The Cloud Backbone for Global Media Giants with Baskar Subramanian
Part one of a media tech startup showcase
In Episode 7 of The Media Room, media expert and author Vanita Kohli-Khandekar speaks to Amagi's co-founder and CEO, Baskar Subramanian. Amagi is a company that deals with cloud-based content management providing the backend to 60% of the top 100 media brands in the world such as NBC, Comcast, Sinclair, WarnerMedia Discovery, Fox, A&E, BBC, and ITV to name a few. In this episode and the next, Tune in for insights into the work of some of the most cutting edge media tech startups in India.
NOTE: This transcript is done by a machine. Human eyes have gone through the script but there might still be errors in some of the text, so please refer to the audio in case you need to clarify any part. If you want to get in touch regarding any feedback, you can drop us a message on [email protected].
—
TRANSCRIPT
Vanita Kohli-Khandekar (Host): There is a strange phenomenon taking place in the 29 billion dollar Indian media and entertainment business. There's a whole generation of media tech firms that are rising and servicing the world. In a two-part series, I will take you through three such firms.
Today's episode is about an established, successful firm which clocked revenues of just under Rs 900 crore in March 2024. Amagi was founded in 2008 as a targeted ad solutions firm. It eventually pivoted to cloud-based content management.
It all sounds very tech tech, but essentially, Amagi provides the backend to some of the world's largest broadcasters and streaming companies. To tell you more about this, here is Amagi's co-founder and CEO, Baskar Subramanian.
—
Vanita Kohli-Khandekar: Hi Baskar, welcome to the media room.
You know, we met in 2008, I think, and that time Amagi had a different shape, and now it has a different shape as a media tech company, as I call it. So, before we get into the past or present, just give us a sense, to my listener, on where in the media ecosystem does Amagi sit? What exactly does it do?
What is the place it occupies?
Baskar Subramanian: So, we are a media technology company, and if you look at it, we are a child of a market change that's been happening, right? Obviously, the first thing that happened in the industry is that all of us moved to streaming as consumers. So, streaming started.
The moment consumers started consuming through OTT platforms, the big change is the factory at the backend, the cloud factory, or what we call the factory at the backend, where content was getting created was starting to change, because broadcasters and large enterprises have to now look at a completely new way of reaching consumers. So, they wanted the whole processing, distribution, monetization, all the pieces had to change for them. The second big trend line that's starting to happen is globalisation.
We're all seeing that we are all starting to consume content across the globe, very, very different, be it K-pop, or Korean drama, or Japanese anime. We're seeing content, and Bollywood obviously has been a big, big push that's happening across the globe. So, both globalisation and the whole idea of streaming led to two big problems for content creators and owners worldwide.
One is, if I'm a TV network and a broadcaster, I was very, very riddled by a lot of hardware, satellites, and equipment, and real estate that are actually driving it. And suddenly, as the moment the change was happening, the pace at which I should change my business transformations was completely saddled by a big hardware capex infrastructure. That brought the need for a lot of these TV networks to really move to a more software-centric, flexible infrastructure, which allows them to really spin up, spin down when live events happen, or new sports games come in, or new channels that we launched.
Can I bring my dynamism in my business to reflect in terms of how my technology infrastructure works as well? That was the first part of the problem that people had. The second is, when you're distributing content worldwide, suddenly the world is different, changed.
It's unlike a satellite mechanism where you're only doing it for your country or a region. Suddenly, you're talking to hundreds of different platforms where you need to take your content. You need to target advertising, you have to localise the content, a whole slew of complexity that came in.
The world there is that this is a 2017-18 time frame. That was the world that is changing in the content world across the globe, primarily with the US, followed by EMEA and other places that we started seeing that change. What's the opportunity that Amagi looked at is, can we be the tech fabric in the middle, connecting content owners, and creators, and broadcasters to modernise their whole infrastructure, and eventually be able to distribute it worldwide wherever they need to go?
That's what we do today. We are the tech backbone for lots of TV channels, both traditional and new ones, enabling them to run everything on a browser, sitting anywhere across the globe, with no real estate whatsoever. You're able to run really premium TV channels networks, and eventually be able to distribute it to anywhere in the globe.
You can go to 150 different countries today through an Amagi platform and be able to deliver that, for example. And the proof of the pudding is, last year we ran the Olympics, which is the most premium event in the US for NBC on a cloud platform that Amagi had built. I think this is kind of the pinnacle of the highest sporting event, and the most complex one, running to the largest media economy in the world, which is the US, which is running on a complete software-based infrastructure from an India company, which actually served the technology for that whole thing.
