Lifecasting: The New Broadcasting Platform

At the Streaming Media East show on Wednesday May 21st, community social media guru Chris Brogan will be leading a session entitled "Lifecasting: The New Broadcasting Platform". In the early days of television, live was the second choice, because of potential pitfalls, cost of production, and a host of other problems. And yet, in the world of Internet video, lifecasting—using Internet video to share moments of our lives or to broadcast personal events and happenings—is the new hot thing.

With platforms like Kyte.tv, Zannel, Mogulus, Stickcam, and many others now available, lots of new options and opportunities exist. Come see some of the hot and upcoming mobile lifecasting options in action and learn if lifecasting will become just a fad or the next big thing.

Confirmed speakers include:

• Moderator: Chris Brogan, VP, Strategy and Technology, CrossTechMedia, co-founder, PodCamp
• Scott Monty, Consigliere, crayon
• Sarah Austin, Founder, Pop17.com
• Brad Hunstable, Founder, Business Development, Ustream.tv

Have a topic or question for any of the speakers you want to see addressed? Submit it in the comments section and we'll add it to the Q&A portion of the session.

Registration is still open and you can see all the various pricing packages, including a one-day ticket on our website. Six years since we took over the StreamingMedia.com business and we've still managed to keep the conference very affordable for everyone to attend. A full two-day conference ticket is only $895.

Majority Of Independent Content Producers Will Never Make Money

With all the talk of online video advertising and the projections people are making, one of the biggest downsides to it is that just about every independent content producer thinks they should be making money. But the reality it, most of them are not making any money today and never will, even year's from now when there are more eyeballs online.

Monetization is now the word that seems to be used in every discussion and in every article, yet rarely do we hear or read about any content producers who are making money from their content. We know of the success that some major broadcasters and those with very unique brands and content like MLB are having, but aside from those, there are very few content creators making any money.

One of the biggest reasons for this is that much of the content on the web today stinks. Not all content, but much of it is really bad, poorly produced and quite frankly, will never make any money no matter how much this industry grows. Content creators think that just because they can create content it must be worth something. When I speak to content creators I use the analogy of TV content. Lots and lots of shows are produced for TV yet many never make it. Only a small fraction of content on TV lasts and makes the networks any money. Now I know many will say that does not apply since the costs for TV style production is so much different than content produced for online, but the principle is still the same. Not all content is something people want to watch, let alone pay for.

Having a discussion with a content producer earlier in the week they said, "Media reviews of our site and customer feedback is very positive. Everyone thinks the idea is wonderful and they love the quality of the videos. We give website visitors two free views of the videos of their choice and then prompt them to sign up for a subscription. However, when it comes time to haul out the credit card to purchase a subscription the enthusiasm wanes."

The questions we need to be addressing are is the subscription-based approach working for anyone, or is sponsorship/ad-supported the only potential option for generating a reasonable ROI? Is the ad-supported model generating revenue for small producers who don't have tens of thousands of viewers per month? Does this revenue amount to anything more than pocket change? Must the small producer partner with a platform provider, e.g., Brightcove, in order to have a chance of success, or is it feasible to "roll your own" website realizing that most small players don't have ad sales staffs and experience in selling ads?

In the long run, the small content producer is still going to struggle to make any money from their content. Viral marketing, syndication and other forms of promotion can help, but not for the majority of those making video. Putting all of the business models aside I still think the biggest problem facing the industry is that there is not enough quality content on the web today.

The comments section is open and I'm sure many have their own take on the subject, so feel free to get the conversation going.

Conference Session Preview: Streaming Media East Show Agenda

I've been a little slow in blogging as of late as I'm hard at work on finalizing the advance program for the Streaming Media East show taking place in May. We will have 36 sessions at the show and the first third are now confirmed with moderators.

This year I have decided to use the blog to post the conference agenda before the advance program is even printed so everyone can see the kinds of topics and subjects that are going to be discussed and the kind of demos that will be shown. Please keep in mind, this is just the first 1/3 of the program, there is a lot more to come.

If you see a session in particular you are interested in possibly speaking on you can send in a speaking request, but since the deadline passed more than two weeks ago, those who sent in speaking requests on time get first priority.

Effective Business Models For Short-form Video Marketing
Some advertisers see user-generated video sites as a free way to distribute their message, however this has rapidly evolved into a significant paid business, where sites charge based on video placement and search keywords. Learn the relative ROI of going to a major site (i.e. YouTube) vs. a smaller site (i.e. Metacafe) vs. a plethora of tiny sites. Learn what methods are successful for getting viewers and the importance of content vs. placement. This panel will discuss and show video examples of effective business models for both advertisers and publishers.

LifeCasting: How Fast and How Real Can We Get?
How did lifecasting videos get so hot? In the early days of television, live was the second choice, because of potential pitfalls, cost of production and a host of other problems. And yet, in the world of Internet video, lifecasting - using Internet video to share moments of our lives or to broadcast events and happenings - is the new hot thing. With platforms like Kyte.tv, Zannel, Mogulus, Stickcam and many others now available on the market, lots of new options and opportunities exist. Come see some of the hot and upcoming mobile lifecasting options in action and discuss is lifecasting will be become just a fad or the next big thing.

Best Practices in Enterprise Streaming for Communications and Learning
Use of online video in the enterprise has evolved well beyond the special occasion of rudimentary talking head videos that characterized early adoption. Today, innovative organizations take a holistic view of all their online communications, seeking to extract as much value as possible from any infrastructure that involves video. Whether webcasting executive briefings across the globe, or capturing and archiving rich media presentations for training, marketing, sales, and compliance, a growing number of organizations are capitalizing on the ability of Web 2.0 technologies. This session will show firsthand examples from Fortune 500 organizations of best practices in integrated online video for communications and learning.

