The Electronic Commerce Committee (TECC) is an organization of cable television networks, advertising agencies and vendors whose purpose is to improve the process of buying and selling cable television advertising through the use of Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) and related technologies. This, in turn, will lead to increased profitability for trading partners through lower costs and higher quality transactions. The Cabletelevision Advertising Bureau (CAB) coordinates the Committee and helps publish standards.
The primary purpose of this guide is to document the new version 3.0 TECC standard and to act as a technical reference for users and implementers of this standard. The TECC V3.0 standard is based on ASC X12 Release 4010. However, unlike traditional EDI implementation guides which assume both EDI and industry knowledge, this guide is also intended as a source of information to the many non-technical or casual users of the TECC guidelines, including those new to EDI or cable television advertising. The guide will provide practical information and real-life examples in addition to the formal technical EDI specification. Certain sections of this document have been written specifically for users with the following levels of experience:
Unlike traditional EDI strongholds (e.g. retail, transportation), media companies do not typically have existing EDI departments. In the media industry, many users’ first exposure to EDI is when they became involved with the TECC standards. In fact, few members of the founding TECC initiative had significant EDI experience before their involvement with TECC. X12, the language of EDI, grew out of a pre-Internet, pre-PC world with its own language and syntax. It can be somewhat daunting to new users, especially those who have grown up in a PC-based world. Therefore, one of the major goals of this document is to provide an introduction to EDI to those who have little or no X12 or EDI experience.
The X12 business model for purchasing is based on commerce as it occurs in “traditional” retail industries (i.e. where individual items are chosen from a fixed inventory and price list, ordered via a purchase order, and invoiced after delivery). While the purchase of media advertising shares much in common with this model, it cannot be stressed enough that there are some significant differences that are frequently overlooked or underestimated by those new to the advertising and media industries. This is particularly true of network cable television advertising with its fixed inventory of commercial units, negotiated orders with guaranteed demographics often covering a full year, and multiple changes to the order occurring throughout the year. Brand allocation and traffic instruction transactions also modify attributes of the original order, potentially splitting or combining the ordered units into new units. Therefore a second goal of this guide is to help those new to cable television advertising understand the industry’s terminology and business practices.
Version 3.0 of the TECC specification marks a significant improvement over the earlier versions of the TECC standards. The new standard is fully Y2K compliant and is designed to solve some of the ambiguities of previous standards. This should greatly reduce the number of individual trading partner variations that must be supported. The TECC V3.0 standard provides a single format that can be used by all trading partners, regardless of whether or not they support serialization. This version also benefits from the many years of practical experience that TECC members have gained since the initial implementation of EDI. A very important aspect of the TECC 3.0 standard is the workflow rules section. These rules had only been implied in previous standards and had been implemented differently across trading partners. A third major goal of this document is to highlight the differences between version 3.0 of the TECC specification and previous versions.
As previously mentioned, some sections are tailored for users with specific backgrounds and requirements. Notes on the applicability of the sections are interspersed throughout this guide. Hypertext links allow a user to easily skip over sections of less interest. Those new to EDI should start with the Overview of EDI section. Users who will be implementing the specification should pay special attention to the technical details. Those new to cable television should read the Overview of Cable Television Advertising section first. The section Overview of National Cable EDI will be useful reading for all users new to the TECC standard. Finally, users familiar with the previous versions of the TECC standard will be especially interested in the Migrating to TECC V3.0 section.
The intent of this guide is to provide accurate, up-to-date, practical information to users with varied degrees of experience. This document will act as the reference source for the CAB, and to clarify and resolve differing interpretations of the standard. It is requested that all readers, particularly existing users of X12, review all sections of this document and provide feedback on the value of the information, suggestions for improvement, and especially, any incorrect or ambiguous information. Click here to send feedback.
This section is designed primarily for those new to EDI by providing a general overview of the subject. As a result, cable industry-specific examples and terminology have been minimized. Nevertheless, experienced users should also read this section because it provides some background information that is useful in understanding the cable television industry’s specific implementation. Click here to skip this section.
EDI, like many technical terms in use today, has multiple meanings:
· Some users employ EDI in its generic sense to mean any exchange of data between two computer systems. Under this definition, a file copied to diskette and loaded into another computer would qualify as EDI.
· A more precise definition implies direct computer-to-computer communication of business transactions in a standard context-sensitive format (i.e. each computer understands the “meaning” of each field without requiring additional human interpretation).
· EDI is most commonly used to mean the exchange of information according to the standards defined by the ANSI ASC X12 committee via a commercial Value Added Network (VAN). (These terms will be defined later in this section).
· In the cable television industry, EDI is typically used to mean conformance to the TECC EDI guidelines (i.e. this document).
IMPORTANT NOTE: All of the above definitions are frequently used, so it is important to be aware of these multiple interpretations. When communicating with trading partners, it is important to know which definition is being used.
Electronic Commerce is the latest term used to generically describe electronic business-to-business communications. However, in the Internet world, the term electronic commerce has developed increasingly to mean the purchase of goods electronically. In the cable television industry, the term is used in its generic sense.
EDI benefits an organization through the use of more efficient and higher quality business processes, which in turn, lead to higher profitability. Like any technology, there is a cost to implementing EDI. The level of benefit and period of payback vary depending on the industry and the implementation methodology.
Benefits typically result from the following:
· Reduced Labor Costs of Mailing and Data Entry - In a paper-based world, one computer typically prints a document that is then sent (i.e. via mail, fax) to a trading partner where a human re-enters the information into a second computer system. EDI eliminates the need to re-enter this information and reduces the costs of mailing and receiving documents because there is no longer an envelope to route or a fax machine to load.
· Timeliness of Information - Information is transferred much more quickly from one computer system to another using EDI. The relative importance of this varies depending on the industry, but it will often result in improved cash flow management.
· Higher Quality Information - Typographic errors can have significantly greater consequences than just the labor costs of reviewing and re-typing the data. Some of these costs are easy to quantify while others are less simple (i.e. shipping the wrong item to a customer can incur additional shipping and labor costs from Customer Support required to research and correct the problem. These costs can be easily quantified from bills and timesheets. However, this problem may also lead to a dissatisfied customer, who then either takes their business elsewhere or becomes more price-sensitive in future negotiations). Quantifying such costs is clearly difficult, but nevertheless they are important to recognize.
· Better Communications, Improved Business Processes - EDI also creates feedback systems to ensure that documents are actually delivered and received by the correct party. This can eliminate the need for follow-up phone calls and emergency re-transmissions of documents.
