Baidu Getting into Video?
paidContent reports today that private equity company Providence Equity Partners, one of the backers of Hulu, is rumored to be joining up with Baidu for a Chinese equivalent of the popular professional video content site. While China is the largest Internet population (350M) and a huge market for ad dollars in just about every online arena, it’s little wonder both the Chinese search giant and the American investment firm are interested. While Providence declined comment, other sources told PC the deal was already closed.
Reuters reports that the new video site would launch in the first quarter of this year. Providence will back it with $60M, while Baidu is fronting $10M. A recently-departed China Mobile executive is rumored to be the CEO of the new site.
Analysys International reports that the Chinese online video market was worth 162 million yuan ($23.73 million) in the third quarter of last year—again, little wonder these two companies are interested in the market. On the other hand, this is considerably less than the well-established US video advertising market, of which Hulu controlled some 10% (and commanded similar ad rates to TV). Could a Chinese Hulu take over the same proportion of the Chinese ad market (to the tune of $9.5M)?
Hard to say, of course. Before Hulu came along, it seemed doubtful that a site with such a model could succeed—but now it does appear to be successful, as well as a major source for online video content. Naturally, Providence and Baidu would need Chinese television stations and studios to sign on to create the professional content. And while the US isn’t the best counterexample here, China has a reputation for rampant online video piracy that may diminish the appeal (and the restrictions) of a site like Hulu.
What do you think? Can Baidu expand its empire successfully with this? Or is China just not the market for another Hulu?
Pilgrim’s Partners: SponsoredReviews.com – Bloggers earn cash, Advertisers build buzz!
Google Testing Skippable Ads in YouTube Videos
Online ads might be working well for news sites, but YouTube is always looking for a bigger piece of the online video advertising pie. As of today, Google is testing skippable ads on YouTube, as part of its ongoing search for the “right” way to monetize the most popular video site on the web.
The test will run with videos from content partners who have opted in to the program. The preroll ads will feature a link to skip through the ad and go straight to the video content.
MediaPost says that this test will provide Google with a demographic break down of their audience for high quality ads:
The test that determines if and when people watch the video clips will provide Google with insight into the type of person who may skip an ad, what type of ad they might skip, and what piece of content does better than another. Google also will look at whether some ads are skipped in a specific portion of the session. Does the person skip the ad in the first video versus the third during a 30-minute time slot while on YouTube?
This information could be assembled into another ad method: “The model is cost per engagement, where advertisers would only pay for opt-in engaged views of the ads.” Phil Farhi, product manager at Google’s YouTube, mentions that the promoted videos model is another example in this area, and in the future, there could be a model where advertisers only pay for complete plays of their ads.
They’re also comparing TV ads vs. video ads created specifically for online audiences. Generally, television ads take 30 seconds to make sure viewers get the message, image and contact/purchase information (call to action). Online, the call to action can run along side the video, in accompanying text that remains after the ad is over, they can use direct links or other methods.
What do you think? Will you skip ads on YouTube? Could this finally be the way to monetize YouTube?
Buy YouTube Promoted Videos Through Google AdWords
The Google Blog announced you ca now buy YouTube Promoted Video ads directly in the Google AdWords console. Google said that any advertiser with video content in the U.S., Canada, the U.K., France, Italy, Germany, Spain and the Netherlands can do this today.
Previously, all YouTube Promoted Video ads were managed on YouTube at ads.youtube.com. [...]
….
Do You Actually Watch 157 Videos Per Month?
This week comScore has released the latest numbers regarding video viewed online and I am still scratching my head. According to the findings (remember class, repeat after me – “It’s research and research ain’t perfect”) in August of 2009 there were just over 25 billion videos viewed by the approximately 161 million US Internet users. That works out to be an average of 157 videos viewed per user during that time period. Google sites alone accounted for over 10 billion of those videos with 99% of that number coming from YouTube. This number eclipses the previous month’s results and I am wondering if this economy is a main contributor to this amount of ‘free time’.
I am still shaking my head. Maybe it’s just me but that seems ridiculously high. I am a heavy Internet user. I spend considerable hours everyday on the computer researching etc, etc but I come nowhere near watching 5 video clips per day. I admit I probably have the TV on too much so maybe being online is a vacation of sorts with regard to watching video. I don’t know. Am I just a really low user of online video content?
Take a look at the comScore chart below to see how just how dominant Google (which is 99% YouTube in this case) is in this space as well.
So help me here. If you fall in line with these numbers, meaning you are a profile match to the just over 5 videos viewed per day type, what is it that you are watching? Of course, this is rated PG blog for the most part so anything deviant just keep to yourself and continue seeking help but please don’t share it here.
In fact, let’s take a look at a specific type of video viewing. Let’s keep it to marketing / advertising / product related videos. As marketers we need to be careful not to just look at this large number and automatically assume that everyone is watching videos about products or something that is related to our work. I have learned to never underestimate the power and allure of “stupid human tricks” video viewing which could simply be an escape mechanism for people at their desks who can’t wait to get out of the office.
What if the percentage of videos viewed that relate to marketing functions is just a small fraction of the total audience? That would be the number that we should be paying close attention to and not chase video’s version of a shiny object that will end up eating up valuable time and resources.
Thanks for stopping by and we look forward to hearing from you.
Jim Lanzone: Vengeance in Video?
In January 2008, Ask CEO Jim Lanzone stepped down. He moved to Redpoint Ventures, a VC firm, to be their entrepreneur-in-residence. But his latest project brings him back to search: Clicker, an online TV video search engine. Kinda.
Lanzone is CEO of the video service, which launched yesterday at TechCrunch50 into private beta. Clicker aims to be a TV guide for online video—”the most comprehensive way to find the video content you’re looking for on the web.”