CDN Pricing: The Going Rate For Video Delivery
With more CDN players in the market than ever before, trying to figure out what you should pay for delivering video can still be quite complex. This presentation will offer real pricing numbers from large, globally focused content delivery networks and show you the average going rate when you outsource delivery to a third party. The session will also cover some of the variables that determine the final price, how you should accurately compare the delivery services of one CDN to another and gives you a list of providers in the market today.

Monetizing And Aggregating Niche Video Content
This panel will discuss the new ways content owners and site developers are aggregating content and distributing it on the 2.0 web. We will give examples of ways to develop niche vertical sites without having to hire tons of new personnel and discuss how to reach audiences on social networking sites like Facebook. Learn about some of the new emerging platforms for niche video distribution and learn best practices of ways to increase your changes of making money with your content.

Focus Group: Young People's Attitudes Towards Online Video
This special session, a panel of high school and college students will discuss their online video consumption habits. Learn what types of online video content they like, what sites they get their content from, the devices they are playing it back on and how they interact with video advertising. Find out what their perspective is on pay media, portable content and what they think the future holds for the next generation of viewers on the web. Bring your own questions for a lively Q&A session with the students at the end of the session.

Live Broadcasting Over Mobile And WiFi Networks
While big media tests the waters of mobile broadcasting, many web video producers are already out there doing it live from the street, with a cell phone. Others are joining in and experimenting with two-way broadcasts via streaming video over cellphone networks and via WiFi, wherever they are. Viewers can chat while the broadcast is going on and affect and sometimes even direct the coverage of the content being produced. Come to this session to hear Steve Garfield talk with other pioneers in the live broadcasting space about their experiences on the forefront of this new technology for sharing their stories over the web.

The H.264 Convergence
Over the past year, more and more streaming media players are utilizing H.264 and providing support for the technology. Adobe's recent support for H.264 in their Flash player has sparked industry discussions amongst major broadcasters and online video producers about the role H.264 will play. This session will explain why H.264 is getting so much exposure, what recent announcements have put it into the spotlight and whether it can really be the one codec that the industry can all converge on. Attendees will also see real-world examples of sites and services that are utilizing H.264 today.

User-Generated Video in Education
The online video revolution has been embraced by students, teachers, instructors and researchers, many of whom are producing video for class assignments, teaching purposes and other uses. Learn what kind of content is being produced, where is it being posted and how user-generated content fits into the overall strategy of educational institutions. This panel of experienced educational media professionals will discuss the many ways your school, college or university can maximize the value of your user-generated video, and how you can assist faculty and students in making it better.

How Old Media Is Embracing Online Video and New Media
Led by the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences, this session will discuss how converging media technologies are redefining traditional distribution methods; how interactive and on-demand services are changing and how entertainment and news video is being consumed. Come hear from some of the leading publishers, broadcasters and advertisers about the impact that video and new media is having upon their business models.

Codec Comparison: VP6, H.264 and Windows Media
Choosing the right codec involves lots of factors, including quality, player install base, costs, and server related features. This session will compare the video quality of the big three codecs; VP6, H.264 and Windows Media. It will also include a comparison of the primary H.264 codecs including Apple, Sorenson, Main Concept and Dicas. The session will present attendees with the latest published penetration figures for the H.264 compatible Flash 9 player and Microsoft's Silverlight player and provide usage statistics among major broadcasters and corporations. Attendees will also learn how to compare relevant server and player related features, and costs associated with adapting and using each platform.

Delivering Media For Microsoft Silverlight With Windows Server 2008
This session will cover how to take advantage of the new Silverlight media serving features in Windows Server 2008. Attendees will learn about the new capabilities of IIS7 Media Pack including bit-rate throttling and playlist options for progressive download content. The session will also demonstrate the enhanced capabilities in Windows Media Services 2008, including scalability doubling and appliance-like cache/proxy deployment for edge networks specific to streaming.

Who Wants To Moderate A Session About Lifecasting: Kyte.tv, Justin.tv, Zannel and Seesmic?

I'm looking for an individual who covers the lifecasting segment of the industry and has been keeping a close eye on companies like Kyte.tv, Justin.tv, Zannel and Seesmic. I plan to have a session about this topic at the next Streaming Media East show in May in NYC and am looking for a moderator who wants to organize and lead this session.

The ideal candidate would be someone who is writing about these companies in the market, has a blog of their own, or has experience in what is required as a moderator to produce a quality session. If you're interested, please send me an e-mail along with a brief description of why this is a fit for you.

Brightcove's Consumer Upload Service Cancellation Overblown By Many

Last week, Brightcove announced via an e-mail to users that it was shutting down its consumer upload service at their Brightcove.TV destination. Many of the blogs that covered the announcement pretty much agreed that Brightcove should not have offered the service to begin with and felt that it didn't align well with their core service offering around professionally produced content; which is something I agree with. But much of what posts about Brightcove on WebTVwire, InsideOnlineVideo and Mashable talk about I completely disagree with. (note: I can read the InsideOnlineVideo article in Google Reader, but the link to it on their website is broken, hence why I don't link to it)

For starters, too many of them compare the Brightcove.TV service to YouTube or wanting to compete with YouTube which was never Brightcove's intention. Anyone who looks at the content on Brightcove.TV could easily see that it was not the same type of content shown on YouTube. Yes, there was some overlap, but not much. Most of it was still relatively well produced content, something YouTube isn't. And as the story on Mashable pointed out, Brightcove's cost to run such a destination site was probably extremely low since they were simply re-purposing the platform they already had in place. It's not like they re-invented the wheel and dedicated a lot of internal resources to the offering.