I think that's the sort of journey, Vanita, that we've gone through.
Vanita Kohli-Khandekar: Fantastic. And the US is in fact a big part of your business. I'll come to that in a bit.
But you're talking about NBC, which was, if I was to use an old-fashioned term, linear in that sense. It's a large broadcaster. But this transition for linear companies to a back-end which is fully digital, I can understand.
But how does streaming come in there? Does streaming fit in the services that you offer? On-demand video?
Baskar Subramanian: So fundamentally, if you look at it, all the content owners, it doesn't matter if they are traditional or otherwise, eventually their fate lies in success in their streaming operations, eventually. Because the world is really progressing towards that. Obviously, if you take the case of an NBC, and again, I'll talk about multiple examples, but NBC is an example.
If you look at it, it's a traditional linear channel creation company. They made 20 plus billion dollars on that sort of a product and offering. But their problem was streaming was starting to happen.
Netflix started to happen. How do I kind of counter that sort of a new distribution model? For example, NBC created Peacock in 2020-21 timeframe, for example.
Peacock is their flagship direct-to-consumer strategy that they actually have been building. So look at it, the back-end of Peacock, where there's a lot of sports that's happening today, or even bringing linear experiences or on-demand experiences powered by Maggi today. If you look at the Olympics, for example, the Olympics is a live event where Maggi prepared all of this.
It was available on cable and available on Peacock through the same platform infrastructure that we provided. So the back-end, Vanita, is independent of whether you are a traditional going to cable satellite or to OTT platforms is not so relevant because the back-end infrastructure on which you're going to do things, basically to process your content, prepare it in multiple forms. If you're live, for example, you're producing live content, for example, in sports and news and others, it's going to be exactly the same, independent of whether the consumption is happening on a digital streaming product or in a cable product, for example.
That's the unification that's happening at the back-end.
Vanita Kohli-Khandekar: Does the cable have to be two-way for this thing to work?
Baskar Subramanian: No. Vanita, if you look at it, just to give you context, if you look at it, what we call is a glass-to-glass strategy, right? One glass is the camera.
So what I'm talking about is the glass at the camera level and there's a glass of the television or the phone where we are accessing content. Now, the first glass, if you go back to the left of the glass, which is the camera, anything, a signal comes from a camera today, you capture that whole signal, take it through the whole process on the front. That's what a Maggi does today.
We produce the content. That means camera feeds come into a cloud infrastructure on a software. We're able to then take multiple camera sources, commentary, graphics, statistics about the whole thing, and eventually blend them into a feed or what the TV feed that we all see, for example, go through an advertising model.
So if you're watching it in a geo-cinema equivalent, for example, in the US context, we do targeted advertising on an individual level for each one person or a viewer on every television that you're watching on a TV device, we do different advertising. The same feed could go to a cable through a satellite uplink, which we don't really control. After that, it doesn't matter to us.
So the preparation part is exactly the same, independent of whether you're talking through a digital network or through a satellite network. In this scenario, for example, I'm talking about.
Vanita Kohli-Khandekar: On cost and on, I mean, is this a capex kind of job or is it a, because when you're saying cloud, I'm assuming there's some ongoing component here and there's a one-time component. So on costs, how does it compare with anything else we know? I mean, the earlier one would have been uplink, downlink and that whole shindig, but how does this one work on costs and on, I'm assuming it's much less clunkier than the way we did it earlier.
Baskar Subramanian: So, okay. I'll answer the second question and come to the first one. Absolutely, this is because it's a modern infrastructure and you're connecting things on a software APIs, right?
So you're not connecting through wires and cables and hardware. So literally zero hardware in most places where you're actually taking from the camera and being able to get a television device, everything is software. So you're clicking mouse buttons to get your jobs done.
You're working on a browser. That's the fundamental aspect. Now, coming back to cost structures, if you look at it, there are two or three vectors, how people are looking at it.
First is when the whole capex model has gone away. In this case, there's no capital expenditure. So look at the old world.
If I was a channel, I would go do my deals with my cable and satellite platforms. I have a five-year deal. I know how much money I'm going to make.
So I come back and actually invest in capital infrastructure, which I can do. Unfortunately, that world is gone. There's no five years in this world.
Nobody knows what will happen in five years. So essentially, the dynamics of the business changed. So the cloud lends itself to become an optics-driven model, fundamentally.