· Standardization - Frequently overlooked are the substantial benefits to an organization stemming from standardization. An organization can use a single business process to communicate with each customer, versus having a separate process for each one. While the costs of individual variations from a standard are often small and easily overlooked, the cumulative effects can be substantial (i.e. the costs incurred if each customer requires a unique printed invoice format. In addition to the one-time costs for MIS to create the new format, there are additional ongoing costs such as the additional time it takes to add a new customer and the amount of additional education and training required for support personnel).
The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) is the recognized coordinator for information on U.S. national EDI standards. The X12 Accredited Standards Committee (ASC X12) is an ANSI-chartered organization that creates EDI standards for submission to ANSI. This body publishes one major release and two subreleases of the X12 standards annually. Version 4010 (version 4, release 1) was published in December 1997 and is the basis of TECC V3.0. The X12 organization currently has 11 subcommittees which meet 3 times a year to recommend changes to the standards based on member requests. The entire membership has then the opportunity to vote on the recommendations of each subcommittee. The Data Interchange Standards Association, Inc., (DISA) is the secretariat for ASC X12. Formed in 1987 and with a current staff of over 25, they coordinate all activities of the ASC X12 body. (A more detailed description of the history and workings of X12 follows at the end of this section).
It is important to understand that the X12 specification is just a rulebook. The standard is voluntary, and trading partners frequently add new rules or modify and ignore existing X12 rules. Trading partners with significant industry power often require conformance to their own variations of the standard. The X12 organization only provides documentation of the standard, it does not provide any implementation software or infrastructure.
The benefits of a standard diminish as more individual trading partners make their own rules. In order to minimize trading partner specific rules, many industry segments have formed trade associations to create and maintain industry-specific versions of the X12 standard. For example, the grocery industry formed the Uniform Communications Standard (UCS), the warehouse industry formed the Warehouse Information Network Standard (WINS) and the chemical industry has the Chemical Industry Data Exchange (CIDX). Each trade association standard typically narrows the X12 rules for individual industry usage (e.g. the grocery industry requires a UPC code to identify each specific grocery item even though this is optional in the general X12 standard). As a result, a transaction that conforms to X12 rules may still not conform to the more restrictive industry rules.
TECC, by representing the cable television advertising industry, is an example of such an industry group. TECC’s specific role is to interpret and narrow the X12 standard for use by the cable television industry.
While the physical definition of a standard is clearly important, the marketplace that supports it is equally important. X12 would be significantly less valuable as a standard if it were not supported by the numerous third-party vendors who provide the tools and infrastructure. X12 users and vendors have a symbiotic relationship; users need vendor competition to ensure lower costs and high quality tools and services; and vendors need a large user base to justify their investment and ensure profitability.
Users new to X12 may find that the standard seems dated and less flexible than newer technologies. While this is generally true, the value of the standard is not just in its technical detail but more importantly, in the marketplace that surrounds it. (As an example, although MS-Windows may not the best operating system from a technical standpoint, it is often the best choice because it has a large user base). X12 is the recognized standard for EDI in the U.S. and has significant support in the marketplace. While other standards, such as XML, look promising, it will be a while before they have a similar infrastructure in place.
Vendors are typically classified as either broadly oriented (i.e. they provide generic products that can be used for all X12 transactions) or narrowly oriented (i.e. products for a specific market segment such as transportation). Broadly oriented products provide the most flexibility but typically require significant customization for an individual industry segment. Narrowly oriented products require less customization and general X12 expertise. However, they are limited to a particular segment and new tools are required when expanding into X12 transactions beyond those in the industry segment. The correct choice usually depends on an individual company’s capabilities and strategy.
The X12 marketplace has 4 key segments:
· Value Added Networks and Communications - An essential component of EDI is the communications infrastructure that allows a file to be transferred from one computer to another. A Value Added Network (VAN) is essentially a large private network that operates like a post office. A user connects to the network (e.g. via a modem) and uploads a piece of X12 mail to be delivered to another user. The user can also check their mailbox and download any mail addressed to them. Most VANs can also send mail to a mailbox belonging to another VAN via an “interconnect.” It is important to note that the VAN model was developed well before the Internet was available as an option. VANs provide some essential value-added services that are not part of current standard Internet e-mail protocols (e.g. security, and delivery tracking and receipts). Finally, VANs can actually validate the contents of the documents for conformance to X12 standards. Some vendors, including some traditional VANs, are beginning to offer their services using the Internet as the communications backbone.
· Translation - Translation is the process for converting internal files to an actual X12 document. This is typically done by generating a “flat-file” from the MIS system and performing a field by field “mapping” of that file to the X12 document. There are many companies offering tools that enable users to perform the mapping. Some tools are designed for non-programmers and provide an easy-to-use interface; others require some programming expertise but allow more customization. Many companies offering mapping software also act as VANs.
· Education and Documentation - There are a significant number of books and publications available on EDI and X12 implementation. Several companies offer EDI courses to train new users, particularly in the area of mapping. Most translation software vendors also offer some training.
· Consultants and Service Providers - Many X12 consultants are available to provide advice on setting up EDI in a company. If necessary, they can act as a “contract employee” to set up translation software and handle the mapping, etc. An organization can also hire an external “service-bureau” to run their EDI operations. More recently, new vendor companies have been formed to provide “turn-key” industry-specific software that consolidates all EDI functionality into a single module.
The only way to communicate via X12 is by using an approved Transaction Set (These replicate an existing paper form). There are over 200 transaction sets in the X12 standard ranging from common forms (e.g. invoices and bills of lading) to specialized industry forms (e.g. application for mortgage insurance benefits). Each has been assigned a 3-digit number that is frequently used instead of its name (e.g. an invoice is called the 810). The standard and design philosophy for transaction sets has evolved over time. In the past, the X12 committees have favored adding new transaction sets for new uses. More recently, they have become reluctant to create any new transaction sets, preferring to modify existing ones. This explains why the cable television industry uses a Purchase Order for the transmission of an order for cable advertising, even though it differs significantly from the “traditional” definition of a purchase order. The cable television industry currently uses only 6 of the X12 transaction sets:
· 850 - Purchase Order
· 855 - Purchase Order Acknowledgment
· 860 - Purchase Order Change Request
· 865 - Purchase Order Change Acknowledgment
· 810 - Invoice
· 997 - Functional Acknowledgment
NOTE: The following sections provide additional historical and technical detail that may be of less interest to the casual or first-time reader. Click here to skip to the next section.
Non-technical readers may want to skip the following technical overview of X12 transactions. Skip here to jump over the technical overview.