That being said, I disagree with the Mashable article as it portrays Brightcove as a company being in trouble and not being focused with it's offering. Shutting down Brightcove.TV does not put the company in jeopardy. It's focus from day one has always been about it's platform, their tools, syndication and advertising. The fact it used those tools to showcase consumer content in addition to professional content is not a big stretch. Yes, the consumer side is probably not a viable business model today, but if it costs them next to nothing to offer it, gets branding for the company name and Brightcove is smart enough to stop the offering as soon as they saw it didn't make sense, how does that put them in jeopardy? Mashable says management has problems but the fact they shut it down only a little while after it came to market, shows to me that management understands the market opportunity and moved quickly to address it. In my eyes, there would be problems with management if they waited years to shut it down all the meanwhile saying how great it is working out, like many companies in this industry do.

The WebTVwire article also questions the long-term success of Brightcove as a company and says, "Whether the company has a shot a succeeding now is still a question that is up in the air." True, but that can be said of any company, but I don't see how shutting down Brightcove.TV now creates more doubt. Yes, Brightcove has raised over $80 million and if we know how much revenue they were doing I'm sure their evaluation multiple would be quite high, but Brightcove is signing up a lot of new customer and content companies we have all heard of. They have large customers and they are getting more of them. While we don't know the average price they are paying, Brightcove had 800 customers at the end of 2006. Today, Brigthcove says they have over 4,000. No, customer count does not help us in trying to figure out revenue, but look at how many companies in the industry won't say anything about how many customers they have. At least it's one metric we can use to show Brightcove's growth.

As for the Brightcove service itself, options vary on how Brightcove's solution stacks up in the market. The post about Brightcove at InsideOnlineVideo says, "Their platform is a commodity, and they’re about to kill their own community. We may as well relegate Brightcove to the deadpool." The Mashable article likes Brightcove's platform and says "...they have the absolute most complex and cool back-end for their video management system that allows for customization of how your videos display. Personally, of the solutions I have used and looked at, I think Brightcove has the most robust tools and features in the market, however I don't use the advertising component of the platform so I can't speak to that functionality.

Some say that others have better tools than Brightcove and I'd love to see in the comments section who readers feel those companies are. Who do you compare to Brightcove when it comes to their platform?

For me, the bottom line is that more and more sites I visit are using Brightcove and years later, they are still focused on their core offering, that being their platform. I know what they do, what they offer and what the value is to a content owner. That is a lot more than I can say about many companies in this space who's service offering is confusing, complex or every changing. Is Brightcove guaranteed to make it in this space? No. No one is guaranteed anymore. But the fact that many companies have made acquisition offers for Brightcove and feel they have a platform worth owning also tells me that their business is not "shaky" or "in trouble" as some bloggers suggest.

Best Buy Launches Online Video Sharing Service, Takes Equity Stake In Mydeo

Today, Best buy announced the launch of their new fee based solution for consumers to store and share videos on the web. The solution is powered by Mydeo, a UK based company that has been offering online tools for the sharing of user-generated content for a few years. Best Buy has also taken a minority, equity stake in Mydeo, the terms of which were not disclosed.

Plans for the new Best Buy service start at about $7 a month and include 100 minutes of video hosting and video lengths up to 30 minutes each. The service will be merchandised online and in Best Buy’s retail stores and is already live on the web at: bestbuy.mydeo.com

Consumer Generated Video Sites: Can They Be Monetized?

That's the question we're looking to answer at the Streaming Media West show next week with a panel entitled "Consumer Generated Video Sites: Can They Be Monetized?"

We've got a great lineup of speakers including:

• Dan Rayburn, Executive Vice President, StreamingMedia.com (moderator)
• Chris Carvalho, Director of Business Development, Lucasfilm
• Joel Sanders, Sr. Director of Site and Operations, AtomFilms, MTV Networks
• David Eckoff, VP, New Product Development and Innovation, Turner Broadcasting
• Steve Rosenbaum, CEO and Founder, Magnify.net

With nearly a hundred video portals or service offerings all based on user-generated video, and more launching each day, can any of them survive? What business models need to be put in place for these companies to make it in the long run? Will advertising ever provide the revenue they need or even help them cover their bandwidth bills? With so many sites that seemingly do all the same thing, how will these sites distinguish themselves from one another? Come hear directly from some of these UGC sites and learn what they are doing to try and lead the charge to profitability.

It's not too late to register. While the early registration discount period has now passed, if you have not yet registered and want a discount code, let me know.

Google-YouTube: Twelve Months Later, Advertising Just Getting Started

It's been a year since Google acquired YouTube and in that time, the promise of YouTube developing and rolling out a successful video advertising product is only just starting to get off the ground. It's going to be a long time until there is enough data in the market to suggest if the model will be successful, and YouTube has a long way to go before we find out of it can really generate any serious ad revenue from their content.

Paul LaMonica over at CNNMoney.com has a good in-depth article about the hurdles that YouTube faces one year later with more niche competitors, the Viacom lawsuit, the big media companies entering the space (Hulu) and the problem with getting advertisers to spend money around UGC content.

OMMA NYC Show: Speakers Wanted: Clip/Mash-Up Revolution Panel

I'll be moderating a session at Mediapost's OMMA show in NYC on Sept. 25th entitled "Access and Activism: Harnessing Video Distribution and the Clip/Mash-Up Revolution". It's being put together last minute so I've got the potential to add one or two last minute speakers to the round table panel. In particular I'm looking for content owners and/or agencies who can talk to the implications for content owners and producers to adapt to the Web 2.0 world of viewer control. If you're interested in speaking, contact me now! Spots will be gone in a day or two.

In addition, if you know of someone who you think would make a good speaker for this panel and can introduce me to them, I'll be happy to get you a free pass to the event.

Session Details:
Tuesday, Sept. 25th. 12pm-12:45pm

Access and Activism: Harnessing Video Distribution and the Clip/Mash-Up Revolution
How should content owners - used to placing tight controls on their content - adapt to the Web2.0 world of viewer control?  With digital distribution of top-tier video content expanding and new services and tools evolving to let viewers capture, clip and mash content - what are the implications for content owners and producers?  How "fluid" should the content economy become and what challenges (if any) does that pose for ad-based monetization?  Join a panel of programmers, distribution enablers, and agency executives to initiate a discussion of the coming age of "content malleability."

