Tag: nuclear-option

Breakdown

So, we leave 2008 in a broken world. Our very narrow world of Internet TV, with all its fragilities and dependencies, is particularly vulnerable, but also has its strengths and offers a spectrum of opportunities in these difficult times.

I hope that many readers of this blog will take the current environment as a challenge and an opportunity. I certainly believe this is the case. After launching companies in 91, 97, 02 and now, recessions are my following wind. 
Crisis, as the old Chinese proverb goes, is an opportunity sailing on an ill wind.

Go here to see the original:
Breakdown

Share/Save/Bookmark

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Shot In The Dark

The current fallout between Universal and YouTube shows how bad the ‘Google Gap’ really is. The revenues generated by Internet TV in no way compare to those generated by traditional TV and traditional media is getting antsy. So, why is this ?

Well, first of all, traditional TV had ubiquity and therefore a currency that will not be matched by any medium ever again. Traditional TV used this to build a hugely dubious metrics system that inflated its relative worth and maintained an aura that is only now finally fading.
The internet delivers true metrics, so this is always going to be at a disadvantage to the obfuscated data that traditional TV works from.
The cost of delivery for Internet TV is higher – there is an incremental cost per viewer that does not exist with traditional TV.
The cost of entry to traditional TV was high, so players tended to work through their business models beforehand. There has been a tendency in the Internet TV world to not worry about business models. Indeed, the subsidies being thrown into the market from everyone from YouTube to the likes of Brightcove have distorted the market. Whilst providing a valuable social service is one thing, this model has actually worked almost in reverse to the long tail principles that prevail online.
The single best thing that could happen to television is for YouTube to start charging its uploaders. This is the model that Google Video has introduced, so why not extend this, especially in a market where ad bucks are becoming rarer than hen’s teeth.
There isn’t a single online video service that has been able to extend a revenue generating business model to content owners yet, so why not throw the onus back onto the content owners themselves – or to other middlemen who can use the content and the technology available to generate businesses – just like the cinema and TV did in the past..

Read the original post:
Shot In The Dark

Share/Save/Bookmark

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Shotgun Wedding

The proposal to merge Channel 4 with BBC Worldwide would have brought a smile to my face had it been made on 1st April, but it seems that this is seriously being considered at OFCOM towers.

Two wrongs doesn’t make a right and it’s high time to decide if these are public service bodies or outright commercial organisations.

The rest is here:
Shotgun Wedding

Share/Save/Bookmark

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A Jump Too Far

So, the Kangaroo has changed its spots and is now reportedly to become an open technical platform instead of a content service.

What this brings to the table that isn’t already done by a hundred existing services from YouTube to Veoh escapes me – apart from top notch seeding content.
The trouble now is rather than competing with video portals the service is competing with video platform providers, so it’s just shifting the anti-competitive onus. The real monopoly isn’t about content – its in market share for the video advertising market, and considering that Google has been allowed to own a majority of text, search and display online advertising markets, it’s unlikely that OFCOM or the Competition Commission will weigh this as the key factor.
Also, how this impacts the ISPs who opposed the original Kangaroo service is yet to be determined.

Read the original here:
A Jump Too Far

Share/Save/Bookmark

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Rich Movie Mogul

Just in, here’s a cost breakdown for someone planning on having a lot of regular viewers on Mogulus reported verbatim:

2$1.50 per gigabyte for bandwidth on Mog Pro. They include 25GB in their base plan at $350/mo.

If we’re streaming at the basic 500 Kbps, that amounts to 3.75 MB/min or 225 MB/hour.
So if we had 11 people watch us for 10 hours, that’s 225MB x 11 x 10 = 25 GB gone.

If we have 1000 people watching for one hour, say a Christmas parade, that will amount to 225 GB. At $1.50 per GB, that will cost us $337.50 for that hour.

ONE person watching for 24 hours would eat up 5.4GB ($8.10)

If we were to average about 1000 viewers over a 24 hour period (with it peaking mid-day and petering off at night) that would amount to 5400 GB, or $8,100. FOR ONE DAY. It would be a quarter million a month to operate at that level.

Unfortunately this isn’t entirely hard to believe. Bandwidth is, and always has been prohibitively expensive. Sorry to rain on the parade, but we should have realized this was too good to be true.”

Read more here:
Rich Movie Mogul

Share/Save/Bookmark

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
« Previous posts Back to top