Plentitube was launched by Jon Labes, 25, and Talia Pulver, 27, to "pioneer the talent discovery industry" and has an inventory of several thousand videos from more than 500 indie producers. The service, which has merely eight employees, empowers content creators to act as their own talent agent, providing them with the necessary resources to market, pitch, and negotiate acquisition or sponsorship for their content.
Plentitube’s revenue stream is both subscription and commission-based. The bootstrapped start-up operates out of New York and has only raised $75,000 from friends and family of the founders. The company has an impressive vision for creating a marketplace where media buyers can find premium content from indie producers. My sense from skimming the company's blog is that it is driven by a passion to find value in UGC, which is a fight not worth waging as far as I am concerned. However, if they focus on bridging traditional media brands with new media production and distribution partners, these young and innovative digital talent scouts may prove to be a disruptive force in shaping the future of the digital media business.
One opportunity worth Pletitube's attention would be to incorporate live media buy opportunities to help live streaming services generate consistent revenue and push the envelope in terms of realizing the true viability of the Internet as a live broadcasting platform.
Mr. Beldy articulates an investment strategy built upon a core emphasis on capital efficiency, driving down of costs for professional and premium publishers. This idea of creating a TV-like broadcast network of professionally produced content otherwise not leveraged for its broadcast value is at the core of SMV's production and distribution strategies. In fact, SMV's model refines Mr. Beldy's concept even further to place a special emphasis on live broadcasting of the premium content, which is generally considered to enhance the value of the media due to the highly engaged nature of live broadcast viewers.
The Financial Times yesterday (11/17) had two very interesting, though highly predictable articles on the state of the YouTubebusiness model in recent months (yes, that is business model, not pageviews) which I thought I would share this morning...
First, the British newspaper profiled the rise of rival video portal Hulu, a joint venture between NBC and News Corp ("Rival forecast to catch YouTube") which serves only professionally produced content as opposed to the user-generated content (UGC) that made YouTube famous and earned its founders their $1.65B exit when the site was acquired by Google two years ago. Arash Amel is quoted in the FT as forecasting Hulu to match YouTube dollar-for-dollar in ad revenues during 2009. “YouTube is in a very tough place right now,” said Mr Amel. “Most of that user-generated content is worthless or illegal. The next 18 months will determine whether or not it was just an expensive mistake for Google.”
This would be particularly significant considering the massive advantage YouTube has in total user traffic, with 83m unique viewers in the US during September alone, compared to merely 6m unique views for Hulu, according to market researcher Nielsen. Google has taken a very gradual approach to scaling, monetizing and enhancing the content base of its very expensive social network, which is what YouTube has basically grown to become since it was launched in 2005. Google has taken the community-driven development approach in their streaming media endevors to-date, with little concern evident (at least on the face of things) over the exorbitant loses YouTube has generated day-after-day as millions of people continue to upload and share their experiences using the free hosting space that each registered YouTube user is alloted.
The paper follows this bold industry analysis with a complimentary evaluation of YouTube's core business model ("YouTube's popularity fails to sway advertisers") and prospects for improving on its dismal record of convincing ad buyers to take a gamble on its almost universally amateur and wholly unpredictable library of home movies and pirated Tivo recordings. Tracey Scheppach, video innovations director at Starcom, a media agency is quoted in the article asserting, “YouTube hasn’t done a great job justifying why advertisers should migrate online.” Clearly there was little thought among Google management dedicated to how YouTube would eventually return its investment to the company prior to gobbling the site up for 10-figures in 2007. Without a really great thought soon, the million-dollar per-day cash burn and they swelling database of worthless content to manage may be too much for even Google to bear in these tough times.
Joost, the biggest thing in online video as recently as two years ago, announced today in the email release above that it has made the decision to abandon its P2P application and embrace Flash as its sole method of distribution. Not surprising, especially considering the companies idiotic strategy to build their own P2P solution, as opposed to outsourcing the back-end and focusing on feeding its viewers new and unique content. As far as I am concerned, this is the beginning of the end for what was once a very exciting project.
The business of music has long been beholden to human technological capacity, particularly the ability to record and distribute performances on a large scale. Since mainstream adoption of vinyl records, the value of music has increased exponentially with each advancement in distribution technology (i.e. cassettes, CDs, MP3). But as artists have become dependent upon traditional studio recording, they have been forced to concede a significant amount of control to record companies that are driven purely by profit motive.