YouTube's Problem Is Not Advertising, Its Getting The Videos To Play

For all the talk of YouTube's new advertising model and the number of eyeballs they have, the biggest problem facing YouTube is the fact that half the time, their videos don't even play back properly. Why can't YouTube get poor quality, short-form videos to play back without all of the wait, buffering, and starts and stops that users are experiencing? I first wrote about this back in February with a post entitled "Is Google Having Problems Delivering YouTube Videos?" and since then it has gotten far worse.

Last week, I saw that my February post about the poor YouTube playback experience had quickly become the number one post on my blog that people were finding via Google. TypePad shows me the phrases that people are putting into Google and it's phrases like, "you tube video wont load", "slow youtube videos", "youtube video loading" and "can't load you tube" amongst others.

What is the problem here? This is not an infrastructure problem. Google is not lacking in technical expertise, capital, or the resources to make these videos work. If smaller companies can get high-quality, long-from content to work without these playback problems, then what is Google's excuse? They have no business model today for YouTube, have been working on their "advertising plan" forever yet they can't even get the basics to work.

When it comes to YouTube's advertising strategy, they have a major flaw. In order for their advertising strategy to work, it requires users to actually be able to view the videos. YouTube is the most overrated, over hyped company ever in this industry.

Bloggers Need To Cover More Than Just YouTube And UGC Companies

With all that is going on in the online video world today, why is it that most of the blogs and news sites only seem to focus on YouTube or user generated content topics? This week is typical of most. Over the past four days, I have read about 450 posts from 54 sites that I have in my RSS reader. Of those 450, nearly 60% of them are about YouTube, user generated content, video and social networking sites and topics all pertaining to user generated content in some form.

What about all of the other exciting subjects pertaining to the online video world? Why aren't more bloggers talking about video in other markets like the enterprise, broadcast, mobile and education markets? Or what about the infrastructure side of the business. Servers, encoders, formats and tools. Yes, some cover these subjects but literally just a handful. If user generated content sites did not exist, I really wonder if a lot of these bloggers and news sites would have anything to talk about?

Am I the only one who is tired of reading a few dozen stories a day about YouTube and other UGC sites that to date, have shown no successful business models? Yes, I understand the role UGC will play in our industry and I understand the excitement around these tools that enable anyone to get video online. But our industry has been around for the past 14 years now and user generated sites have been around for only a few. There was an entire industry and business before the UGC sites were even around, but you wouldn't know of it the way many of these sites only talk about YouTube.

Google And I Agree On One Thing: TV Is Not Dead

It's good to see that I am not the only one who thinks people are crazy when they say that TV is dead. TV is not dead. People kept telling me they don't watch TV anymore and only use their computer for video. What are they watching? Nearly every single show I watch is not available on the Internet today, in any form. TV is the only place I can see it. Yes, other means of distribution are going to affect the TV platform, but people are not abandoning the TV in favor of video online like people make it sound.

And to date, those creating content for the web are not creating the type of content that I personally want to watch. And even if they were, can I get it in HD? No. Can I watch it on a large screen? No. Can I easily watch it on my computer with someone else? No. When I travel and am in a hotel, is there a computer there? No. Can I TiVo it? No. Can the Internet scale like TV? No. The TV and the PC (or Mac in my case) are not the same platforms, showcasing the same content, or providing the same kind of experience.

An article in Business Week recently said, "when the line between the TV and Internet will blur..." and it's a comment you hear all the time. The line will never blur between them. They offer different experiences, on different devices, one via a closed network, one open. Yes, they will have some cross over, but they will never "blur". No one will even confuse their PC for their TV or vise versa.

And it's good to see that Google agrees. Vincent Dureau, head of TV technology for Google in a keynote address at the Internet Television Technology Conference this week said that, "on the surface it looks like TV is dead, but I believe there is actually a bright future for television." EETimes.com has details of the  keynote here. Some of their coverage said: Every minute six hours of video is uploaded to Google's YouTube service. What's more, "every day 95 percent of the YouTube library is watched at least once," Dureau said. That implies there is a broad, but fragmented audience for a wide variety of content. "You need to make the long tail of this content available, and the tail is very long," he said.

But I do disagree with Dureau when he says that the biggest problem right now is that users can't find the content they want to watch on the Internet and it's no surprise he says that search is the way to solve this problem. For me, it's not trying to find the content online that's the problem. The problem is that the content does not exist online. And telling me that there might be other content that is "similar" to the content I am looking for is not an answer.

If I like to watch MacGyver, which I do, then I want to see MacGyver shows online and not something that someone created that may be similar to it. I want to see that specific show. So search is not going to help me there. The Internet is not yet ready for TV as we know it and in my eyes, there is no such thing as "Internet TV" even though it is a phrase widely used in the industry.

Flash Based Bubble Guru Product Makes Adding Video To Websites Easy

If you are looking to put video on your website and have content that will work in a small window, like a talking head, you should check out Bubble Guru. This neat little application, based on the Flash plugin, allows you to record video, set options, add tags and then put the video on your website or blog all without having to be a programmer. The coolest function of the video is that it's in a bubble that hovers on your site and moves with you as you scroll down the page. It's hard to explain but you can see a demo right on the home page of their website.

The product really stresses how easy the overall process is in getting personalized video messages on a site and is really going after the non-technical folks. It is ideal for those who would like to quickly place video messages on their site to engage their visitors, but either don't have the technical knowledge to accomplish this in some other method, and/or don't want to have to redesign their web page to make room for videos on their page.

I haven't had time to do a full review of the product yet, but from what I have seen so far, it is clearly a neat and affordable tool for the marketers, public relations professionals and small and medium sized business owners. If anyone reviews the product in detail, please feel free to leave some comments here on what you think of it.