Just like its paper form counterpart, a transaction set is composed of multiple fields of information. Fields that make up a logical group (e.g. name, address and telephone number etc.) are called Segments. Each transaction set is composed of multiple segments. Some segments can appear multiple times on a form (e.g. listing all of the items in a catalog), some are optional (e.g. method of shipping on an invoice) and others are mandatory. X12 uniquely identifies each segment with a short 2- or 3-character alphanumeric id. There are over 300 segments in the X12 specification. Some segments are very specific (e.g. the ADV segment for advertising demographic information) while others allow a lot of trading partner variation (e.g. the SI segment which allows for numerous industry-defined name-value pairs). Transaction sets typically consist of three sections, or “tables”. The header section (Table 1) contains the information that might appear at the top of a paper form (e.g. buyer and seller names). The detail section (Table 2) contains the actual details of the transaction (e.g. item numbers and quantities ordered). The summary section (Table 3) contains transaction totals (e.g. the total invoice cost).
Segments are composed of individual fields called Data Elements. Data elements may be optional, mandatory or conditional on other elements (e.g. an area code may be specified only if there is a phone number). Each data element has a data type (e.g. numeric or alphanumeric), a minimum and maximum length, and optionally, a list of allowed values. The X12 standard does not allow an element to appear multiple times within a segment. X12 uniquely identifies each data element by a number. There are over 1500 data elements in the X12 specification.
To send transaction sets from one trading partner to another, they must be organized to ensure proper delivery. Transaction sets designated for a particular partner (i.e. those sets grouped together in an “Interchange Envelope”) begin with an Interchange Control Header (ISA) segment and end with an Interchange Control Trailer (IEA) segment. The header identifies the sender, the recipient, a time and date stamp, and an interchange ID number that can be used for tracking purposes. Related documents, called a Functional Group, begin with a Functional Group Header (GS) segment that contains an additional time and date stamp, and ID number. Functional groups end with a Functional Group Trailer (GE) segment that includes a count of the number of transaction sets. The recipient uses this information to ensure that all of the transaction sets have been received. The interchange envelope ends with an Interchange Control Trailer (IEA) segment that keeps a count of the number of functional groups. Even if a transmission contains only one document, it still must contain a Functional Group Header and Trailer.
Note the following background information will be useful to understand how X12 formed, how it operates and some of its terminology. However, it may be too much detail for some users. Click here to skip this section.
EDI began in the early 1970’s when the transportation industry (i.e. ocean, trucking and rail) formed the Transportation Data Coordinating Committee (TDCC). The first TDCC standard, composed of 45 transaction sets, was published in 1975. ASC X12 was chartered in 1979 and based their standards on those developed by the TDCC. Computer technology was very different at that time; the majority of computers were mainframe computers running proprietary operating systems. There were few standards for communicating between computers built by different manufacturers and even computers manufactured by the same company had difficulty exchanging information. There were numerous modem standards (the common “Hayes-standard” did not exist), and most protocols for transmitting files were vendor specific. Even sending tapes was not easily accomplished because some used the EBCDIC system to store alphanumeric data and some used ASCII. Much of the early EDI standards process was oriented to solving these problems, many of which seem trivial in today’s PC and Internet-enabled world.
X12 standards are technically not official ANSI standards. The ANSI standards process requires an even more rigorous public review process that can take years of elapsed time from submission until adoption as an ANSI standard. As a result, the formal X12 documentation refers to the adopted specification as a “Draft Standard for Trial Use”. While this has no practical implication, it does lead to confusion when viewing documentation and using the term ANSI standard. In the cable television industry, ANSI and X12 are used interchangeably to mean the current X12 standard.
The Data Interchange Standards Association, Inc., (DISA) coordinates all activities of the ASC X12 body. This includes maintaining the numerous X12 rules and regulations, organizing and coordinating the 3 annual meetings of the X12 body, organizing the annual industry EDI conference and trade show, and publishing numerous standards and guidelines. Each year the standard undergoes one major release (published each December) and two minor releases (subreleases - published in February and June). In reality, the only difference between a major release and a minor release is the date of the meeting. However, there can be some practical implications because some third-party suppliers still do not support subreleases. The DISA web site is http://www/disa.org.
The version of the standard is identified by a number of the format xxxyyz where xxx is the version number, yy is the release and z is the subrelease number. Leading zeroes are often dropped so the format is often called xyyz. The current TECC specification is based on Version 4, Release 1, Subrelease 0, which is commonly written as 004010 or 4010 (and pronounced forty-ten). The version number is somewhat arbitrary and changes when there is some “major” change to the specification. The first release of Version 3 was in 1990 while the first release of Version 4 was in 1997.
Industry standards are typically based on a specific version of the X12 standard. Trading partners typically do not upgrade to the newest version of the standard without an important reason to do so. It is not uncommon for some industries to be several generations behind the current standard (e.g. some in the transportation industry are still using version 2040 of the X12 standard from 1989).
In 1986, the United Nations formed a group, UN/EDIFACT, to set international EDI standards. The syntax and structure of EDIFACT transaction sets (called messages) are somewhat different than X12 but the concepts are similar. Users familiar with X12 can easily understand EDIFACT after some review. EDIFACT was organized around regional associations; the U.S. belongs to the Pan-American EDIFACT Board (PAEB) which represents all North America. A recent reorganization has consolidated the regional associations. The goal was to eventually replace the X12 standard with EDIFACT but the bureaucratic nature of standards setting, and in particular, international standards, has delayed this initiative. It is highly unlikely that the cable television industry will be involved with EDIFACT. The current growth of the Internet is likely to create new EDI standards before EDIFACT becomes a worldwide standard.
The X12 body is composed of over 850 member organizations. The steering committee oversees X12 and numerous task groups. Eleven X12 subcommittees handle modifications to the standard. Some X12 subcommittees are industry oriented (e.g. X12N - Insurance) and others are functionally oriented (e.g. X12F - Finance). Modifications to the standard are made by a formal request (called a DM - Data Modification Request) from an X12 member. The Technical Assessment Subcommittee (X12-J or TAS) is responsible for routing the request to the appropriate subcommittee and ensures that overall X12 design rules are followed. Each subcommittee has ownership of particular transaction sets, although multiple subcommittees often review the same DM. Each subcommittee has evolved over time and has developed somewhat different design philosophies and methodologies. As a result, getting DM’s approved is sometimes as much political as it is technical. Disagreements between subcommittees and even between particularly vocal members can delay adoption of DM’s over multiple meetings. The cable television industry has been involved mostly with the Purchasing Subcommittee (X12K) which is responsible for the Purchase Order (850) transaction set.
Rapid technology changes, including the growth of the Internet, are straining the X12 organization. Some member organizations are still using legacy mainframe systems and are reluctant to make significant changes whereas others are pushing forward with new technologies such as object-oriented EDI and XML. These strains were particularly apparent when the X12 body took several years and multiple meetings to finally agree on a standard for adding century information to dates in order to be Y2K compliant.