Humans have advanced tremendously since the early days of recorded music, and the prevailing technologies of today are in prime position to power the music business of tomorrow. Before the technology existed to record music and sell content as a physical product, the music business was necessarily a service industry: those in the music profession made their living performing, teaching, or writing commissioned compositions. However, once music was transformed into a tangible product which could be sold, it became the lifeblood of the music business. (Kusek and Leonhard, 2005)
At least two rock legends understand the realities of the digital age. In a profile piece written by the New York Times on Peter Gabriel (right), former lead singer of Genesis and aspiring new media entrepreneur is quoted saying, “Technology has always shaped music, be it 78s, 45s, LPs or CDs, it changes the shape of the music. With downloading, the artistic change hasn’t really hit yet. But it’s turned the economic model on its head. The major record companies have some smart people looking at digital models. But the question is, will the people at the top be willing to turn the business upside down?”
David Byrne (left), formerly the front-man of the Talking Heads, laid out his ideas on the essence of music and how musicians should view the true value of their work in an edition of Wired Magazine early this year. To quote him,
"In the past, music was something you heard and experienced — it was as much a social event as a purely musical one. Before recording technology existed, you could not separate music from its social context. Epic songs and ballads, troubadours, courtly entertainments, church music, shamanic chants, pub sing-alongs, ceremonial music, military music, dance music — it was pretty much all tied to specific social functions. It was communal and often utilitarian. You couldn't take it home, copy it, sell it as a commodity (except as sheet music, but that's not music), or even hear it again. Music was an experience, intimately married to your life. You could pay to hear music, but after you did, it was over, gone — a memory."
While Byrne is lamenting the idea that music has become something typically bought and sold as a recorded commodity and not as a performance art, he himself sells CD's and DVD's of some of his live shows on his website. The basic message I take from Byrne is that music is meant to be experienced live, because only then is it truly appreciated and honored in its natural form.
Until recent developments in software and network capability, limitations of distribution technology have prevented live Internet streaming media from growing into a business that makes sense for performers and content owners. However, what if every musical performance (concert) was broadcast live on the band's website with associated sponsors and targeted advertisements? Isn't that the same model used by artists and promoters to monetize live shows already? What about making the video available for free post-live to those who attended the show, or even selling a digital copy to fans of that particular band through iTunes or Facebook? Sounds like the foundation of a new business model for the music industry...
Legal P2P Live Streaming Media
Peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing and digital media formats have thrown a wrench in the previously undisturbed machinations of the major recording artists and the business model of the major record labels. "Millennials" (aka Generation Y) are younger and less familiar with the idea that music is an “intellectual property” protected against unauthorized distribution. Millennials prefer an open environment where copyrighted content is shared and enjoyed by all without restriction or the fear of becoming an example in an increasingly litigious marketplace.
P2P-powered file-sharing, and to a growing extent YouTube and similar video sharing websites, have created a vacuum in the music business for which artists and publishers ("rights holders") have instinctively turned to litigious remedies, rather than concentrating on innovation. Musicians not exercising their legal options to recoup revenues from YouTube, which promises 50/50 revenue share with rights holders, have instead chosen to give Google some time to work out its internal monetization strategy before exploring legal options.
Avril Lavegne's (right) music video for hit single "Girlfriend" has largely been acknowledged as the most viewed video in YouTube's brief history and the first to top the 100m views plateau. According to Avril's manager, Terry McBride, YouTube's own policies leave him to estimate that the 200m+ views generated by the young Canadian artist's copyrighted content through the video sharing portal entitle her to a check for about $2 million. Needless to say, McBride doesn't expect this payday to be realized anytime soon, or anytime in the next 2-3 years at least. It also goes without saying, artists are going to increasingly view new media outlets and social networks like YouTube as more than simply viral promotional outlets, but rather as additional sources of revenue.
When it became clear that the record industry is not afraid to take even teenagers to court for illegally downloading music from nefarious file-sharing sites, it also became clear to all a new vision for the future of the music business is long overdue. These "illegal" web services (i.e. Napster) are powered by efficient P2P distribution software, which allow users to quickly and efficiently share media on the Internet, and unilaterally decided the laws protecting copyright were meant to be broken. Over a century since music shifted away from its core value as a pleasant experience for whom it was preformed, it seems as if the industry has come full circle and digital distribution has brought services back to the fore in terms of revenue streams for artists selling their "product" via the Internet.
