeping other stuff on internet, you know, social media and use all that out, but we consumption which is video consumption in a way that to like for my whole was the hypothesis of grand building, you know, which is video long format and stuff like that. My point is that even today in those homes, which are these 33,000 homes, the TV position is there, TV consumption is still far higher than additional consumption or utility consumption, and TV prices TV TV, the sufficient prices are not Bob has dramatically had chances are internet prices so there's going to be an issue there. So I think there is enough juice and television. Coming on to, you know, the other point to make which is, yeah, a very interesting point. So which I was observing, you know, and you see it in India, you see it all over the world. You know, look at this look at the look at the oddity in this, all the big global companies, and I'll explain to you the reason why all the big global companies who are strong on the digital side, Amazon, Google, Facebook, you name them. They're all spent in the advertising budgets all of the world even in deeply penetrating markets where additional consumption is very high spent almost 40 to 50% of their money on television. So there will be some method to the madness and my hypothesis, that's primarily because the power of the for two reasons. One is the power of brand building, which I started off by saying, is far easier on television television always provides you that that canvas and provides you the ability to, you know, build the brand in its entirety rather than a small screen where the mobile device where you're seeing the story on the brand so so bad building is that much more possible. Secondly, television also gives you an impact you can reach 1000,000 people at the same time. So by definition this is all about personalization you see that your convenience and your time and your fame. So that takes time to build up reach, reach when it will be built up but you know, if you put an add on IP or the whole world sees it, you know, as quick way to launch a product to get possibility was today in the world of short attention spans, you need the possibility and opportunity also comes from television, the new campaign making a new product launched on the last scale with impact, and which is why think about it. If you see big properties, big properties in the world be it Super Bowl and US or IPR in India. If you see the rights which go, you know, you will find almost 70% to 80% value being subscribed to the TV rights and about 25 to 30% being subscribed to the digital rights. Is there a story in that that you know, if TV digital in CPMs is far better, if digital was growing as a particularly as we meet out to be, and why would people, why would broadcasters and invest so heavily on big ticket premium properties on television, because primarily because they know this value, look at IPR in India. So if you look at India, you know, 75% to 80% of the revenue comes from TV 20% from digital. The numbers are huge and digital concurrent viewership of the funds are huge. But the fact is that revenue is there because of the recent dimensional impact. When I say impact is what I call it to feel is a quick buildup of reach, which matters in a country where attention spans are low, where ratings are fragmented, you know, getting a 1% rating 90% of the time no program gets you 1% rating in that context to have a program gets you 10 rating in one shot. It's not only about the numbers of CPR pays or ratings. It's also about the impact it creates a lot of us experience there's so many people, 10% of whatever 75% of individuals have watched it is several people at one shot seeing all the motion. And that's why the power of band building and band building is also about the emotion but also the emotion across so many people. So I think that is to me the largest case I built for television that television has a role to play will continue to sustain. And the final few points I want to make in this context is that, you know, finally it's about content. So television is that is a means to enable connected TV finally is TV being watched. And before I come to that, sorry. So this whole short term crazy, also at some point in time will catch on because it's regulation, you know, there's no censorship and stuff like that so that's the place but look at a long term point of view. The long term point I was making was that, you know, finally it's about content is distribution is a mechanism where you put on television you put on digital wherever it is. Now the point is that today, if you notice that a lot of content companies are catering to the OTT market or the video market and not companies like Google and keep them aside for the time being are not really making money, while those the profitability of organizations were contributors coming from the TV because they're practically modern TV. So in spite of getting low revenue share from distribution revenue, and mainly sustaining this still are making money, all the networks be it wirecom or Sony or a star or a Z they're all the four main networks of the sun, they're all profitable, and that is the content they're fueling in. So finally, they're fueling content the content is not getting short term eyeballs on OTT, because of you know the kind of content which is a G which is not censored, and it allows you, but they've got the capability of television or tomorrow. If they start shrinking money on TV, they don't want to put that money on digital and digital India such a president country will never get subscription value to the Netflix you know 150 bucks on what and what's every box whatever they're charging. So you'll never be able to generate revenue from subscription to that extent, it always be advertising funded to a large extent. And minute you personalize your sequence have to come down because you know you're not getting the impact. So the hypothesis I'm building up that for a variety of these reasons the business model will be such that you will have a situation where really nearly TV, the TV, the networks content networks content companies will have to ensure that they have to feed the TV monster which is giving the money, and then they invest wherever they want to invest. So I know it's very right and right to say that this is the future, your topic says it first that you know TV as a medium in the digital world, it says it away. But I believe there's a lot of juice left in television, and my final point was original point, which is the simplicity point at 72 crore homes, 7 to more individuals watch TV, there's a lot of headroom there, and the markets will go there. And out of those 39 crore TV homes, which are TV individuals, which are just TV, they will get their own additional but additional day time because of the passage I mentioned. So I think I submit by saying that, you know, there's a lot of juice in the television, you see in TV ads growing, and prediction for TV addicts, it'll keep growing. But the value of TV provides in terms of brand building, in terms of impact, it never will go away. The only thing which can work probably TV and district can work in tandem, and for which this platform which you're providing is a great role. I think in terms of seamless messaging of content is opportunity. And I think we have a job to do that in terms of ensuring this seamless measurement across. So Bach unfortunately has been slow on this, but they were embarked on this whole thing of TV presidential measurement. That's not Bach's fault, it's the stakeholder managing the, you know, Bach's industry body. So managing stakeholders becomes a big issue. But I'm hopeful that in the next 20 to 18 months, they will be able to ensure that there is seamless integration of TV presidential measurement. I alluded to some pilots, which some of us are preview, but those pilots are very successful in the scaled up. And this single measurement that people will have a view of both medium together, one video, one interview, and then maybe money will move both ways faster. But in conclusion, for the reason which I mentioned, a lot of headroom, you know, big impact properties, quick buildup of reach, and profitable juice in the companies in the content side. As a result, TV is your mistakes. They're all over the world, so to India. That is my case. Thank you so much, Mrs. Sanat. Always such an honor on listening to you and hearing you, you know, when we have a media mobile like you coming on the screen, if definitely we couldn't have asked for a better closing to our hashtag TV first conference. Thank you once again. Thank you.