Post by VanillaFlava on Sept 21, 2006 17:25:46 GMT -5
Yeah, you're definitely right about most points. Don't discount the advertising though. And there's smarter ways to integrate Google and Overture than just plonk the standard Adwords in. The point is really to get somebody to sell your inventory, other than just the generic stuff from AdLink, Google et. al.
Sure, this site needs way more traffick than it has right now to make ad revenue work, that's what I said though, didn't I?
Merchandise and subscriptions are out, I agree. If this had more of an audience you could try maybe additional premium shows, like 1-2 USD a pop or something, but I am not too optimistic about premium models, with all the billing overhead and customer service ickyness it entails.
My main point was mobile, I still think mobile would work, if done with the right partner. But, Noa already mentioned it's not big in the US.
As far as music goes ... well, yeah 99c doesn't even break even, I know, but there's a couple of new models being introduced right now, at least here in Europe. Kinda like P2P that pays back. But you're right, unless something could be done about price this is iffy at best. Mostly people have already given up on music, that is just the loss-leader to get people into the store to then sell them movies and stuff, which still have a margin.
I still do not think the video is anything more than bringing in the people though, and Revver is also not the thing.
I just posted some thoughts on this Financial Express article
Maybe the best hope the IMS has is that YouTube and Google Video and Microsoft and Yahoo!, the "networks" of Web video (and the latter three, companies for whom a million dollars is a drop in the bucket) will recognize the value of a good series and fund their development.
Would people be too turned off by it? Or are people eager for better content? Your typical, psycho YT teen might be turned off, but what about older consumers?
Post by VanillaFlava on Sept 26, 2006 16:19:22 GMT -5
Yep, read that, very interesting. I think that might be an avenue. SoapBox will have a lot of ground to cover anyway before it even gets close. So what they need is a headliner.
That is all kinda reminiscent of the old Hollywood studio system or even network TV, trying to get their ratings through headliner stars. Possibly also the music industry.
It will get really interesting when they get their hands on multiple channels, like Microsoft has been trying to for the last couple of years, then you can really spread your content out there, and not make it such a loss-leading investment to attract an audience.
Or, the IMS can always try to win prizes like this. But seeing the NY Times Web site makes me miss Virginia.
So Vanilla, we got a bit off topic, but can you explain how a model built around mobile would work? It's very unfamiliar in the US, but I think there's room for mobile, especially among the YouTube generation that have never had a cell phone without a camera. And the other thing about the US market -- obviously, it's a big country, you don't need the same penetration rates to make serious bank. If 3 percent of the population does something, that's 10 million people.
Post by VanillaFlava on Sept 30, 2006 12:43:57 GMT -5
Yeah, you are absolutely right. The US market is so much nicer to introduce new products in. You simply have such a large homogeneous user base. In Europe, everything is fragmented and you need to localise and you always end up catering to a much smaller audience, with much more effort involved.
I think one of the reasons why mobile is more proliferated here, is because the telephony market was deregulated much later than in the US. While deregulation is a good thing for competition, having fewer big players here helped establishing standards quickly, which are key for mobile proliferation. It is more complicated than the Internet because you have the hardware factor, these hundreds of incompatible phones with differeng operating systems, slightly adapated Java VMs etc.
Now, how could mobile work? You want to team up with an Operator who will bundle your content with their phone (or present it on their pre-configured service.).
Usually right now, all this is still happening over WAP, but as the technologies spread, we will see much nicer Java clients or other things that make rich media possible.
You would put up the IMS content, possibly with a few extra episodes exclusive to the mobile channel. You can see that happening already for movie launches or game launches, where mobile content is exclusively produced. You can charge for this, even if it is at low amounts.
It is fairly easy these days, to also integrate your web community content with a mobile service, i.e. chat, profiles, etc. This wouldn't be your primary offering, but an extension of your total service. It will also introduce the content, who generally do not know about YT etc (which at least here would be a lot).