So our customers' biggest value that they see, and obviously CFOs are learning through this process of starting from moving from a capex model to a completely optics model, where you're only paying on a per-year basis, literally, or per-month basis. That makes a huge difference, number one. The second biggest difference is because of the uncertainty in the environment in terms of both growth and degrowth, because nobody knows how it's going to happen for each one of these companies, the biggest challenge is it can spin up and spin down on-demand infrastructure for specific things.
I'll give you a case in point. We work with a company called Dizon. Dizon is the largest sports OTT operator in the world.
They do thousands of events, tens of thousands of events a year. Now, their problem was, I don't even know how to predict how many games on a per-day basis that I have to do, because they do about 40 different games, starting from ping pong to the Bundesliga to La Liga matches in soccer. They run everything fundamentally across.
They go from Japan to Italy to France to Australia to all the places. The challenge for them, in a single day, they could have up to 200 matches of different events happening simultaneously in a day. The next day, it will be only 40, for all you know.
During the season, it picks up, and then sometimes it doesn't happen. Now, hardware was an impossibility in this case. They couldn't really know, should I buy 200 pieces of equipment and keep it?
Suddenly, new rides come in. I have no idea how to predict my business. Business and operations were not matched, both in terms of the dynamism of the business that they had, as well as the cost structures of the business.
Now, with clouds, it makes it so superbly good. So, it's not even about cost effectiveness. Today, I can say, hey, I'm going to buy rides for a particular event.
I can only spin up when I need it for the few 90 minute games that I have. Only during the 90 minute game, the whole infrastructure comes up and it goes down. I don't need to pay for cloud infrastructure or any hardware, anything more than that particular 90 minutes that I do.
So, it's a significantly different model, which is where our customers see the most value and the simplicity of the whole thing shines very well for them.
Vanita Kohli-Khandekar: That sounds very interesting. But if I was to look at using this technology, either as a percentage of costs or as a percentage of revenue, is it like a miniscule percentage? I'm assuming it's variable, but nevertheless, if I was to look at it on an annual basis or on a P&L basis, where does that stand?
Baskar Subramanian: So, largely, if you look at it, if you look at a spectrum of cost structures and how technology spending has happened in the media business, I don't know much about India, but across the globe, when we look at it, it's anywhere, if it's a traditional broadcast TV network, they spend about 5% of the revenues in technology. And if you are an OTT major operator, typically about 8 to 12%, depending on the amount of investment cycle where you are from a maturity standpoint. This is on an average that they're spending.
Obviously, content cost is the biggest cost, then it's the cost of marketing, distribution, all of that's the next level of cost that happens. Now, what we are talking about is the share of the wallet in that 5% to 12% that we're talking about. And what's that amount of money that you want to spend either on a satellite network and with hardware versus managing it through software infrastructures and on demand, which is actually shaving your cost down.
That's the core focus that people are looking at. So, even if it's a few percentage points of drop in their cost structure, that goes to the bottom line dramatically faster, number one. The second is obviously the business itself is changing.
So, people want to have future proofing of the business and that's a bigger driver. It's not even a dollar driver or a money driver. It's literally driven by, I may not be able to survive this business or grow this business or match the dynamics till I actually have a very flexible operating infrastructure through which I can go through the process.
Vanita Kohli-Khandekar: One thing I was very curious about because I rent that 60-70% of your businesses from the US, the media business generally globally is challenged and it's not about legacy versus streaming. Even many of the legacy players have strong streaming brands. You mentioned NBC in India, five of the biggest OTT brands come from broadcasters.
So, it's every which way, but it is challenged because you have a legacy business and maybe I'm talking more about India than the US market, which is very profitable, but your audiences are moving gradually to another technology, which is not delivering the same kind of profits, but which is demanding a much higher cost in terms of programming, etc. So, your margins are challenged on the new business, but it requires investment, but your old businesses are the profitable part of the business. This is possibly the India scenario.
In the US, I think the legacy businesses are deeply challenged anyway. In that challenging environment, how does Amagi function and is it only broadcasts and video businesses or where do you see yourself stepping forward, going ahead?
Baskar Subramanian: I don't think India is any isolated. This is something that's happened or happening across the globe in different evolution cycles. So, it's not happening.
It happened in the US. So, it happened five years back. The US went through the same pain that India is going through and actually deeper and deeper pain that they went through to a point where they had to flip the whole thing.
