The technology gap in TV distribution is growing, but modern platforms are making it easier for distributors of all sizes to improve buyer experiences, engage audiences and boost sales.
After another MIPCOM in Cannes, one thing struck me more than anything else: the growing gap between how distributors use technology to engage with buyers. And I think it’s becoming a much bigger issue than many realise.
I’ve been working with TV distributors for around 15 years now, and it’s interesting to look back at how much has changed.
When we first entered the market, the playing field was relatively level.
Of course, the bigger distributors had bigger catalogues, bigger sales teams and considerably bigger stands at MIPCOM. Some had impressive screening rooms, elaborate presentations and the budgets to make a real impression.
But when it came to the technology behind the buyer experience, there wasn’t necessarily a huge difference.
Buyers would meet salespeople, receive screeners, browse catalogues and follow up over email. Whether you were dealing with a major studio or a smaller independent distributor, the experience wasn’t always that different.
Fast-forward to MIPCOM 2026, and I think we’re looking at an entirely different landscape.
And what surprised me most wasn’t how advanced some distributors have become. It was how far others have been left behind.
Around ten years ago, some of the larger distributors started investing seriously in their digital platforms.
They moved beyond basic screening websites and began building connected systems that could manage catalogues, understand buyer behaviour, support sales teams and offer buyers a genuinely impressive experience.
At the time, these were significant investments. They required budgets, technical expertise and a willingness to rethink how things had always been done.
But those investments have compounded.
Today, some of the leading distributors have an extraordinary understanding of how buyers interact with their content.
They can see which programmes are attracting attention, which screeners are being watched, how buyers discover titles, and what interests particular companies or territories.
They can build personalised experiences around individual buyers, recommend relevant programmes and give sales teams valuable context before they even pick up the phone.
And crucially, they can do all this while making the buyer experience feel incredibly simple.
Buyers get beautifully designed, consumer-grade platforms where discovering, screening and exploring content feels natural.
Behind the scenes, there’s an enormous amount of sophistication. But the buyer doesn’t need to know that.
That’s the real advantage. The technology gets more sophisticated, while the experience gets simpler.
Meanwhile, at the other end of the market, we’re still having conversations that could have taken place in 2005.
Distributors relying on fairly basic websites. Vimeo links. Manually assembled screening lists. Buyers having to request access to individual programmes. Salespeople with little visibility of what’s happening once they’ve shared a screener.
And, in some cases, very little understanding of what buyers are actually interested in unless they explicitly tell them.
I’m not suggesting every distributor needs a hugely sophisticated technology stack. They don’t.
But the difference in buyer experience between the two ends of the market is becoming difficult to ignore.
This is perhaps the most important point.
A buyer doesn’t suddenly become more patient because they’re dealing with an independent distributor.
They’re the same person who spent yesterday browsing a beautifully designed catalogue from a major studio, with personalised recommendations, instant screening and everything they needed in one place.
Today, they’re being asked to navigate a clunky website, email someone for a screener and wait for a link.
It’s a strange contrast.
Outside our industry, we’ve become accustomed to extraordinary digital experiences. Netflix, Spotify and Amazon have fundamentally changed what we expect from search, discovery and personalisation.
Yet parts of TV distribution still operate as though simply putting a catalogue online is enough.
And I think that’s becoming a problem.
Because good technology isn’t just about looking impressive. It’s about respecting the buyer’s time.
It’s about understanding their channel, their territory and the types of programmes they’re interested in.
It’s about making relevant content easy to discover, rather than expecting buyers to dig through hundreds of titles.
And it’s about making every interaction feel like the distributor understands who they’re dealing with.
The best salespeople have always done this brilliantly.
The difference now is that technology allows distributors to deliver some of that personal attention at a scale that simply wasn’t possible before.
Another theme that kept coming up in conversations at MIPCOM was the pressure on sales teams.
Everyone is busy. Everyone has more content to represent, more territories to cover and more buyers to keep in touch with.