What makes Clicker different from the myriad other video search engines out there? TechCrunch reports:
[Clicker] creates a structured database of programming, organizing shows by things like network, genre, and show name. This type of data not only allows for better search results, but it allows you to browse content without having to do text-based searches, which you probably won’t be doing when television and future web-enabled tablets start to serve up this content. Clicker already has a deal with Boxee.
The goal is really to be the best search engine for video content. Clicker will point you in the direction of whatever you are looking for (and will do embeds if they’re available), but won’t serve up the videos themselves. They will also delve into surfacing content not explicitly produced for television, but is still high quality web video content. But they don’t want to be YouTube, which is cluttered with user-generated content. Clicker is going for a different market.
Clicker will also allow users to edit and submit information about shows wiki-style.
My question: what’s with all those vowels?! Are you sure you didn’t mean “clickr”? Way to shoot yourselves in the foot, guys. 
Naturally, the first real question is what’s their business model. And the answer is typical of search engines: advertising, both search and display. However, they also plan to offer premium accounts, “which the company envisions might be used for storing your favorite videos online, kind of like a DVR of sorts.”
We’re obviously still learning new things about how to do online video all the time, as Hulu has shown us. But is there room for another video search engine—and if so, will Clicker be it? What do you think?
Boy, We Watch a Boat Load of Video
Of course everyone knows that Americans watch a lot of video. Why not, right? We spend a lot of time online and we like to make excuses to not exercise. It’s the perfect storm for YouTube and Hulu and the rest of the video distribution sites of the world. It is somewhat amazing though to see the numbers attached to it, though. comScore reports, in fact, that in July US Internet users watched a staggering 21.4 billion videos. That’s a new record, by the way. I feel like Frank Barone from the Everybody Loves Raymond show because all I can say to that is – “Holy crap!”
In July, Google Sites continued to rank as the top U.S. video property with a record 8.9 billion videos viewed, making up 42 percent of all videos viewed online. YouTube.com accounted for more than 99 percent of all videos viewed at the property. Viacom Digital ranked second with 812 million (3.8 percent) followed by Microsoft Sites with 631 million videos viewed (3.0 percent).
So Google leads the pack (yawn!) but Hulu reached an all time high with 454 million video views. Not bad. As for number of viewers Google logged 121 million viewers who averaged 74 videos a month.
Other notable findings from July 2009 include:
- The top video ad networks in terms of their actual delivered reach were: Tremor Video Network (20.1 percent viewer penetration), Brightroll Video Network (17.4 percent), and BroadbandEnterprises.com (14.4 percent).
- 81.0 percent of the total U.S. Internet audience viewed online video.
- The average online video viewer watched 500 minutes of video, or 8.3 hours.
- 120.3 million viewers watched 8.9 billion videos on YouTube.com (74.1 videos per viewer).
- 48.2 million viewers watched 518.6 million videos on MySpace.com (10.8 videos per viewer).
- The average Hulu viewer watched 12.0 videos, totaling 1 hour and 13 minutes of videos per viewer.
- The duration of the average online video was 3.7 minutes.
I still marvel at the amount of video content consumed. My question is what percentage of it is stupid human tricks and the online version of the last words of every redneck, “Hey y’all watch this!”?
Pilgrim’s Partners: SponsoredReviews.com – Bloggers earn cash, Advertisers build buzz!
Coming to a YouTube Near You: Local News
YouTube has yet another new—or should I say news?—feature: News Near You. The New York Times reports that the biggest video site in the world is taking after it parent company (you know, Google?) in cornering the news market—or, if you’re the CEO of Dow Jones, “sucking the blood out of the newspaper industry.”
YouTube started promoting their news partnerships a month ago. Along with News Near You, which actually started in the spring, these are part of a larger news strategy for YouTube. The NYT reports that “nearly 200 news outlets have signed up with YouTube to post news packages and split the revenue from the advertisements that appear with them.”
There are some doubts about whether this is a good thing for news producers, however. The NYT says:
YouTube says it is helping TV stations and its other partners by creating a new — but so far not fiscally significant — source of revenue.
But news media companies may have reasons to be wary. Few TV stations have figured out how replicate profits on the Internet. YouTube can easily act as another competitor.
But it’s not just news stations in News Near You. In fact, the NYT says that “most” of these videos come from sources like radio stations, newspapers and colleges. Everything from enterprising locals to local businesses and churches is bringing relevant, localized video content in the new feature. This could be a gateway to further citizen journalism, especially with video phones to upload directly to YouTube.
However, the vampiristic element (it’s a great newsday when you get to use that phrase in a sentence!) in News Near You is far lower than in Google News. As the NYT reports, YouTube “is not sending digital spiders around the Web to collect videos automatically; instead, it is asking news outlets to sign up as partners and promising a wider audience for their material.”
And so far, the adoption rate is low. For the most part, News Near You has to rely on a 100 mile radius around users for their localized content. Clickthroughs on the module, however, seem to be going well. Steve Grove, head of news and politics for YouTube, “said about 5 percent of users who see the News Near You module watch at least one local news video, a rate that YouTube sees as encouraging.”
What do you think? Is 5% good enough? Do you want to see local news on YouTube? Would you rather see local news from individuals, businesses, or traditional news providers?
Why Isn’t There More “Internal Syndication” of Video Content?
Let’s face it – unless you are YouTube or Hulu, you are looking for ways to build audience and streams to capture more in-stream advertising dollars. Nowhere is this truer than in the news market where CNN, the leading online news site, has a 1.2% market share in streams (Nielsen), and is selling-out 100% of [...]
….