In order to understand the importance of EDI to the national cable television industry, one must first have a good understanding of how the industry works, industry terminology, and how it differs from other “traditional” industries. The following section is for those readers who are new to the cable television industry. Click here to skip this section.
Modern television began as a broadcast medium. A local television station would broadcast a signal on a VHF or UHF frequency, which could be picked up by those households within the vicinity of the broadcast antenna. The larger local stations were affiliated with one of the national broadcast networks (i.e. ABC, NBC, CBS) who would provide them with the programming they required for broadcast to their local community. The network receives revenue by selling advertising that would air on all of the affiliate stations that carried their programming. This is called national advertising because it is primarily sold to advertisers whose products are sold across the country. In addition to being paid by the network to air its programming, the local station also receives revenue by selling advertising that will only air on the local station. This is called spot advertising. Spot advertising is often sold to local merchants but the station can also sell to larger national advertisers whose commercial will air only in that particular market. The first is called local spot advertising while the latter is called national spot advertising. The distinction is required because they are typically sold by different organizations. National advertising is typically purchased by larger advertising agencies on behalf of the national advertiser; local spot advertising is largely purchased by smaller agencies or directly by the advertiser.
Each half-hour of programming is typically allotted a certain amount of time for commercial messages. Some of these messages are allocated to the network and some are allocated to the station. Commercial time is typically sold in 30-second increments, which are typically called units (for national advertising) or spots (for local advertising). The terms spot and unit are often used interchangeably.
Cable television originally began as a method to deliver broadcast television to communities who were unable to receive a quality broadcast signal. A community would often erect a large antenna to pick up the broadcast signal and pass the signal on to homes connected via a coaxial cable (This was called CATV - community antenna television). This technology also became popular in urban areas to give viewers a higher quality picture from broadcast stations.
CATV grew into cable television, as we know it today. Individual communities would typically award a contract to a single cable system operator who would build the coaxial cable infrastructure to connect homes in the community to their “headend”. The system operator then re-broadcasts a signal via the coaxial cable. The coaxial cable was also capable of carrying additional signals beyond those received via broadcast and the idea of network cable was born. Cable television networks create a schedule of programming that is transmitted to each system (typically via satellite) for re-broadcast by the cable system to homes in its local area. Some cable networks only target a specific region of a country and are called regional networks. Cable networks and system operators negotiate the terms under which the network’s signal can be retransmitted. (The industry term for this is “carriage”). Most individual systems are typically part of a larger company that owns and operates more that one system. Such a company is called a multiple system operators (MSO). Originally, all advertising on a cable television network was sold as national advertising. Recent advances in technology now allow system operators to sell advertising locally and “insert” the commercials into the national network programming.
While they may appear to be the same, the business processes for buying and selling national (network) cable television advertising differ significantly from that used for local television advertising. The reasons for this are varied but among the key factors are that national advertising is seen in more homes, is more expensive, and must therefore be tracked in more detail. The TECC initiative deals only with national network advertising, so this introduction will focus on that process.
As in the case of an airline with its fixed number of seats, a cable network has a fixed inventory of units that they can sell in a given program. Multiple advertisements are typically aired back-to-back during a break. A group of advertisements is called a “pod”. A pod of four 30‑second units (2 minutes) is typical. Some advertisers want to air in a particular “pod position” (typically the first or last position in the pod) or to buy both the opening and ending commercial positions (called a bookend). Just as an airline can not add more seats to a popular flight or get any revenue from an unsold seat, a network must carefully manage its inventory to gain the maximum yield.
Units are priced according to their desirability to advertisers. Most advertisers typically want to reach a target demographic audience, which is a combination of the viewer’s gender and age group (i.e. Men 18-34 or Adults 55+). A viewer watching a program is called an impression. The cost per thousand impressions (CPM) is typically used when discussing advertising costs because it simplifies comparisons between programs.
Example:
A program has 500,000 viewers.
400,000 of the viewers are male, 100,000 are women.
The cost of a 30-second spot is: $5,000
The total CPM is: $5,000/500 = $10.00
The CPM for an advertiser targeting men: $5000/400 = $12.50
The CPM for an advertiser targeting women: $5000/100 = $50.00
Each program appeals to a different audience and a different demographic segment. A network tries to maximize its revenue by selling to advertisers who value the demographic profile of a particular program. Advertisers (via their advertising agencies) try to minimize their costs by finding programs that offer lower CPMs for their target audiences. Clearly, it is difficult to find a perfect fit. As a result, the networks and agencies typically agree to a target total impressions and total costs for the target demographic. Both network and agency work on creating a package of units that will deliver this audience and satisfy each party. The initial broad negotiation is called the Pre-Buy process while the specific programs in which a unit will air (and date of airing) are detailed in the deal. Most deals cover an entire year’s worth of programming and are negotiated many months before the beginning of the new season. This negotiation period is called the upfront. Inventory not sold in the upfront or which becomes available for other reasons, is sold throughout the season and is called scatter. The program and date of airing are important to advertisers so that a commercial reaches the target audience at an appropriate time (e.g. most advertisers would not want all of their annual advertising to occur in a single week).
The new cable season typically begins in late September or early October. The upfront negotiation period varies but usually occurs during the late spring. However, this process is changing as some cable networks are modifying their programming schedules to start a new season at different times of the year.
Scheduling and billing is typically done according to a “broadcast calendar” and “broadcast clock”. The broadcast calendar defines a week as starting on Monday and ending on Sunday. A broadcast month is defined to also always start on a Monday and end on a Sunday so that it only contains full weeks. By convention, the broadcast month begins on the first Monday after the last Sunday in the previous calendar month. The broadcast clock defines a day as starting at 6:00 a.m. and ending at 5:59 a.m. of the following calendar day (e.g. the broadcast month of January 2000 actually begins on December 27, 1999 at 6:00 a.m. This is because December 26th is the last Sunday in the calendar month of December). To accommodate this, many systems use a “30-hour clock”. This means that a unit airing at 5 a.m. (0500 in military time) on December 27th, would be stored as airing at 2900 on December 26th.
One characteristic that makes cable advertising unique is that CPMs are guaranteed. If a deal fails to deliver the total number of impressions required (known as under-delivery), then additional units called ADUs (audience deficiency units) must be added at no additional cost to make up for the shortfall. Refunds are avoided if possible, because the advertiser needs their commercial to be seen in order to generate sales. On the other hand, if a network delivers more impressions (over-delivery) than are stated in the deal, it does not receive any additional money from the advertiser. A deal is based on estimated impressions (i.e. an estimation of how many people will view a particular program in the future). However, the final calculation is based on the actual impressions: the actual number of people in the target demographic who viewed the program. Actual impressions are determined by data collected by the A.C. Nielsen Company and reported in its NTI reports.