But very few businesses can simply keep hiring salespeople to match that workload.
So inevitably, sales teams prioritise.
They spend their time with the broadcasters and buyers they know best, the relationships with the greatest commercial potential and the opportunities most likely to turn into deals.
And they’re absolutely right to do so.
The problem is what happens to everyone else.
Every distributor has a long tail of buyers who might be interested in something, but who don’t necessarily justify the same level of personal attention.
Perhaps they’re a smaller broadcaster. Perhaps they’re exploring a new genre. Perhaps they’ve never bought from you before.
Historically, it’s been difficult to give these buyers much attention without creating an enormous amount of additional work.
But this is another area where the technology gap is becoming significant.
Imagine a buyer exploring your catalogue independently.
They’re discovering programmes relevant to their territory, watching trailers, screening episodes and returning to particular titles.
They’re doing all this without needing someone from your sales team to hold their hand.
Meanwhile, the salesperson can see those signals of interest.
Instead of blindly emailing hundreds of buyers asking whether they’ve had a chance to look at the latest slate, they can identify who’s genuinely engaging and start a much more relevant conversation.
The buyer gets a better experience. The salesperson spends time where there’s actual interest.
And potentially valuable relationships that might otherwise have been overlooked can start to develop.
It’s not about replacing salespeople. It’s about allowing the same sales team to understand and serve far more buyers than they could before.
For me, that’s one of the most exciting developments in distribution technology.
And it could have a far greater commercial impact than simply making a catalogue look nicer.
Here’s where I think things are starting to change again.
For years, the most sophisticated platforms were largely the preserve of major distributors.
And understandably so.
Building bespoke systems, integrating rights databases, managing complex permissions and developing beautiful buyer-facing applications isn’t cheap.
But the technology has matured enormously.
What once required a substantial bespoke development project can increasingly be delivered through established platforms, with much of the complexity already handled.
That changes the economics.
A smaller distributor doesn’t necessarily need the same integrations, custom workflows or technical infrastructure as a global studio.
But why shouldn’t they benefit from the same thinking?
Why shouldn’t their buyers enjoy a beautiful catalogue, intuitive discovery, secure screening and a genuinely professional experience?
Why shouldn’t a smaller sales team understand who’s engaging with its programmes?
And why should the size of your technology budget determine how seriously buyers take your digital presence?
These were exactly the questions behind our decision to introduce ONE Lite.
Having spent years building technology alongside some of the world’s largest distributors, we realised there was an enormous part of the market that could benefit from much of the same functionality, without needing the complexity or cost of a fully bespoke implementation.
ONE Lite takes that experience and makes it available in a simpler, faster-to-deploy package.
It isn’t designed to replicate every feature or integration of our larger implementations.
It doesn’t need to.
The point is to give smaller distributors access to technology that can dramatically improve how they present their catalogues, engage buyers and understand what’s generating interest.
And, importantly, to do it without requiring an enterprise-sized budget or technical team.
I came away from MIPCOM thinking the technology gap in distribution is probably wider than it’s ever been.
But I also think we’re reaching an interesting turning point.
For the past decade, the divide has largely been between those with the budgets to invest in sophisticated platforms and those without.
Increasingly, I suspect the divide will be between distributors who recognise the importance of the buyer experience and those who continue to treat technology as an afterthought.
Because the barriers are coming down.
Smaller distributors can now access technology and capabilities that would have been difficult to justify even a few years ago.
And larger distributors can continue pushing the boundaries, using deeper integrations, better insights and personalisation to serve more buyers without continually expanding their teams.
The opportunity exists at both ends of the market.
Of course, great content and great relationships will always be what drives television distribution. No platform is going to change that.
But the way we present that content, the way buyers discover it and the way sales teams understand their interests are changing rapidly.
And I don’t think buyers are going to become more tolerant of poor experiences as the best distributors continue to improve.
The technology gap may be wider than ever. But for the first time, there really isn’t much reason for it to stay that way.
Adam Smith
ONE — thisisone.tv