Alas, SMV is founded on the calculation that it will be the very same technology which was once thought to spell the demise of the music industry, P2P multicasting, which will provide musicians their greatest opportunity since FM radio. Distribution of high-quality digital video over broadband offers musicians in particular a tremendous amount of leverage in charting the course of their own futures, freeing them once and for all from their dependence on record companies and CD sales to make a living.
Music as a Service (MaaS) Model Emerging?
The major record labels have been living in denial of the coming digital revolution. Artists have largely failed to take advantage of the current lapse in vision and obsession with traditional copyright and litigate strategies prevailing among executives at the major recording labels, but one artist has stepped upon the soapbox and assumed the role of evangelist-peacemaker: Peter Gabriel. “I don’t believe in the death of the major record companies,” Mr. Gabriel says. “But as an artist, I’d love to see them reinvented as service companies.”
The rapidly approaching launch of the much anticipated 4G international WiMax wireless internet service will change the way we all live unlike any innovation of the last 25 years. I am serious, and this video will make it clear why and how....
YouTube has been the biggest thing in online video since coming on the scene in 2006, with a current market share hovering between 75-85% month-to-month. It isn't that hard to become the biggest thing in any web-based market when you have the full financial power of Google behind you, which is the fourth largest company on the planet and entirely liquid, but the YouTube team deserves credit considering the hundreds of competitors it has left in dust as the market grows.
One might assume that YouTube is raking in cash, especially considering the $1.65 Billion Google paid to acquire it in 2007.
However, despite all of the advantages any Internet company could ever ask for, YouTube hasn't the foggiest idea how to make money off of their product. Of even greater concern, everyone seems to think that they need to burn cash on a crappy product to keep pace with a market monopolized by a cash cow. YouTube could never exist without Google behind it, but does that prevent anyone from rising to challenge Google in the online video space?
Ever since launching in 2006, YouTube has inspired many to speculate on its potential as a revenue generating business. Many have given the video platform high marks for potential, but all seem to arrive at the same dead end conclusion- no profitable model has yet been validated.
According to estimates from industry experts, YouTube distribution costs are at least $1 Million/day and growing as the demand for online video grows. Financial reports from Google last year listed the company's revenues as "not material", which is significant considering the website consumes 3% of Google's $11.2 Billion in annual operating costs. This is not something that Google's shareholders will like to read, but it is about the only bad news coming out of the search giant so I doubt their share price will suffer too badly.
So what is Google to do with the most successful money-pit in history? If the words of Eric Schmidt, Google CEO, are any indication of what the company's YouTube strategy is, things don't look very good in Mountain View. "We have enough leverage that we have the leverage of time. We can invest for scale and not have to make money right now, he said. Hopefully our system and judgment is good enough if something is not going to pay out, we can change it."
In other words, "WE DON'T HAVE A GODDAMN CLUE WHAT TO DO!!" Trust me, these are the most coherent comments from Dr. Schmidt I could find anywhere on how YouTube is going to monetize its massive video collection.
BARTIROMO: Which is a huge priority, clearly. A lot of people feel like this is an amazing opportunity for you. So, as far as monetizing that business on YouTube, do you think that takes a year? Does it take the next five years? What's your time frame on that?
Dr. SCHMIDT: We believe the best products are coming out this year. And they're new products. They're not announced. They're not just putting in-line ads in the things that people are trying. But we have a number--and, of course, Google is an innovative place. The Yahoo! team are trying various new forms of advertising, ones which are much more participative, much more creative, much more--much more interesting in and of themselves. Google believes that advertising itself has value. The ads literally are valuable to consumers. Not just to the advertisers, but the consumers.
Google has another huge loss generator created by its poorly considered acquisition of YouTube- litigation. A long-running legal dispute with Viacom has potential to run Google in excess of $100m in legal fees, and this is not the first nor the last copyright infringement case Google's flawed online video strategy will create.
No matter how hard you look, nobody at Google can answer the $1.65B question!! Shashi Seth, fomerly head of YouTube monetization, quit recently for a position with startup Cooliris, and even Founder Sergey Brin admits that the idea at this point in Google's video strategy, all that matters is the community, content is presumably going to fall in line eventually. Sadly, Google seems convinced that "YouTube + Ads = Holy Grail". Who are they kidding?
Cross-posted at The World We'll Inherit, my personal blog on the screwed up world we Millenials are inheriting from our selfish "Baby Boomer" predecessors...
