Comments on: Time Warner, big media and video sites

By: transduction

transduction — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 12:40:33 +0000

You\'re right Mark, and its sites like http://www.archaicdinosaurs.com, a site where you can Watch Free Anime shows and Cartoons, thats changing the way people view their entertainment.

By: girls basketball

girls basketball — Thu, 04 Jan 2007 00:14:39 +0000

Look at it from the most simplified standpoint: Google wants to buy traffic, buy eyeballs, and buy before a competitor does. Most likely, Youtube was talking to various media companies (i.e. Yahoo, et al), and once a company is in play, they become more attractive. In the same way Google started out as a search engine and then later figured out how to monetize that traffic (through pay-per-click ads), they want to buy Youtube’s traffic and figure out how to monetize it later. Good idea? The right execution? Time will tell. But they had the capital to do it, and this keeps the competition out of the picture. And, looking back at the Myspace acquisition, they wanted to be in on the deal.

By: basketball drills

basketball drills — Thu, 04 Jan 2007 00:13:50 +0000

Turning something like Youtube into a revenue generating site isn’t that out of the realm of possibility. They could easily sell low dollar “memberships”, or charge for downloading or accessing over a certain number of videos, or charge for a “premium” type membership. Aside for the legal and copyright issues, Google didn’t just fall into the success they’ve had. Not only do they have access to eyeballs, they can turn this into a profit center (or at least not such a cost center) without too much trouble I would think.

By: Tony

Tony — Wed, 20 Dec 2006 10:58:22 +0000

Perhaps MSFT will run up..

By: John

John — Sun, 12 Nov 2006 21:54:44 +0000

If you check 9:31 mark of the 4th quarter, Mavs/Suns game last week, you will see one of many terrible calls.

Ron Olesiak calls Dampier for 3 seconds, even though Dampier is barely in the paint for 2 seconds. Check the tape if you have it.

My point is simple. NBA officials, maybe because they have too much to look out for, are now simply assuming calls.

Why call 3 seconds if you didn't see a player in the paint for 3 seconds?

NBA officials are truly holding the game back right now. Casual fans might not care, but diehards notice it.

By: scott

scott — Fri, 20 Oct 2006 20:22:04 +0000

“Some people play fantasy sports. I like to play Fantasy Business.”

Someone needs to build that site!

By: RL

RL — Fri, 20 Oct 2006 00:36:54 +0000

The death of physical media is on the horizon. Storage capacity and bandwidth are increasing at rapid paces. Following Kryders law, well probably be able to store up to 200 HD movies on a portable media player in 10 years. Balancing the transition away from physical media is extremely important. Part of the process is experimenting to find out what delivery systems work.

For big media companies to sell content directly to consumers through their own sites is definitely a step in the right direction. However, they shouldnt miss out on the potential a market leading site like YouTube can offer. YouTube reaches a much wider target audience that can attract advertising. Creating a short term agreement with YouTube to share content is a good way to test this market. Media companies should start by offering products that havent faired as well in the traditional markets or that have run their course. Offer these videos in 4:3 ratio and embed ads for other products. Offer higher quality versions of the videos in wide screen on your own website. Have YouTube advertise these and other products you sell next to your videos. In addition, Google can add advertisements for products used in the videos or anything else they want (maybe similar shows from other media companies or TV ads). Create a new production arm that focuses on producing free videos for online distribution/advertising. If people want free media give it to them. Make this content as cheaply as possible and use it to market your other properties.

By: Robert

Robert — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 23:31:56 +0000

Why bother with YouTube? The solution for media companies should be to embrace Apple and its iTunes model. This is a proven model that has worked for the music industry. The music industry has faced the same copyright infringement issues. iTunes has been successful selling music even when it can be illegally downloaded for free.

YouTube was created for user generated video, it is not modeled on selling commercialized video. Signing deals with YouTube for an unproven model doesnt make sense. Giving away content for free is really going to upset Walmart and Target who depend on DVD sales.

By: behindthepen

behindthepen — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:16:48 +0000

Here’s another twist … from the NYT on 10/19: “Three of the four major music companies Vivendis Universal Music Group, Sony and Bertelsmanns jointly owned Sony BMG Music Entertainment, and the Warner Music Group each quietly negotiated to take small stakes in YouTube as part of video- and music-licensing deals they struck shortly before the sale, people involved in the talks said yesterday. The music companies collectively stand to receive as much as $50 million from these arrangements, these people said.”

Now obvisouly, $50 million, or even $100 million, isn’t enough to compensate for the destruction of a multi-billion dollar business. But clearly GoogTube and the content players are working together. That’s pretty refreshing to me.

By: maddux sports

maddux sports — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 09:05:01 +0000

I don’t really have anything more to add but I have enjoyed reading the frenzy going on surrounding this popular topic of the moment.