Some examples, would be a mobile based soap I saw produced for mobile and IM, one episode a day.
I see pricing here from 1.99 EUR to 5 EUR for something like a monthly subscription. The payment is low threshold as it is all done automatically through the Operator, so it's really just one click on the yes button. I can see this easily making 10-20k a month on a decent userbase (from experience).
Post by VanillaFlava on Oct 2, 2006 19:46:48 GMT -5
That is assuming they get the straight off the shelf deal.
Your numbers are assuming each view is a payout, which is unrealistic. Revver has a pay per click not a CPM (cost per thousand impressions) model.
CPC deals are bogus on these kind of ads (mind you from the provider perspective, from the advertiser perspective they are ultra sweet, as you are getting branding for free). Unless we see views in the region of millions, the clicks are only gonna pay for Steinfeld's outstanding parking tickets.
Here's a site with some interesting 'from the front' articles, regarding Revver, viral video and advertising:
Their assumption is that with market maturity (next 2-3 years?) the revenue per view will come in at 1-5 cent for content creators. Sounds just about right to me, assuming the ads will remain as non-intrusive. Interstitials will make much more (but are infinitely more annoying to users, hence less views).
So unless you are a top billing act, forget about ad revenue for your clips.
Last night I realized you can download Revver videos on to your computer really easily, so I went through and did it. As I went, I added up the views they've gotten. It's about 450,000.
About 450,000 Revver views, and supposedly Revver counts views by whether or not videos are watched to the end. With our estimated revenue rate of 1 cents per view (although I've never clicked on one of these ads) their revenue would be around $4,500 -- if they could sustain that level of interest for a year, it'd be a little over $50,000. Enough for a single film-maker who's not particularly greedy, but not enough to support much else. Still, it's more of a revenue stream than I initially expected. If they combined it with moderate merchandise sales (not sure what LG would sell or who would buy it... I can't really imagine wearing a lonelygirl15 t-shirt, I guess I might buy the LG Season 1 DVD) and the ad rate went up a bit, they'd actually be getting somewhere.
Who all would buy a Lonelygirl15 DVD? Assume it includes the entire series, "Creators" commentary, behind the scene's footage, outtakes, deleted scenes, interviews with the cast and crew. Maybe a featurette documentary about the emerging online video business.....uh, English, Spanish, and French subtitles. Photo gallery. Comes in three collectible cases, Bree, Daniel, and Purple Monkey. Maybe a fold-out mini poster. For sale through Amazon.com, for rent through Netflix. Priced new at, say, $24.99 U.S. Yeah, it's pricey, deal with it. You're a fan. For me, it does depend on how the story turns out. Assuming I like how they wrap it all up, I'd definitely buy one. Sort of a souvenir of this time in my life when I spent probably too much time following it, plus I'd be very interested in the director's commentary.
Last Edit: Oct 27, 2006 7:02:15 GMT -5 by Smashing
"Every true story has an anticlimax" - John Updike
The Motley Fool has another good story from Rick Munarriz, it's long so here's the operative bit -- payday for the IMS producer:
CNET's California Streaming By Rick Aristotle Munarriz (TMFBreakerRick) November 20, 2006
Yes, it sounds like Project Greenlight or the Fool-enriching AOL Greenhouse, which help seek out and finance aspiring filmmakers and webpreneurs respectively. That's pretty much what this will be. In a few months, Martin hopes to have the first five properties under contract. Helping fund investigative journalists and budget-strapped makers of online serials is the secret sauce in the video playbook at Webshots.
Winning directors will grant Webshots exclusivity, at least initially, in exchange for monetary and promotional help during the incubatory process. That is something that has been missing at YouTube, as some of the hits that site has birthed have moved on to sites that help monetize popular submissions. Lonelygirl15 and AskANinja turned to Revver.com's ad-sharing allure. Sam Has 7 Friends is relying on broader distribution through iTunes.