So, I think the reality of the media business is that the metamorphosis is a decade-long metamorphosis. It's not going to happen in one go. Every content owner, no matter who they are, is going through this challenge of a transforming viewer pattern that's starting to move and you have to move, your whole dollars have to move, and dollars have to move, subscription dollars have to move.
It's a big transformation that's happening. So, it is a stressed ecosystem as a market and this is worldwide. I think at different stages of evolution what's happening.
Now, coming back, if I look at it from a macro standpoint, the storytelling is timeless. So, it's going to survive. It's going to grow.
It could either be existing players who are able to transform themselves and become the new storytellers or there's going to be a new set of storytellers coming on board. So, and it's both. Literally, we've seen new storytelling and new mechanisms that are coming because the cost of producing at the lower end, obviously, is coming down.
At the higher end, it's actually going up. So, it's both the kind of a yin and yang of the whole business that is kind of stretching on both sides fundamentally. For us as a company, wherever there is change and transformation is an opportunity to go deliver innovations, Vanita.
If you look at it, our customers are migrating into newer and modern infrastructure for exactly the reason of saying, hey, I don't know the new world. I need a very flexible, cost-effective, dynamic environment through which I can actually drive progress for themselves. So, the biggest reason, Vanita, for us we're seeing is what we call the streaming unification problem.
Our customers are saying, why should I have one stream of media operations for broadcast with its own staff and monitoring and people and all of that? And I have another staff for my digital experiences where I'm putting a lot more people again for different reasons. Now, by unifying streaming and broadcasting operations at the back end, I get tremendous cost advantages and efficiencies first.
That's the number one problem they're trying to solve. This also allows them to now transition to the new world, less pain, not trying to replicate the whole infrastructure again. See, if you look at it, the biggest change we're seeing in the evolved markets today is that streaming and digital and broadcast are actually merging together.
There's one decision-making, one content strategy, one technology strategy. They're kind of trying to bring it to one single mechanism. So, that's the biggest driver where an opportunity like ours is to really unify them and help them to move to an infrastructure which allows them to do that.
This is like a banking problem, Vanita. I'm sure banks had offline banks and online people coming in. They had to go through this process of having a back-end infrastructure that supports both an offline bank as well as start to reconcile it with the digital experiences of new consumers coming in.
So, it's not a new bank only, but you need to kind of have these two together. Exactly the same behavior is starting to happen in Vanita. That's happening.
The second part, if you look at it, is not only cost. For us, the future is very exciting because of the whole evolution of AI and the maturity that we see in AI in the media business. So, if you look at it two years, three years back, we've been investing in AI, but I was thinking it's more gimmicky to some extent.
It's not delivering value. Either it should reduce my cost from an optimisation standpoint or increase my revenue. But over the last 18 months, we've seen tremendous value that we're able to accrue for our customers by optimising cost structures and actually bringing in new personalised experiences, which means it's driving more revenues, for example.
So, last year, we did a bunch of innovations where we were able to get personalized content streams for our customers in the US, which gave greater than 20% increased advertising revenue. So, the revenue increased for itself. So, for example, fundamentally, we work with Vizio Walmart, right?
This is Vizio's stuff, right? So, we launched a model called Zero Slate. Zero Slate is essentially a technology which is personalised for each one of us.
That reduces the number of fillers in personal streams. For example, the problem in the US was ad breaks will never get filled. If you have a two-minute ad break, only one minute gets filled and one minute never gets filled, for example.
So, we were able to replace that by moving to personalized channels. So, Vanita will see a different channel. Baskar will see a different channel.
Each one of us will see a different channel from personalisation. This increased session duration. These people started watching more because those breaks were much fewer.
It increased the overall number of breaks and also started increasing because people saw for more time. Henceforth, more revenue came, for example. So, these innovations are starting to happen, Vanita.
Fundamentally, because we're seeing this new world of bringing AI as a personalisation engine to increase revenue, as well as AI as an agentic engine. What I mean by that is really starting to look at chore jobs in your, take monitoring, for example, or take creation of some of the promos, trailers and all that. Today, machines are at a point where you can actually replace some of the human elements and the humans can actually only be creative about what they need to do.
All others, the job of editing and all of that, the machines are able to do it much better today, Vanita. That's the thing.
Vanita Kohli-Khandekar: I had a long conversation recently with Kallipuri, it should appear soon, on this and how they're using AI in the newsroom at India Today Group. But, you know, to your point about the Lisio example on personalisation, I did not understand how that personalisation has helped to increase revenues. Because, okay, I'm getting a personalized stream. I'm very happy you're getting a personalized stream.