YouTube Does NOT Equal 10% Of All Traffic On The Internet

Last week, I saw a lot of bloggers and news sites talking about a press release put out by Ellacoya Networks, a communications equipment company, that says YouTube accounts for nearly 10% of all traffic on the Internet. Yet, I didn't notice any bloggers who questioned the report or the data in it. The idea that any company would put out a report that says "YouTube alone comprises approximately 20% of all HTTP traffic, or nearly 10% of all traffic on the Internet" without data to back up such a claim, is absurd.

Looking at the details they announced it says they "released findings based on usage data of approximately one million broadband subscribers in North America". So how does 1 million subscribers in only North America account for all traffic on the Internet when the Internet is global?

Plus, Ellacoya Networks can't even take the data it has and present it properly. It says, "Breaking down application types within HTTP, the data reveals that traditional Web page downloads represent 45% of all Web traffic. Streaming video represents 36% and streaming audio 5% of all HTTP traffic." Say what? If is is "streaming video" like you say, then how can it be HTTP based? Which one is it? Streaming or HTTP?

They use the term streaming and download in the same phrase twice in the four paragraph release. "Presently, as a result of streaming audio and video in Web downloads, HTTP is approximately 46% of all traffic on the network." Are you talking progressive downloads or streaming?

And they end the press release with a quote that includes them saying, "The way people use the Internet is changing rapidly - from browsing to real-time streaming. We expect to see new applications over the next year that will accelerate this trend." That may be, but you didn't report on anything that was "real-time streaming" based.

The news sites and bloggers should be doing a better job of questioning data like this and not just posting highlights of a press release just so they have another blog post for the day.

User Generated Video Bubble Needs To Pop, And Soon

The entire market for user generated content, in particular video, has just gotten completely out of hand. I must get 2-3 releases a week now from new UGC sites that are launching, yet none of them say anything about their business models. They all talk to how their player is different, their video looks better, their search capability is improved or some other aspect of the user experience.

What about the business model? Where is it? By my last count, there were over 60 UGC sites on the web that I am tracking, the majority of which I have no idea how one differs from the other. Yes, some of them are more focused than others and provide content for just one vertical like comedy, or independent films, but still, there are too many of them. It is only a matter of time before this UGC bubble bursts and these sits consolidate or disappear completely.

Mediaweek published an article yesterday about ManiaTV and how they are shifting their business model away from UGC to focus solely on original content. Will it help? Too early to know, but I give ManiaTV credit for realizing that much of UGC is purely hype. ManiaTV’s chief marketing officer Peter Clemente said it best in the Mediaweek article, "Hype doesn’t necessarily equate to profitability."

User Generated Video Sites Veoh and Kyte.tv Both Receive Funding

In more funding news this week, Veoh and Kyte.tv both announced investment deals.

Veoh raised $26 million in a series C funding led by Goldman Sachs and existing shareholders Spark Capital and Shelter Capital Partners. For Veoh, this gives them a combined total of just over $41 million raised to date, by far the largest of any of the user generated video sharing sites. That's a lot of money for a site that shares videos and I know I speak for many in the industry when I say that I can't wait to see how they will monetize this type of content and show investors a return on their money.

Kyte.tv, a new company on my radar which launched its website in May, said on Tuesday it had received funding from the investment arm of Nokia. Kyte.tv which aims to take the video sharing model on the Internet over to the handset, did not disclose the size of the investment. Kyte also lists as investors Swisscom and Niklas Zannstrom, who started Web phone service Skype.

eBay To Use More User Generated Video, Amazon.com and Others Need To Follow Suit

Thanks to Rod Bacon over at Media Publisher for giving me the heads up about eBay making an announcement last week about their planned use for expanding user-generated video functionality on their website. In conjunction with an announcement by Onstream Media, eBay sellers now have the ability to easily place their own embedded videos in any listing on every category of eBay. Options include a "Show and Tell" feature which is a talking image gallery for use on all eBay listings and an "About Me" video feature which enables sellers to create a short, :30 to :60 second spot about themselves which eBay hopes will further establish trust and credibility. In addition, eBay is also running some user-generated video submission contests tying into the Transformers movie premiere in July.

I always felt sites like eBay, Monster.com, Amazon.com and others are behind the curve when it comes to video. Why can't I see a video of an item on eBay instead of just a picture? Why can't I see a video resume on Monster.com instead of reading a word document? (Only Monster's India website has the option, announced two days ago) And why doesn't Amazon.com allow companies to upload videos of the product they are selling, so we can see how it actually works before we buy it.

As much as we talk about video having mass-market adoption, some of the biggest sites on the web, that generate the most revenue, hardly use video at all.

Video Player Functionality: Are Companies Putting Functionality Over Content?

About a week ago, Break.com launched a new video player with some interesting capabilities that I have not seen on many other sites. These user controlled capabilities include TV-style picture controls that let you change brightness and colors of the video, a click and drag option to make the video window any size you want, electronic picture guide within the player and some other additional functionality. You can see a demo of the new player here.

While additional player functionality and customizable options are always cool to have, my real question for Break.com was how this would translate into additional revenue for the company. As anyone who knows me has heard me say over and over again, "technology means nothing unless it moves your business forward". The answers I got back from Break.com on how this would help their business makes sense, but I think in some part, many sites are focusing too much time on their player and its controls instead of the content being shown in the player itself.

For Break.com they said the new player functionality is important as they are using it to hopefully help drive more consumption. When someone e-mails a link to a video, Break.com is hoping that the enhanced player will keep the user at the site and turn that visit into multiple video views, which for them equals more advertising dollars. Allowing the user to browser other videos while continuing to watch the current channel, hence the electronic picture guide option, also is a very important tactic for them and is what drove the creation of their guide.

