I've lost count of the number of meetings based around digital convergence, where somebody has popped up with the comment "can't we think of a better word - convergence doesn't mean anything to anybody!" While true in part, the reality is that an alternative word doesn't exist and inventing one doesn't really solve the problem of meaning. Americans use the word Triple play (extensible to quad-play) but this surely is an industry term rather than something for consumers. My argument has always been that like "broadband" and "google" and "email" - words that are used often enough and have a specific meaning will sooner or later become universally understood. I believe it was George Bernard Shaw who said "you must make things as simple as possible, but no simpler"
And so I'm overjoyed by the fact the the Ofcom have, in their annual Communications Market Survey of 2007, made no bones about the "Convergence Market". Defining it at the very least by Content, Networks and Devices. To this, based on my earlier work, I would add consumer, and business models as 2 more distinct pieces of the convergence puzzle. Nonetheless, kudos to the Ofcom for providing a very thorough and unambiguous endorsement of the notion of convergence.
The report contains some very interesting models - including the timeline of convergence going all the way back to Ceefax in 1973 through the first text message, the birth of Skype all the way to Virgin's Quad Play in 2007. It also highlights some of the key deals in the past 1 year. A more telling table, the one on bundling services since april 2006, which really shows how the convergence options for consumers have snowballed in 15 months. But by far the most imteresting nugget is the comparison of BBC and BT roles in the communications market value chain. Of course, if you add to this Sky and Tesco, who I believe are an equally important convergence player, the results might be even more interesting! In 2008 perhaps?
