FAST was not the Content Monetization solution that broadcasters & content creators hoped for, but the technology was great!

FAST is not a bad attempt at content monetization, but its complexity and the involvement of multiple intermediaries primarily burden the most important stakeholders: content creators, content libraries, and premium linear broadcasters. In any ecosystem, the reward for success must be fair to all parties and sustainable over the long term. Unfortunately, as a business model, FAST is held back by numerous intermediaries to achieve profitability without adding significant value. Traditional #Programmatic workflows which are tied to the term FAST has singlehandedly made it redundant, it is not that FAST is wrong but the reliance on Programmatic is.

YouTube and Google have demonstrated that content monetization can be achieved with a simple technology stack, an audience outlet, and effective marketing strategies. In contrast, FAST typically involves five independent companies to sell each advertisement, whereas YouTube only involves three: the ad agency, Google as a DSP, and YouTube as a platform.

While FAST has been a buzzword during the streaming television gold rush, it has failed to provide a sustainable business model for content owners, creators, or broadcasters, and therefore needs to be superseded.

While the text below critiques a failed attempt, FAST has undeniably shaped the future of TV into streaming television. People appreciate the ad-funded approach, and enhancing its efficiencies will elevate Ad-Funded Streaming TV and Ad-Funded Content Monetization as the future for content studios and broadcasters.