And how much more personalised it is, let's say in the case of a sports match or something. I mean, how much personalisation is possible there?
Baskar Subramanian: Now, okay, sports match, obviously, we're all watching the same set of content, but this is not true in other genres of content that you're watching. Obviously, if it is suited to you, you will start to watch more and more content. So, the duration of the content viewing behaviours are increasing.
When you increase, there are more ad break opportunities. Because you have more ad break opportunities, you make more money. That's the sort of the logical steps that happen.
Vanita Kohli-Khandekar: Okay, that's the part I wasn't getting. A large proportion of your business is, I think, the US and then the UK. India is pretty insignificant and considering that we are, we generate, I don't know how many billions of hours of video in this country.
I'm curious, why is that so? Is it that you started by offering in the US or that market was ahead on the evolution cycle and that's how it happened? Why is that?
And also the big learnings there, which you think the Indian business can apply, whether it is on Amargi's side or whether on your client's side, the big learnings that you could apply from your US-UK experience?
Baskar Subramanian: So, from a macro perspective, if you look at it, obviously, the US media economy is much, much larger than India. So, just by the amount of the ad dollars and subscription dollars is actually massive when compared to India. So, clearly, that means the economics of a lot of things started to work there for us.
And again, that's the reason why we started there because two or three things are happening. One is that the economy is large, the media economy. And that also meant that the economy was also the most pained in some sense.
The pain is also higher for them. The infrastructure was available, cloud maturity was existing, internet maturity was existing. And advertisers had started moving their dollars from traditional television into online options already.
So, be it all of the online destinations that are trying to move. And when connected television or what smart TV was happening, I think that progression was happening. So, all in all, the system was very, very ready and ripe for innovations.
And actually, the disruptions were much easier to do, for example. Having said that, the benefits of learning that we have seen is that we are able to build a very sophisticated infrastructure now to run at the highest level of liabilities and security and latencies that we need. Because you're running Olympics, you're running equivalents of that technology.
Now, I think the technology is at a point where we can bring it to the next tier of countries that are ready to embrace the new world. The unique aspect in India, and I'm sure you've seen it more than all of us, is that advertising is lagging in India from an indicator standpoint. So, digital advertising, for example, or CTV advertising has to grow.
At CPMs, think about it, right? Our customers in the US make almost $20 to $25 CPMs in the digital world. Here, we're talking about tottering $2, $3 CPMs. Cloud cost in India is actually more expensive than US cloud costs. Internet cost is actually more expensive in India than actually... Internet means I'm talking about the enterprise internet. And so, if you look at an Amazon Cloud data centre in Mumbai, it's more expensive for us than what we spend in Virginia today, for example.
Now, you have a very lopsided problem here. You have an economy which is not really driving a lot of revenues for top lines for our customers, but my cost structures are not really lending itself because, actually, we have a higher cost structure and lower revenue potential for our customers. That's the fundamental problem, Vanita, unless we see more and more advertising dollars moving here in volumes.
It may not be in CPMs. It could be in just volumes of dollars for our customers because we have viewership. We have billions, billion-plus people. So, clearly, viewership can drive that compensation in some sense.
Then, if customers make money, then we can provide them with an infrastructure which will be really modern. And actually, it will be better than their existing infrastructure, for sure. And we are already talking to some of the large broadcasters in the country to do that.
But this change has to be driven by the streaming economy outside of Google and Facebook, trying to make money realistically. Obviously, now, Jio is making money, hopefully, but against anybody else, we need that whole infrastructure to grow, Vanita. And that's what's really not happening today as fast as what we'd like to see.
Vanita Kohli-Khandekar: You've touched upon something which bothers me no end. With due respect to Google and Meta, they've done a fantastic job in this market. But the fact is, their domination has therefore meant also that a lot of other businesses struggle to scale up in a market that there is scale available.
So, I don't know how one can address this question. Will Amagi's territory remain media and entertainment, or do you see applicability to others? And if it is media tech, so within media tech, what more is possible?
Baskar Subramanian: Two or three things, Vanita. We're a very small company right now. So, we're just starting to grow.
The transformation is happening. So, we're going to be leaning in heavily only on the media business at a global level. First is, I think the world itself is large enough.
We are too small in this whole transformation. We're very, very in the early phase of the transformation of people wanting to modernise their infrastructure. So, that's going to be a big part of our growth process for the next, at least for the next five years, plus years, Vanita.
