One of the things I have been doing in recent months is designing a piece of market research designed to aid those in the FAST industry looking for solid information that they can use to either demonstrate the potential of the market to new partners, the value of the FAST viewer to advertisers, or both.
Thus the FASTMaster FAST Landscape Study was born. A piece of research that went to 3,003 U.S. adults 18-64, half of whom were a FAST viewer and half of whom were not, it offers unparalleled insights into where FAST fits in to the distribution landscape and why it should be used by all entertainment companies.
(It also includes detailed insights into the FVOD landscape, but as this is the FASTMaster and not the FVODMaster, and to make the most of the time I have available to write this, we will focus on FAST).
First, a big thank you to my supporting founding partners in this, who made it possible to field this study with CRG Global: Sony Pictures, Hallmark Media, Vevo, BBC Studios and Scripps Networks. Thank you as well to Fox and AMC Networks for supporting my work once we had ended field and took it out to the wider market. FASTMaster salutes to you all for helping to further the value of FAST.
Let’s start with the most used FAST services. But before we begin, if you’re reading this and going to assume that I a) asked consumers about FAST directly, and b) didn’t devise a complicated multi-step scheme requisite with definitions and images of each service someone said they used, you’re mental. I applied as much rigor as possible to try to get the most realistic results.
What was fascinating is how many people say they use the Freevee integration within Prime Video. From other studies I’ve conducted, I have seen that people don’t always equate the two together, which is understandable considering that the FAST channels in Prime aren’t described as that. But what it does suggest is that once consumers are shown a picture of the interface and asked if they watch content this way, a large number say that they do.
(This points to a world that already exists where several of the major SVODs have a degree of FAST integration within them—Prime, Peacock and Paramount+, even if the latter locks those under a paid tier—and shows that in order to achieve maximum reach, integration under one roof is the way to do it. You may read elsewhere that this world will be resisted and slow to come to the U.S. but it is already here and thriving in the right places.)
Also of interest: the big four services of Freevee, Pluto, Tubi and Roku account for the vast proportion of all FAST viewing. This is total sampling of FAST use but, not to give away too much of this study, we did find that a majority of users for each service say they watch FAST at least a couple of times a week if not more frequently. That is to say, FAST for many viewers is a behavior that they have incorporated into their media lives.
(Also, as we have seen in other studies and reports I’ve worked on for Xumo, around half of FAST viewers have pay TV so it’s not just something being used to fill a gap once cable is gone, but is something that is used to supplement cable too).
This is further evidenced by the majority of FAST viewers saying that FAST channels are one of their favorite things to watch. They like the content and the experience, I just wish online analysts and commentators would use data like this fairly instead of constantly trying to run FAST down (it’s not going anywhere).
I’ve included this slide as one of my key highlights because one of the things that gets me most annoyed on LinkedIn is when someone says “yeah but FAST is only on in the background LOLZ I’ve seen the data.” I’m not denying that some people do put FAST on as background noise but I do think it duplicitous to put that line out there without saying how other formats fare.
As I suspected, FAST has a lower rate of background noise use than many other ad-supported formats. But I am sure no-one is going to use that to dismiss SVOD, TV or YouTube as formats to advertise on… let’s just get some parity here.
My final data highlight is the entertainment hierarchy. This refers to when you are looking for something to watch, not when you have a specific show or NFL game in mind. It’s no surprise to see SVOD as the clear leader here in an untouchable lead, with YouTube the second choice. What an upending of the media landscape!
FAST however gradually picks up steam. If you sum together total mentions as a source (i.e., 1st choice, then can’t find something so look for a 2nd choice, then if that doesn’t work turn to a 3rd source), you find this:
SVOD = 66%
FAST = 39%
YouTube = 36%
Cable TV = 31%
Broadcast TV = 30%
FVOD = 18%
What does this mean? Whilst there’s a hardcore bunch of FAST warriors who go to it first thing to find something to watch (who are these people, I want to do a panel with them), it shows that among viewers, FAST is already dependable and trusted to entertain. A key fact that I think is often overlooked as most of the content isn’t “new” (but who was grumbling about “new” when Suits was savaging all new SVOD shows in audience last year? The hypocrisy of the industry…).
Those are my key highlights. If you want to learn more, like how it falls out among 18-34s, 35-49s and 50-64s, or any of the cuts in the data by ethnicity, pay TV status, sports fandom, genre fandom or more, hit me up in the next week. If you found this interesting, feel free to let me know too, always good to hear what people think.