Break.com also feels that to retain users, they need to have a differeniation in the market for their player. They say as the technology of web video delivery becomes increasingly commoditized, the barriers to entry have gotten lower. In light of that, creating a differentiated, hard-to-duplicate suite of features that users want becomes important to them. In their research, the one thing users value most is control over the playback experience... every facet of it, hence the TV-style controls with resizing, slow-motion, brightness, etc... Break.com also said that being focused on the 18-35 male demo has distinguished them to date, and they feel that in order to defend and grow within that demo requires a differentiated and superior playback experience. Some of Break.com's members would agree and some wouldn't. Based on the feedback to the new Break.com player, it looks pretty even with half of the comments saying they like the new player and the other half saying the older player was just fine. A few commented that the volume and assortment of video content should be the focus, not the player.

Break.com is like most sites when it comes to the functionality of their player, constantly trying to improve on the user experience and give that user as much control as possible. However, I think users are more focused on the type and quality of the content rather than the player. We have seen before that consumers are looking for specific video content and are searching for content based on interest, not based on which site has the best player. I think the content has to drive the technology, not the other way around. Having a lot of control over the video playback is nice, but I'd rather go to a site that has the content I want and has fewer player controls.

For me, I just want a player that has volume and pause options. Even full-screen is a waste as far as I am concerned unless the video is encoded at 500Kbps or more, otherwise it's just too pixelated. Yes, TV style controls may be nice, but I don't think I've ever changed the contrast on my TV at home, let alone via videos on the web.

Blip.tv and EyeWonder Both Receive Funding

And the funding deals just keep on coming. Yesterday, Blip.tv and EyeWonder both announced they had received a round of financing.

Blip.tv, best known for sharing advertising revenue 50/50 with content creators, announced yesterday that they have closed a second round, amount not disclosed, led by Ambient Sound Investments (ASI), the venture capital fund established by the four founding engineers of Skype. Blip.tv plans to use the money to develop and offer new advertising options and extend their content distribution network to reach users on multiple devices.

Also yesterday, EyeWonder announced they had received a round of funding from BIA Digital Partners, a private investment firm focusing on mid-to-later stage companies. The amount was not disclosed. EyeWonder plans to use the money to expand in the U.S and abroad.

Deutsche Bank Has It Wrong: Apple TV Will Not Cannibalize a Good Chunk of the DVD Market

Why is it that every time a new means of distributing video content comes out, analysts always immediately predict that it will eat into the current way of doing things? From an article on Yahoo!, "Apple will cannibalize a good chunk of the U.S. $26-billion DVD player market in the next several years, according to Deutsche Bank. One of the primary drivers of this change will be the availability of YouTube content on Apple TV."

Seriously, this is just getting ridiculous. If you want to have the opinion that online video will eat into DVD sales, that's one thing. But to say the reason Apple TV will do so is because of the availability of user-generated content, well now you're not even comparing Apples to Apples. (no pun intended)

You can't compare content on YouTube with professionally produced content on DVDs. And you certainly can't compare downloading content to your computer and having to transfer it to a device connected to your TV with that of having a portable DVD disc with content. Even online video has not eaten into DVD sales and  online video on multiple devices has way more market share than Apple TV ever will. These analysts are just getting carried away.

 

YouTube Content Coming To Apple TV, Changes Nothing

Yesterday, Apple announced that they will be making YouTube content available on the Apple TV in mid-June. In the initial beginning, only select content will be available with the entire YouTube catalog available by year's end. While some seem to think this is a big deal, it changes nothing in the way of either companies business.

Some have predicted that this is now the first real integration of web video and the TV but I beg to differ. Is there any business model behind it? No. Will Apple they sell more Apple TV's now? No. Does this give YouTube some sort of way of monetizing their content? No. Yes, YouTube will get some more viewers to select pieces of videos but the lack of traffic to YouTube is not what's stopping them from creating a revenue stream from their traffic. The only reason Apple and YouTube did this deal is is because they could. It's does nothing to change the dynamics of the business models or the industry.

This deal also highlights the lack of standards in the market as all of the YouTube content currently in the Flash format is going to have to be transcoded to be able to play back on Apple TV since the Flash videos would look bad on a TV screen. And if YouTube is going to make available however many tens of millions of clips they have, we're talking about a lot of work to do so. No, it's not rocket science, but it's not like YouTube can easily just re-purpose what they have. There is a direct cost to having to transcode millions and millions of clips to another format, not matter how big you are.

Am I the only one that is getting tired of hearing about YouTube? Ok, I get it YouTube, you're really cool and you got bought by Google. But what about a business model? How about discussing what your video advertising strategy is going to be? You have been saying for the past two years that you are "experimenting" with advertising models. Less talk, more action.

YouTube's Chad Hurley Writes Lame Article In Forbes

This week, Forbes published an article written by Chad Hurley on it's website. I don't know if the article also appears in print but I imagine it does since on the website it says it's published date is three days from now.

I expect Forbes to publish a better article than this. Chad spends the entire time talking about how YouTube allows new talent to be discovered and gives people the ability to get in front of a lot of eyeballs and basically just tells us all how great YouTube is. Come on. We all know that YouTube allows new talent to be discovered and allows users to get eyeballs to their videos that normally no one would ever see. Is that the best thing that you can write about?

What about writing an article that explains how you plan to monetize YouTube? Or maybe some details on how the revenue sharing will work for video advertising you plan on rolling out this summer? Why not tell us what it's been like integrating YouTube into the Google infrastructure? Or better yet, talk about when you plan on rolling out your content filtering technology and what that will entail.

There are so many things about YouTube and Google that people want to know about and probably need to know about that could have been discussed in detail in this article. But instead we just get another piece about how great YouTube is. Disappointing.

Motionbox, VideoEgg, Veotag & Magnify.net To Speak On UGC At The Streaming Media East Show

We have some great sessions at the Streaming Media East show, May 14-16 in NYC talking about user generated content. One of the sessions on May 15th is entitled "User-Generated Content Tools".