Many networks provide added value by associating “billboards” with some units. A billboard is a short (typically 5 second) introduction to a unit, and frequently consists of an audio introduction such as “This program is sponsored by….” accompanied by an on-screen graphic. Billboards are usually offered as value-added features and as such have no costs themselves. A billboard is always associated with a specific unit (i.e. if the unit is moved to a new program or pod, the billboard must also move with it). Billboards are negotiated as part of the overall deal.
Some networks repeat their programming at different parts of the day. When the advertising is also repeated, the units are known as “mirrored”. Similar to billboards, mirrored units are tied to each other and therefore require some special handling.
The pre-buy process focuses on those parameters that affect the overall aspects of the deal (e.g. the total number of units, unit length, specific programs, number of billboards, aggregate impressions and CPM). The agency typically negotiates with various networks to achieve the goals of its media plan. The media plan, agreed upon by both agency and advertiser, serves as the master outline of all advertising purchases. The media plan typically identifies the flight (the period in which an advertising campaign is to run), the budget, and target demographics.
The deal breaks the media plan down into unit specific detail. A deal document is sent from the network to the agency for their approval. This document identifies each unit in the deal by program, air date, time period, associated billboards, unit cost, and the estimated target demographic impressions for the unit upon which the guarantee is based (Note that guarantees are for the deal in aggregate, not for each individual unit).
The agency reviews the document to ensure its accuracy and then typically enters the information into their internal MIS system (Either by keying this information in manually or by using EDI to automatically update their MIS system).
The unit level information in the deal is based on the best information at hand at the time of the deal. However, the reality of the media market is that some changes are inevitable (i.e. the upfront occurs many months before even the first unit airs, means that some units are purchased well over a year before airing). The deal document is essentially just a “snapshot” of the agreement at a particular point in time. Both parties are aware of this and work together to negotiate changes that maintain the spirit of the original deal.
One very important aspect of the process is that no change can be made to the deal without the approval of the other party. While a network can cancel a program without the agency’s approval, it cannot reschedule the unit to a different program without the agency’s approval.
As a unit nears its air time, changes become more frequent. A deal typically undergoes some change at least every week. Daily changes are not uncommon. Networks may cancel or reschedule programs meaning that units have to be moved to new programs. Units are also moved within a program for various reasons; commercials may not air due to special programming (i.e. major news events) or due to technical problems. Such units must be rescheduled or credited. Agencies can also request schedule changes due to changes in advertiser’s schedules or media plans (e.g. a movie is scheduled to be released a month after originally planned).
On occasions, a network may add “zero-cost” units to the deal. These Audience Deficiency Units (ADU) units are added to make up for under-delivery. Recapturable units, commonly called recaps, are included in the deal in case the network under-delivers. This enables the agency to know in advance where the recap will air if it is required. The network can cancel (“recapture”) this unit, after agency notification, if the guarantee can be met without it.Bonus units are sometimes given as “rewards” to an advertiser and do not count toward the guarantee.
All changes initiated by the network must be reviewed with the agency before the change is actually made.
Advertising is usually purchased well before the agency or advertiser has decided on which specific commercials they will air. In addition, large advertisers may pool several different products in a single deal to get better prices and to give them greater flexibility. The individual units are later allocated to specific brands (Brand Allocation) and assigned to individual commercials (Traffic Instructions or Copy Instructions). An advertiser may request to “combine” two 30-second units into a single 60-second unit or “split” a 30-second unit into two 15-second units (or even split a 60 into a 45 and a 15 etc.). A network will try not to air competing commercials in the same pod (and are often contractually obligated to do so), so brand allocations and traffic instructions may require the network to rearrange its scheduling of the units.
The actual ad copy that is scheduled to air is usually identified by an 8-character industry standard “ISCI” code assigned by the American Association of Advertising Agencies (AAAA). This code is physically attached to the actual videotape of the commercial so that a network can identify which commercial to air during a specific time slot. The shipping and tracking of the physical media containing the audio and video is known as “traffic”. The terms “traffic instructions” and “copy instructions” are used synonymously.
When a unit does not air for some reason and is replaced by another unit (or units) the new unit is called a “makegood”. The makegood unit maintains a link to the unit it is making good in order to aid in “stewardship”. Stewardship is the term used to describe the process of monitoring how a deal is doing in terms of meeting its guarantee. Makegoods do not need to be 1 for 1. For example, an unaired unit in a program with a large audience may be made good by 2 units in a less popular program. This would be called a “2 for 1” makegood. Makegoods come in many flavors (e.g. “3 for 2” or “1 for 2”).
After airing, the network sends an invoice to the agency detailing each unit and the time it ran. The invoice serves both as an affidavit and a bill. The distinction is important because it may involve two different departments at an agency. Invoicing is typically done monthly. The agency undertakes a “reconciliation” or “match” to ensure that the unit on the invoice matches what was agreed to in the original deal. If errors were made in entering the numerous changes since the original deal, it may take months of effort to resolve the discrepancy. Typically an agency will not pay an invoice until all discrepancies are resolved. Agencies do not usually get paid by the advertiser until they pay the network so both parties lose money (as well as incur increased labor costs) due to the long reconciliation process.
Post-buy analysis (often called “posting”) sums up the actual impressions that the deal has achieved to date based on the units that have actually aired. After the client schedules have been reconciled to what has actually aired, the agency can then post the actual viewing impressions of the people in their target demographic that have actually viewed the program. The validated sources of measurement are A.C. Nielsen reports or tapes. This analysis allows the agency and network, to track whether the deal is likely to achieve the guarantee as well as anticipate any under-delivery problems (Remember that the deal was based on estimated (vs. actual) impressions). While many agencies do the posting analysis themselves, networks can also provide the agencies with a report of actual delivery, generated by a neutral third party.
Note that while the negotiations between agency and network are based on the deal, the agency’s primary concern is that they achieve the overall media plan.
The prior section was designed to be a “primer” on the major aspects of buying and selling national cable television advertising and to provide a basis for understanding the remainder of this document. It should be apparent that the national cable television business process is complex and goes beyond other “traditional” industries that have benefited from EDI. The next section details the implications of these differences in an X12 implementation. The history section is very important to the understanding of why certain decisions were made and the implications these decisions have upon any EDI implementation.
The TECC initiative covers the process from the initial deal through the invoice (i.e. deals, deal changes and invoices). It does not address the pre-buy or post-buy processes. While discussions have taken place about potentially using EDI for these transactions in the future, it is not addressed in the version 3.0 TECC specification, nor is it expected to be added in the near future.
This section describes how EDI is used to support the national cable television advertising process. It assumes a familiarity with both EDI and the business processes in cable television advertising as described in the previous sections. Those users who have already implemented previous versions of the TECC specification should at least skim this section once. Click here to skip over this section.