The European Union has taken initial steps toward establishing a continent-wide peer-to-peer television (P2PTV) protocol for delivering rich multimedia via broadband. An exciting opportunity exists for the EU to emerge as the pioneering force for entrepreneurial activity in the P2PTV market, which offers many exciting possibilities for innovative media strategies to redefine online video. Known as P2P-Next, the project homepage makes as clear an argument as I have yet found for the importance of finding useful applications of P2P technology, rather than take the suppressive approach that many in the US and Japan have adopted.
The EU is internally divided however, with some states taking equally aggressive stances against peer-driven protocols as those assumed by their American and Japanese counterparts, who have recently considered allowing ISPs to block P2P traffic. Pressure from powerful interests, such as the music industry, have led to institutional mistrust of P2P technology generally following the well documented file-sharing networks, such as Kazaa and Morpheus, which have utilized P2P to pirate music and movies for over a decade.
(From the P2P-Next Introduction) The P2P-Next integrated project will build a next generation peer-to-peer content delivery platform, to be designed, developed and applied jointly by a consortium consisting of high profile academic and industrial players with proven track records in innovation and commercial success. The current infrastructure of the Internet is not suited to simultaneous transmission of live events to millions of people (i.e. broadcasting). The problem is that a dedicated stream of data must be sent to every single user.
With millions of potential users, the simultaneous streams of data will easily congest the Internet. For several years, we have been told that the answer to this problem is "multicasting", whereby the data stream is distributed to many local servers that subsequently "re-broadcast" the content to local users.However, most IP routers of the Internet cannot support multicasting–and there seems to be no financial incentive for the ISPs to introduce multicasting. Also, the use of Audiovisual Media is moving from a collective and passive approach to personal active behavior, at home and in mobile situations outside the home. At the same time use patterns are shifting towards non-linear usages, moving away from the classic model of linear broadcast TV. The TV set no longer has the monopoly of delivery of audiovisual content; the PC and related media centers, mobile phones, and potentially initiatives from new stakeholders are all becoming increasingly important.
In such heterogeneous environments, efficient content delivery needs optimized unicast, multicast, broadcast, and also support for new mechanisms that have been made possible by the recent advances in P2P grids. This situation has important consequences for the existing business models and institutions, as well as for content production, content distribution, and end user experience on various terminals. This particular holds for stakeholders that propose services based on heterogeneous terminals and networks, together with the demand from users of transparent service continuity.This makes Peer-to-Peer -based technologies that can provide efficient and low-cost delivery of professional and user created content essential for the technologically-competitive future Europe.
In response to these challenges, the objective of P2P-Next is to move forward the technical enablers to facilitate new business scenarios for the complete value chain in the content domain from a linear unidirectional push mode to a user centric, time and place independent platform paradigm. A platform approach allows modular development and modular applications, enables knowledge sharing and facilitates technology integration, code- and skill re-use. This translates to fast development of new content delivery applications that build value for service and content providers.P2P-Next will develop a platform that takes open source development, open standards, and future proof iterative integration as key design principles.
A lofty goal for certain, but will the EU accomplish its mission if the rest of the western world is going to every extent imaginable to suppress all P2P network transmissions? There is some indication from Comcast, the primary target of P2P obstruction allegation in the US, that the company has come to see the merit in the legal application of P2P distribution on the 21st century Internet.
Communal Computing’s Many Problems
-
In the first article of this series, we discussed communal computing
devices and the problems they create–or, more precisely, the problems that
arise becau...
CES 2018: Breaking Through the Clutter
-
It was another ground-breaking year at CES with over 184,000 participants
and close to 4,000 exhibitors showcasing the latest technologies and
gadgets span...
This Week on Livestream | April 17, 2017
-
Watch live as the European Space Agency holds the seventh European
Conference on Space Debris, Brian Lehrer hosts The Brian Lehrer Show at The
Greene Spa...
Sneak peak: BitTorrent expands live streaming tests
-
BitTorrent founder Bram Cohen and his company are moving forward with its
P2P live streaming project, expanding field trials and courting indie bands
to st...
Image by via CrunchBase![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_a.png?x-id=1ed9672c-bb5a-46d3-9d2f-a4264feeba10)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_a.png?x-id=158c8567-9fcd-4b4d-8164-f1427c91160e)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=b495f985-1764-4cdd-a56f-9190418eae7e)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_a.png?x-id=830fb7f8-b80b-4fb9-b730-0f6862ee588c)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=bcdc6b51-ccb8-49bb-b7e0-f97a8d28df9f)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=40c56cf6-3dbf-45d9-9b59-47061cd9f743)