Moderated by Steve Bryant, Associate Editor of eWEEK and Hollywood Reporter blogger, this session covers how with more than 50 user generated content sites available on the Web today, what tools are currently being offered and used by consumers for content generation? Learn what tools consumers want, how they manage content today and what the future holds for making consumer-generated content even easier to create, upload, and deliver. The panelists include:

• Chris O'Brien, CEO and Co-Founder, Motionbox
• Matt Sanchez, CEO and Co-Founder, VideoEgg
• Steve Rosenbaum, CEO and Founder, Magnify.net
• Scott Rhodes, CEO, Veotag

Register for the show and see firsthand presentations from some of the leading companies offering tools in this niche vertical. Are there any topics or points would you like to see discussed at this session? If so, please include them in the comments section.

NBC Teams Up With News Corp., AOL and Others to Form Video Site To Rival YouTube

NBC Universal and News Corp. announced today that they are joining forces to launch a new video portal this summer enabling them to better control their programming and give YouTube some competition. It's about time. What's taken these major content owners so long?

I like this deal for two major reasons. One, this new video portal will have real syndication in place since they are teaming up with Yahoo, Time Warner Inc.'s AOL, Microsoft Corp.'s MSN, and MySpace as their initial distribution partners. In addition, they are going to focus on producing professional looking content as opposed to most of the junk you see on YouTube. Some have said this new video portal can't be compared to YouTube since YouTube is all about allowing users to upload their own videos and the new NBC Universal and News Corp. portal has not yet defined what roll user generated content will play.

It's hard to know how much of YouTube's traffic comes from user generated video or from TV produced content, but we know that a vast majority of traffic comes from TV content. I mean, how many jackass style videos can you really watch each day?

For me, the outstanding questions about this deal are:

• How will this new NBC Universal and News Corp. portal distribute content? Will they use a firm like Brightcove or try and keep most of the technology in-house? If they don't have a user generated function, then all they are doing is delivering video which they can easily do. But if they need to have transcoding and other functionality, my guess is they will partner with someone so that they enter the market faster.
• What will be the role of user generated video in the new portal?
• How many other content providers will jump on board with NBC Universal and News Corp. to add their content to this new portal? If it is successful when it launches, many other content owners will quickly want to join.

It seems every time there is a big deal announced people always seem to call it a "game changer" even when the new offering has not yet launched. In most cases, I think it's a bunch of hype and they use the term simply to create drama, but in this case, I think this announcement really does have the potential to change the economics for some content owners.

18 Reasons Why Google And YouTube Are Guilty Of Copyright Infringement

Steve Bryant who is moderating a user generated content panel at Streaming Media East in May has an excellent article over at Google Watch, an eWeek blog, entitled "18 Reasons why Google and YouTube are Guilty of Copyright Infringement".

Steve outlines Viacom's argument as presented in their official complaint and edits it down to the core points as Viacom sees it. Head over to Google Watch to read it.

Viacom Sues Google and YouTube For $1 Billion Dollars

No surprise here, we all knew it was coming. Today, Viacom announced that it was suing YouTube and its corporate parent Google for alleged copyright infringement and is seeing more than $1 billion dollars in damages. Viacom is seeking an injunction prohibiting Google and YouTube from using any of its content on their websites.

In it's press release Viacom said, "“YouTube is a significant, for-profit organization that has built a lucrative business out of exploiting the devotion of fans to others’ creative works in order to enrich itself and its corporate parent Google. Their business model, which is based on building traffic and selling advertising off of unlicensed content, is clearly illegal and is in obvious conflict with copyright laws. In fact, YouTube’s strategy has been to avoid taking proactive steps to curtail the infringement on its site, thus generating significant traffic and revenues for itself while shifting the entire burden - and high cost - of monitoring YouTube onto the victims of its infringement."

There is both good and bad to this. The good is that online video will continue to get more exposure in the press and with consumers because of all the coverage this suit will get. The bad is that many people will still reference online video as a product that no one has been able to create a business model from. While that is not true, perception is reality in any industry and even more so in the Internet space.

This should make for some interesting times as I expect we'll now get to hear even more information about Google and YouTube that we didn't know about before regarding their business, the buyout and potentially revenue. The comments form is open.

Consumer-Generated Video Panel Announced For Streaming Media East

We have some great sessions at the Streaming Media East show in May talking about the business of user generated video.

Consumer-generated video was a big story in 2006 and continues to be so in 2007. From the latest media companies to garage-bound startups, it seems that everyone is incorporating user-generated content and community into their business plans. But questions still remain: Will business models emerge to drive profitability? Will marketers embrace this new type of media? Is UGC all a bubble waiting to burst? Hear how these sites are tackling these questions while looking for ways to differentiate themselves in a crowded space. Tap into what's next on the horizon for sharing video content and new innovations in social media. Find out about the positives and negatives surrounding copyright issues and content ownership. Come to the Streaming Media East show and hear about business models and potential revenue streams related to user-generated video communities.The panelists include:

• Moderator: Raghav Gupta, Director, Business Development & Strategy, Brightcove
• Panelist: James McQuivey, VP, Television & Media Technology, Forrester Research
• Panelist: Daniel Blackman, Strategic Partner Development Manager, Google
• Panelist: Dmitry Shapiro, CEO, Veoh Networks
• Panelist: Brian Kalinowski, COO, Lycos
• Panelist: Bambi Francisco, Columnist and Correspondent, MarketWatch

What topics or points would you like to see discussed at this session? Please include them in the comments section for your chance to win a free conference pass to the show.

UGC Site Viddler Looking To Raise $1M in First Round of Financing

Viddler, another UGC site that launched at the end of last year is now out looking for its first round of financing between $1-2 million. Viddler classifies themselves as an interactive online video platform that allows people to enhance and share video inside of the browser.