Without EDI, the cost to administer a unit (i.e. data entry, stewardship and reconciliation) is relatively fixed; it costs about the same to administer a $1000 unit as it does to administer a unit costing $100,000. However, since agency revenue is typically a percentage of actual media expenditures, the agency’s per unit revenue decreases as unit costs decrease. Variable revenues and fixed costs mean that profit margins are lower for lower cost units. Individual units on cable were traditionally priced lower than broadcast network units because they attracted a smaller audience for a given unit. To continue cable network’s growth and encourage agencies to buy cable, the industry recognized the importance of reducing the cost of administering units and restoring agency profit margins.
Additionally, the growth of cable has meant a larger number of trading partners becoming involved in cable television. Before cable, there were only 3 national television networks and most of their inventory was purchased by only a handful of large advertising agencies. System customizations for specific trading partners could be maintained with relatively low costs. However, new techniques are required to support the larger inventories and greater number of trading partners created by the growth of national cable. There are now over 60 advertising supported national cable television networks and an additional 40 advertising supported regional networks that are members of the CAB. The greater penetration of cable television, larger inventories, lower per unit costs and ability to target audiences, has led many more national advertisers and agencies to buy cable advertising. The number of networks, agencies and advertisers continues to grow each year.
EDI is ideally suited to reducing unit administration costs and keeping costs manageable as more trading partners are added. EDI has been successfully adopted in other industries to address similar needs. The following section provides more specific details of the cost benefits of EDI for the cable television industry.
o Reduced labor costs - The most obvious and easily measured benefit from EDI in cable is in direct labor savings from the following sources:
§ Direct Data Entry - Without EDI, each unit must be hand-entered into the agency’s MIS system at both the deal and invoicing stages. This can be completely eliminated by EDI.
§ Document Tracking - While the costs to receive a fax seem minimal, studies have shown that they add up to substantial expenses, especially when factors such as the time spent waiting for a fax to print and paper jams are considered. In the modern office, these functions may be performed by expensive senior personnel as well as by clerical staff.
§ Error Correction – Data-entry mistakes can take significant time to detect and correct, and often require the involvement of management personnel. The illegibility of some fax transmissions is a major cause of data entry errors.
o Improved Customer Service - In today’s competitive marketplace, finding and keeping good staff is a difficult and expensive challenge. A significant benefit can be gained by freeing up existing staff from repetitive tasks and providing them with more time to focus on improved client service. A secondary benefit is increased motivation gained from more challenging work, leading to better retention of advertising staff. EDI also provides agencies with more accurate and timely information about a media campaign which they can in turn, share with their client. At least one advertising agency has justified their EDI investment on this basis alone.
o Greater Accuracy - Errors in communication can be extremely costly. The network does not get paid for an aired unit that is inconsistent with the deal. The agency also receives no additional revenue from such units and more importantly, risks compromising the media plan. A failed or compromised media plan will certainly reflect negatively on the agency-network relationship. Many advertisers rely on the media plan for promotional and staffing purposes, so incorrect information can negatively affect an advertiser’s profitability. Inaccurate data may also skew the post‑buy analysis reports and cause lost revenues through unnecessary ADUs. While technical difficulties can cause some of these errors, many others are caused by flawed communications (i.e. a misplaced fax, data entry errors or communication delays). One estimate puts the industry losses between 1 and 2% of its total inventory due to such errors. These errors can also reduce the level of confidence between trading partners and may require management time to maintain and restore business relationships.
o Improved Cash Flow - The network and the agency do not typically get paid until the invoice is entered into the agency’s system and fully reconciled. Errors due to data entry or miscommunication can prevent an invoice from being reconciled. Tracking and correcting such errors can cause invoice payment to be delayed by several months. Industry participants have reported that EDI for invoicing alone has accelerated payments by 10 to 20 days.
o More Timely Communication – Faster communication means that misunderstandings can be corrected quicker and therefore have a better chance of being corrected before a unit is aired.
o Standardization - When a new network comes on-line, or a new agency expands into national cable, experienced trading partners typically take on the responsibility of “training” the new entrants in industry practices, including specific trading partner requirements. By having a set standard of industry procedures, the amount of effort required to train the new entrant can be reduced.
Click here to view a case study of the benefits of EDI to a large US advertising agency
TECC was formed with the mission to create the EDI standards necessary to make the buying and selling of national cable television easier. Cable networks, advertising agencies and industry vendors, have all worked together as TECC members since its inception. TECC is composed of multiple committees. The Executive Steering Committee (ESC), with representatives from cable television networks and advertising agencies, sets the general direction of the committee, makes policy decisions and is the ultimate arbiter of disputes. The Design Committee, with representatives from networks, agencies and vendors, is responsible for the actual creation and maintenance of the standard. Recently, the Implementation Committee was formed to help educate those users new to TECC and to share best practices among existing trading partners. The Cabletelevision Advertising Bureau (CAB) helps coordinate all of the TECC activities. Scott Lowe is the contact person for all EDI activities at the CAB and can be reached by telephone at 212-508-1223 or by e-mail at ScottL@cabletvadbureau.com.
X12 was chosen by TECC, primarily for the infrastructure it provides and the number of third party vendors who support it. It was, and remains, extremely important for the industry to adopt a completely open standard that is vendor-neutral.
Similar to the role of other EDI industry trade associations, TECC’s role is to interpret and narrow the X12 standard and to develop guidelines specifically for use by the cable television industry. However, TECC can only provide the rules. It can not prevent trading partners from making deviations from these rules or from interpreting rules differently.
Version 1.0 of the TECC specification (which is still used extensively by the cable industry) stretched the way X12 transactions had commonly been used. This led to some ambiguities in the standard and required customizations to some third-party EDI software. These factors, together with the cable industry being new to EDI, have contributed to the significant number of trading partner variations of the TECC standard.
A significant goal of the Version 3.0 standard is to eliminate or at least to drastically reduce trading partner-specific deviations. This will further reduce implementation costs and pave the way toward support of additional EDI transactions.
Prior to TECC, several other groups had been formed to discuss EDI in the industry. It was the potential for multiple “competing” standards that was the impetus for consolidating these groups into a single body. A vendor-specific file format for transmitting basic contracts via diskette was becoming a de-facto standard. The AAAA’s (American Association of Advertising Agencies) had adopted a “flat-file” format for electronic invoices. While this standard was originally designed for local television and radio, it was used for national television invoices as well.
The TECC Design Committee was given the charter of developing the EDI standards for the electronic transmission of information between networks and agencies. One of the challenges to designing this specification was to create an overall industry “business model” which was not biased toward any specific trading partner or MIS vendor system implementation. A second challenge was to reflect existing non-EDI business processes and minimize EDI’s impact on the way networks and agencies conduct business. This was essential if the standard was to include all trading partners.