Obviously, AI is providing a lot more, supercharging the whole effort. I truly believe it's increasing our overall hotel available market in terms of making it much, much larger for making our customers more productive. I think that's the biggest change.
We will lean in on this, Vanita, for the next, at least forthcoming future. That's going to be our biggest focus for us because it's large enough for a company of our size to really grow that first, before even looking at any other markets at this point in time.
Vanita Kohli-Khandekar: Super. One last question, which I somewhat skipped. When you deal with companies like NBC or anybody else in the US or in India, you're dealing with companies which have made professionally generated content for decades.
But there is a whole new ecosystem of user-generated content. And it's not just a meta kind, but there's TikTok and there's a whole lot of other companies. Does the backend change at all when it comes to the nature of content, when you're talking camera to camera?
Would you have a role to play in the user-generated ecosystem at all?
Baskar Subramanian: Absolutely, Vanita. And again, we have, in fact, internally, as well as two product lines. One is more enterprise-centric for the likes of the NBCs of the world, who are very complex, multiple tech operators running your system, hundreds of people operating your system.
It's a very different beast altogether. We have hundreds of digital-first companies which work with Amagi today. These are people who come out of the YouTube world and want to create their own stories and build their own brands, TV brands today, for example.
So these are companies that we work with there. They want a very simplified setup through which they can actually just pretty much drag and drop their content, get their things done, and actually look at it in a much more B2C fashion, if you will. So we have two distinctly different products, Vanita.
One focussing on large enterprise players and their complexities and their needs for reliability and security, and it's very different. We have another product which is ShrinkCrop as a platform for smaller media companies which are really dynamic, new folks who want to really have everything as digital-first experiences, for example. We have two different products.
So absolutely, yes, that we support these two economies with two distinctly different solutions which are, this is very rapid, fast, you can get things done. That is more enterprise-y, heavyweight, operative training, a whole sort of very, very enterprise-focused in terms of how it happens.
Vanita Kohli-Khandekar: Quickly, your big clients in the US and your big clients in the UK, just a couple of names which kind of give my listeners a sense of...
Baskar Subramanian: Absolutely, absolutely. So if you look at it, NBC, Comcast, which is the largest media company in the world, right, today. So we kind of support them in the US, in the UK, in Latin America, all their markets that we do today, for example.
We work with Sinclair, which is one of the largest news networks in the US. So we work with them where we are transforming, going through a cloud transformation of all their local stations to move to the cloud. That's a big part of our customers.
We work with WarnerMedia Discovery in the US, supporting all their digital, what we call free ad-supported streaming platforms at the backend. We support that. We work with Fox in the US.
We work with A&E, which is arts and entertainment in the UK and in the United States and in the US, for example. So largely, we work with 60% of all the top 100 media brands in the world. So we kind of, we've touched everybody.
So we're kind of starting to work with everybody across the world. We work with BBC, we work with Astro in Malaysia, Huzo, pretty much all parts of the business, wherever you see some. We work with ITV in the UK, which is a pretty large broadcaster in the UK, for example.
And we work with Televisa, Univision in Mexico. We work with Globo in Brazil, which are the largest networks. So pretty much we work with 60% of the largest top 100 media brands.
Vanita Kohli-Khandekar: Super, super. That is really good. Thank you so much for this, Baskar.
And, you know, I find this thing, whether it is your company and I'm talking to a lot of media tech startups right now, and I find this whole thing of media tech coming out of India, but it's actually doing a whole lot of work globally. Of course, Prime Focus is a much bigger example with DNEG, et cetera, which is doing special effects. But I find it very heartening to see these technology thingies coming out of India.
I'm sorry, I'm using the word thingies in this room. But it is fantastic to see them coming out and servicing the global media entertainment economy. This is why I was very keen on talking to you.
Great. Thank you, Baskar.
Baskar Subramanian: Thanks, Vanita. Thank you very much for this.
—
Vanita Kohli-Khandekar (Host): Amagi is now well-established. It gets two-thirds of its top line from the most developed media market in the world, the United States. There are now over half a dozen media tech startups, as I call them, from India that could become the next Amagi or even bigger.
They have created interesting AI-enabled products, managed to raise money from investors and get customers from outside of India. In the next episode of the Media Room, I will introduce you to two such media tech startups. The first is Frammer AI, set up by Suparna Singh, Arijit Chatterjee and Kavaljit Singh.
And the second one is Neural Garage, which has been set up by Mandar Natekar, Subhashish Saha and Anjan Banerjee. Tune in then to the next episode of Media Room in the next week.