I spoke to Viddler's president Rob Sandie yesterday who gave me an update on their technology and business model. Of course, the first thing I had to ask was how they plan on making any money and how they are any different that all the other UGC sites out there. Rob explained that they want to be the Flickr of web video allowing users to upload long form content, provide the tools for them to be able to edit the video and then allow the user to be able to buy a DVD of their video. I don't know if there is a large enough market for that but I don't recall any other UGC sites trying to do this. Selling DVDs is not the only business model they are focusing on but rather taking the approach of creating revenue from advertising, subscriptions to their video platform and the DVDs.

On the investment subject, I hear from a lot of companies all the time who are actively looking to raise a round of financing, but then always tell me I can't tell anyone they are looking? Usually they say they don't want their competitors to know. How do you expect to raise the money if you don't get word out in the community that you are looking? And so what if your competitors know, that should have no affect on your business.

Kudos to Rob for saying he wants to get the word and out wants everyone to know that they are looking for financing. I'm happy to let any company looking for money to use my blog to get the word out. That's the whole point of a blog, networking with your peers.

A Brief Guide to Online Video Lawsuits

I was going to write an in-depth post about all of the lawsuits taking place surrounding major video sharing sites, but Steve Bryant over at reelpopblog.com already beat me to it with a post entitled "A Brief Guide to Online Video Lawsuits". He gives details on lawsuits and subpoenas against Veoh, Bolt, Grouper, YouTube, Google Video and MySpace. Head on over to his site to read it.

Steve will be moderating a panel at the Streaming Media East show in May about "User-Generated Content Tools".

Verizon FiOS Signs First Content Deal With Revver, Relaunches Broadband Portal

As predicted, Verizon FiOS signed it's first content deal with content syndicator Revver. I expect this is the start of many content deals to come from Verizon, specifically for the FiOS service. While Revver's content will initially be available only through FiOS TV, it will also be available on the Verizon FiOS Internet portal later in the year.

Speaking of the Verizon portal, I commented earlier in the week about some of the things I wanted to see Verizon do with their videos in the portal. Yesterday, I noticed they had overhauled the portal and changed the name of it to Verizon Surround. The portal, still powered by ROO, now offers videos at up to 700Kbps. Better then the 300Kbps the old portal had but I still am waiting to see some content encoded over 1MB.

Business 2.0 Issue Features Online Video Companies

The March edition of Business 2.0 magazine, which arrived in my mail today, has some good stories about the online video market and in particular what some of the vendors are working on. Erick Schonfeld does a feature story on "Make Way For Must Stream TV" and talks about Diggnation, Joost and Veoh and how they are targeting content to niche audiences. It's a good read but I don't see it on the Business 2.0 website as of yet. Erick just e-mailed me to let me know the article is now online.

Another article in the issue talks to the "25 Hot Startups To Watch" and includes a page of online video related companies. Unfortunately, none of the companies mentioned  are really classified as startups in my mind and I would have liked to see them highlight companies who haven't been in development for at least a year. They highlight Joost and Revision3, two companies already thoroughly covered in Erick's article and they also highlight blip.tv, Metacafe and Dabble. Not what I would really call startups except maybe for Dabble.

There are also some other editorial pieces in the issue that talk to online video advertising and some other rich-media applications.

Is Google Having Problems Delivering YouTube Videos?

Every since the Google acquisition, many times when I go to play video clips on YouTube they don't load as fast as they use to or they have to stop half-way through to re-buffer. For me, this is happening more and more. Yesterday, it took nearly 2 minutes for a 30 second video to start to play and it was a video that had only been viewed 6 times. There has been a lot of speculation on how Google was going to integrate YouTube's videos into the Google delivery network and I have to believe that they are clearly having some performance issues.Has anyone else seen a drop in performance in the playback of videos since the acquisition?

JetBlue CEO Uses Video To Reach Customers

With all that has been going on with JetBlue the past week, it's great to see their CEO David Neeleman use video to talk to his customers by posting an embedded YouTube clip directly on the JetBlue.com website. With all of the services that are out on the market today, making it so easy for anyone to quick post and deliver their message, you have to wonder why more companies don't use the medium to reach out to customers. Usually you see only technology companies like Cisco, Dell and others use video like this to deliver a message from an executive, but I can't recall the last time I saw a company use video on it's website to explain why something happened and how they were going to fix it. Seems like a no-brainer to do, but it does not seem to be done often. Have you seen other companies using video this way?

Magnify.net Raises $1.2 Million - Will Showcase Tools At SM East Show

Last week, Magnify Networks (www.magnify.net) announced that it has closed on an investment of $1.2 million to accelerate the growth of its search-and-sort platform for Internet based, user-generated video channels.

Founded by industry veteran Steve Rosenbaum, who some say is widely regarded as the "Father of User-Generated Video" from his ground-breaking work with MTV Unfiltered, Magnify.net enables publishers to create their own video channel featuring targeted content for their niche communities.

Magnify.net was one of the companies featured at the Demo 2007 Conference and Steve will be doing a demo of the Magnify platform at the Streaming Media East show in May along with demos from VideoEgg, and Motionbox among others for the "User-Generated Content Tools" session.

The 17 Most Talked About Online Video Companies and How They Differ

SplashCast Media posted a great video that talks about the differences between all of the consumer facing video sites on the web today. The companies compared include:

• blip.tv
• Brightcove
• Veoh
• Vimeo
• Mixpo
• Panjea
• Revver
• YouTube
• Metacafe
• Daily Motion
• MySpace video
• iFilm
• Joost
• ClipSyndicate
• Grouper
• VodPod

The ones I see missing from this list are VideoEgg, AOL and Yahoo's video offerings. Who else would you put on this list?

A List Of 62 Video Sites For Creating, Discovering, Sharing, and Storing Videos

A nice detailed ist from eConsultant.com with a comprehensive list of 62 video sharing and video community websites for creating, discovering, searching, sharing and storing videos.

Will be interesting to see at the end of this year how many of these sites are still around. What do you think will be the number one downfall when it comes to sites like these aside from the lack of a clear business model?