Using the X12 standard presented some early challenges. The industry was new to X12 and was not yet represented in the X12 committees that set the standards. As discussed in an earlier section, the industry’s purchasing process is quite complex and does not easily fit into transactions designed for other mainstream purchasing activities. X12 segments were used in creative ways to allow TECC to support industry specific data such as billboards and mirrored units. To support the guarantee and demographic information, which had no parallel in other industries using X12, version 1.0 of the TECC standard used multiple transaction sets to represent a single deal. A single deal was sent as an X12 843 “Response to Request for Quotation” transaction set and multiple 850 “Purchase Order” transaction sets. A second example concerned the handling of the standard broadcast clock. The industry defines the broadcast clock as beginning at 6:00 a.m. and ending at 5:59 a.m. of the next calendar day (A unit shown in the deal as 3:00 a.m. on October 2nd, will actually air at 3:00 a.m. on calendar day October 3rd). To avoid confusion, the industry had become accustomed to using a “30-hour clock” (3:00 a.m. was represented as 27:00). However, the X12 standard would only support times from 0:00 to 23:59.
While the business rules for cable are similar to those for broadcast networks, where each unit is treated individually, most internal MIS implementations were influenced by spot television, where similar units are aggregated together. To distinguish one unit from another, TECC adopted the concept of “serialization.” Simply stated, each unit in a deal is given a unique serial number, which it retains for the life of the deal.
Serialization is essential to the handling of deal changes because of the need to identify each unique unit being changed. Even transmitting all of the identifying information about a unit (i.e. program, date, time) is not sufficient to identify a unique unit because more than one unit can have the same identifying information.
Some significant programming changes are required for most cable network and agency MIS systems to fully support serialization. Although the full benefit of EDI would not be realized until serialization was in place, great benefits could be realized by implementing the invoice and initial deal transactions, which could be sent without serialization. These are called the bookend transactions because they define the start and end of the process. (Note: this is not to be confused with the term “bookend” which is used to mean units airing at the beginning and end of a commercial break).
The first TECC specification, version 1.0, was published in the fall of 1994. This release defined both X12 and flat-file standards for communicating initial deals and invoices. The flat-file standard was included primarily to make mapping easier although some trading partners used it for communications via diskette or modem. The release also included TECC’s progress to date, on defining deal change transactions. As is typical of any new EDI initiative, the initial implementations saw numerous trading partner-specific variations of the standard. This was particularly true of some of the industry’s unique requirements (e.g. some third-party EDI software was unable to handle TECC’s usage of multiple transaction sets for a deal). Other variations were due to software limitations, ambiguities in the initial specification and the industry’s modest experience with X12. The 30-hour clock and other similar “extensions” to the X12 standard led to most trading partners turning off the X12 validation, a significant value-added component of X12. Despite these minor problems, the initiative was very successful, especially for invoices, which provided the greatest initial benefit.
The Design Committee continued its work and published version 1.1 of the TECC specification in the winter of 1995. In addition to documenting the committee’s progress on change transactions, the new specification attempted to clean up and resolve many of the problems and issues found with the version 1.0 standard. However, because most trading partners had already found workarounds to these issues, version 1.1 was not widely used and version 1.0 remained the de-facto standard.
Version 2.0 was published in March 1997, and was the first release that defined all of the change transactions. By this time, the cable industry had gained more X12 expertise and had become active within the ASC X12 committee. As a result, some significant changes were made to the X12 specification for purchase orders, which reduced the complexity of mapping initial deals to X12. The entire deal could now be transmitted in a single transaction set (i.e. it required only one 850 transaction set instead of the 843 and multiple 850 sets). The transmission of demographic information was also much clearer due to the inclusion of a new X12 segment designed specifically for that task.
However, the version 2.0 standard fully supported deal changes and required serialization. While some agencies and networks were now capable of handling serialized units, many others were not. Trading partners were reluctant to invest in the new standard because they would still need to support the old standard for trading partners who were unable to support serialization. In addition, Y2K issues in other areas were taking precedence over EDI enhancements for many trading partners.
At the same time, new trading partners were beginning to implement EDI and were often confused as to which version was the current standard. Existing trading partners had to spend much more time than expected helping these new trading partners get up to speed. This reduced the amount of time they had available to work on serialization. Because version 1.0 remained the de-facto standard, trading partner variations continued to proliferate, further delaying serialization.
To address the issues above, version 3.0 (also referred to as “Scaleable EDI”), was created with the goal of providing a single standard for all trading partners, regardless of their support for serialization. This standard can be used without serialization for new deals and invoices, allowing all trading partners to take advantage of the cable industry sponsored changes to the X12 specification. An entire deal can be transmitted in a single transaction set using a new segment for transmitting demographic information. In addition, the specification clarifies the ambiguities that caused so many trading partner variations to the 1.0 standard.
New trading partners can now be assured of a single, fully documented specification that they can implement without the extensive time commitment from existing trading partners for prototyping and training. All trading partners should benefit from this unified specification, which will minimize trading partner variations. This specification is also fully Y2K compliant.
The development of this web-based TECC document versus a print-based version is also significant. It is inevitable in any undertaking of this magnitude, that there will be differing interpretations and potentially even some minor errors in the specification (This is especially true of the largely untested section on deal changes). By having this document available on-line, problems can quickly be identified and documented, and new trading partners can benefit from the practical experience of the existing trading partners.
The terms “deal” and “contract” have been a cause of some confusion during the implementation of EDI. Local television uses the term “contract” to define an advertising agreement between a station and agency. In addition, most cable MIS systems are extensions of systems originally defined by spot television, with the result that the term contract is often used instead of deal. Due to local television being purchased typically a quarter at a time, it is common for MIS systems to break a deal into multiple “contracts”, each representing a quarter’s worth of information for a single network. The original version 1.0 specification also broke deals up into contracts. Unfortunately, the definition of contract (and assignment of units to a contract) is trading partner specific, so it is very difficult to standardize.
To clarify these definitions, TECC introduced the term “Master Order” in version 2.0 for use instead of “deal”. This term was based on the traditional purchasing model where a deal is roughly equivalent to an “order”. However, Master Order never gained widespread use and TECC has decided to return to using the term “deal”.
One advantage of EDI is that it allows trading partners to maintain their own internal representation of the data. Each trading partner can design and maintain their database as best fits the needs of their organization. However, this also means that the same data exists in two separate databases, one at the network and one at the agency. The two databases must be kept “synchronized” (or “in-synch”) to ensure that they both reflect the same key deal information. There will still be periods when the two databases reflect different information (i.e. the time between a change being made on the network system and the time this information is approved and loaded into the agency system). The goal is to provide a process to control periods when the databases are out-of-synch and to provide processes for getting them back in-synch.
The Executive Steering Committee (ESC) oversees all TECC committees and is responsible for setting the overall direction and goals of the TECC committees. The committee consists of senior executives from cable networks and advertising agencies. It meets two to three times a year to set direction and to address any difficulties related to electronic commerce.
Click here to view the current ESC membership list
The EDI Task Force works in conjunction with the Design Committee and the ESC, to identify and provide recommendations for resolving problems associated with electronic trading. The EDI Task Force is comprised of representatives from cable networks and advertising agencies.
Click here to view the current EDI Task Force membership list
The Design Committee's mission is to provide technical and operational support to the cable industry's electronic commerce efforts and to develop implementation guidelines and strategies in support of business solutions as defined by the Executive Steering Committee. The committee consists of representatives from cable networks, advertising agencies, and vendors.
The committee's charter guides it to:
· Support ongoing efforts of the ESC by designing solutions and developing standards based on the electronic commerce requirements of the cable industry.
· Maintain and disseminate current and new versions of the TECC specifications.
· Obtain industry and ASC X12 approval of specifications for cable EDI.
· Resolve issues arising from the TECC Implementation Committee and EDI Task Force, and incorporate resolutions into the TECC standards.
Click here to view the current Design Committee membership list
The Implementation Committee's mission is to provide a forum in which all issues, concerns and ideas can be freely presented and discussed by those users interested in conducting electronic commerce in the national cable industry. Activities include education, advice, support, pilot experience feedback and a technology review forum. The Implementation Committee consists of representatives from cable networks, advertising agencies, vendors and service bureaus, and anyone else interested in implementing EDI in the national cable industry.
Click here to view the current Implementation Committee membership list
The most recent survey found that there are more than 45 cable networks and 25 advertising agencies, currently trading deals or invoices via the TECC X12 standard. 80% of these are trading both invoices and contracts while the other 20% are using X12 for invoices only. The number of trading partners using X12 is expected to grow by 10 to 15% per year.
Some of the networks to first implement EDI and actively add agency trading partners, are reporting that well over 50% of their deals and invoices are being sent via the TECC standard. Networks newer to EDI as well as those that have not actively sought out agency trading partners, are reporting that 5% to 30% of their deals and invoices are being sent via EDI.
Agencies that are EDI-capable have been doing an even higher percentage of their volume via EDI. Most report that between 70% and 95% of their volume is via EDI. Some agencies require that networks be EDI-capable (or at least have an EDI implementation plan) as a prerequisite to doing business.
Agencies and networks that wish to trade should register their contact information with the CAB. This information will allow trading partners to contact the appropriate person in the organization when problems and issues arise, and when new trading partners wish to begin prototyping.
Click here to view Agency Participants
Click here to view Network Participants
Click here to register or change information
EDI has been used extensively for the “bookend” transactions: initial deals and invoices. While this provides significant advantages, the full benefit will only be achieved when EDI is used for deal changes. The first and most important step for trading partners will be to convert to the version 3.0 standard. Unfortunately, trading partners can not abandon support for the older standards until everyone has moved to the new standard. More importantly, new entrants to EDI will only support the new standard. Energy expended on support for older standards serves only to dilute the effort to implement deal changes.
A key component will be a commitment to eliminate trading partner-specific variations in the implementation of the version 3.0 specification. It is inevitable that some situations such as a system limitation or unforeseen occurrence will arise in which a change to the specification is requested. At this point, it will be important to resist the temptation of an immediate workaround but rather to escalate the issue to the appropriate TECC committee so that an industry-wide solution can be agreed to and, most importantly, so that it can be documented. The impact of trading partner variations will be greatly magnified during the implementation of deal changes.
While serialization is not required to implement the version 3.0 specification, it is needed to take advantage of deal change transactions. It is important for the remaining trading partners to make the required changes to their internal MIS systems for handling serialized units.
Once the conversion to the version 3.0 specification is completed, trading partners can begin prototyping for deal change transactions. The ability to produce a snapshot of the current deal with serial numbers, at any time, will be very important for implementing and testing deal changes. Both agencies and networks should have this capability.
This section also includes is a planning guide to help new users get started with EDI. This section may also be useful to those who are already trading via EDI and who are now re-evaluating their EDI strategy for TECC version 3.0.
The business processes for national cable television advertising have been continuously evolving since the inception of cable television. Few were formally documented, most of these conventions were passed from trading partner to trading partner. Anyone new to the industry would often learn by trial and error.
In the same way, the rules and processes for X12 have evolved as well. While X12 is highly documented, there are still some processes that are commonly assumed and which have not always made it into implementation guides.
A major goal of this guide is to identify and document as many of these rules as possible. The intent is to make EDI easier to implement for new trading partners and help to minimize “unwritten rules.”
The technical rules regarding the EDI transmission of a document are detailed in Section 4 of this document. Rules outside of the scope of the formal specification and generic in nature (i.e. not specific to EDI) and rules that need additional emphasis or clarification are also defined here. In the past, these rules were often referred to as the Rules of the Road. In version 3.0, they are now called the Business Process Standards. While Section 4 is written primarily for technical personnel, the rules are intended primarily for those responsible for the business implications of EDI implementation.
The TECC Rules of the Road were created to set the framework for future EDI transactions and to help solve some of the ambiguities discovered in early trading. They were also designed to record existing standard business processes that had never been formally documented. However, the Rules of the Road included some rules that many trading partners could not implement due to technological limitations and as a result, they were treated as goals rather than rules. It became unclear which rules were requirements and which were merely guidelines. To address this problem, TECC recently revised and updated these rules. It now clearly identifies the rules that are mandatory for all trading partners, the rules that are goals (i.e. best practices), and the rules which are highly desirable but may not yet be achievable due to technology limitations.
These rules represent industry standards or rules constituting current cable buying and selling business practices. As such, they apply to all transactions, not just to transactions via EDI.
· Rotation is defined as equitable distribution both horizontally and vertically within agreed time parameters and program (s).
· Changes to rotation/ROS day, date and timeparameters, but not specific spot airings within these rotations,require deal/contract change.
· The salesperson will be responsible for monitoring adherence to the agreed upon schedule.
· Run of schedule (ROS) must conform to day, date and time parameters without regard to equitable distribution.
· For networks not utilizing a standardized broadcast clock, units will require conversion of time and date to correspond to the AC Nielsen clock, defined as 6:00 – 29:59 Eastern time.
· Sell patterns cannot cross broadcast days.
· A broadcast month will end on the final Sunday of a calendar month.
· A broadcast quarter will end on the final Sunday of a calendar quarter (final Sunday of Ma