Video Insider: All Great Internet Companies Eventually Build Or Buy a Video Ad Network

All Great Internet Companies Eventually Build Or Buy a Video Ad Network by Tod Sacerdoti , Thursday, December 10, 2009 Lately, I've been looking into the evolution of successful Internet companies. How did they succeed? Which factors were the game-changers for them? Earlier, I wrote an article that addressed a few of these issues, where I dove into why many successful Internet companies build or buy an ad network.   Being in the online video business, I began to wonder: Is the same true for video networks? I think the answer is yes. Here's why: 1.     The "big TV budgets" all great Internet companies are fighting for are made up entirely of video advertising.  Sometimes the most obvious points are the hardest to see. Video advertising is the preferred ad unit for most major marketers, so as budgets continue to shift, video demand will increase. The research and data are undeniable; video outperforms every branded ad unit on the Web. The only issues in the market are scalability and targeting, which will eventually be solved. 2.     All great Internet companies will create video content, use video advertising as a form of monetizing non-video content, or sell ads targeted to their users on other sites with video ad inventory. Fundamentally, the Internet is becoming a video medium and online video advertising is an engaging and rapidly growing category. No powerful publisher will be selling in the market without a video ad offering. As video grows as a piece of the overall ad pie, every major player will fight for their slice. 3.     Video networks will be larger than the great internet companies until they build or buy their own video networka. The same phenomenon that was observed in display advertising (ad networks becoming bigger than the large publishers) is happening now in video advertising. Last month, six of the top 20 video properties were video ad networks, according to comScore's VideoMetrix report, and within the next 12 months, video networks will likely be the majority of the top five properties. Only YouTube will hold its position, and I would argue it has already built a video ad network of its own. Obviously, the timeline for this video ad network evolution is likely much longer than it is for display (although many great companies have already made significant moves in the display arena -- Yahoo, Facebook, LinkedIn, Fox Interactive Media and Cox, to name a few). As a result, it is hard to know which steps to take today. My advice for Internet companies is to focus on video inventory creation or video advertising strategy. If you are able to create meaningful inventory of your own, or if you are able to build a powerful video media network, then there will be many ways to win in the marketplace.  Alternatively, you can simply focus on becoming a Great Internet Company in your own right. If you succeed, you will be able to make your build vs. buy decisions and determine your own timelines. You can even delay focusing on video entirely, as Facebook has done. The minute Facebook decides to open the video spigot, it will quickly be the largest streamer in the world.  Don't forget, Flickr used to be the default photo site, as YouTube is for videos today. This commentary is insightful. I recommend it to others. Post your response to the public Video Insider blog. See what others are saying on the Video Insider blog. Sacerdoti is the CEO and founder of BrightRoll, a branded video advertising network. Under Sacerdoti's direction, BrightRoll has grown into a premier video advertising network, having served billions of ads on behalf of the world's leading agencies and their clients and executed campaigns on more than two-thirds of the top 100 online media properties in the U.S. Do you have strong opinions and inside knowledge about the topic of this newsletter -- and do you want to share your insights, observations and points of view regularly with the readers of MediaPost? To be considered as a MediaPost contributing writer, please send pertinent info about your credentials, plus several column ideas and one example of your writing on the topic, to pfine@mediapost.com. Please see our editorial guidelines here first. Video Insider for Thursday, December 10, 2009: http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=118874 You are receiving this newsletter at brian.bobo@gmail.com as part of your membership with MediaPost. If this issue was forwarded to you and you would like to begin receiving a copy of your own, please visit our site - www.mediapost.com - and become a complimentary member. For advertising opportunities see our online media kit. If you'd rather not receive this newsletter in the future click here. We welcome and appreciate forwarding of our newsletters in their entirety or in part with proper attribution. (c) 2009 MediaPost Communications, 1140 Broadway, 4th Floor, New York, NY 10001

Video Insider: Amid Shift To Online Video Ads, An Opportunity for Local TV

Amid Shift To Online Video Ads, An Opportunity for Local TV by Glenn Pingul , Tuesday, June 16, 2009 A lot has been written about the shift of broadcast TV ad dollars to online video...   "The shift to online video is already happening?" "As TV becomes more interactive, will that abate the shift from traditional advertising?" "Will the shift be driven by generational, supply or technology changes?" All good questions, but I'd argue that it's too early to know the answers. I say, also, that focusing on any impending shift misses the real opportunity -- especially for some local media publishers -- to grab a greater share of overall advertiser spend. Many publishers of local TV Web sites, for example, seem uneasy about this shift to online video advertising, fearing it will steal broadcast dollars. I believe, however, that local TV publishers are in the best position to move to online video advertising. The operative word here is video. Local TV publishers have the advantage. They have existing clients who currently run commercials (video). They understand spot TV (video) and the power of local marketing. They can articulate the benefits of television ads (sight, sound, and motion) in driving brand awareness and purchase intent. Online video advertising should be viewed as a powerful extension to advertisers' offline media buys rather than a substitute for them. Bundling online video advertising into advertiser sales packages: 1)Extends an advertiser's reach to new audiences or times of day. 2)Increases the efficiency of an advertiser's total ad spend. TV spots can be repurposed into rich-media video ad campaigns with no increased production cost. 3)Drives the deep measurement insights afforded by the Web. 4)Acts (like TV) to build brand awareness and, in addition, drives interactivity. 4)  Acts (like TV) to build brand awareness and, in addition, drives interactivity.   Smart advertisers don't rely on the "one trick pony" method of advertising by sticking to only one medium. They run campaigns across media (print, TV, radio, online display, and search) and Web properties (portals, premium sites, and ad networks). Advertisers are increasingly aware, for example, that search performance is augmented by running display ads. The last click theory, where search got all the attribution, is disintegrating as more marketers see that you have to look at all points in the purchase funnel and build campaigns that get your brand noticed, while at the same time including elements that drive action. To touch more parts of the funnel and sell a multi-platform solution, local TV publishers can easily bundle broadcast TV spots with online video advertising. Technology drives changes in media consumption. Choice leads to audience fragmentation but rarely elimination of a medium. Local TV publishers have the assets to play both sides of the shift and deliver a sum that is greater than the parts. It's really a discussion of optics. A shift implies someone is losing. Seeing online video advertising as a way to grab more total ad dollars, especially for local TV publishers, is a more opportunistic view of the world.   This commentary is insightful. I recommend it to others. Post your response to the public Video Insider blog. See what others are saying on the Video Insider blog. Glenn Pingul is vice president of marketing for Mixpo, an online video advertising technology company. an online video advertising technology company. The companyÂ's comprehensive VideoAd platform enables any advertiser, from small to large, to run actionable online video advertising and promote its business at the local level. Video Insider for Tuesday, June 16, 2009: http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=108062 You are receiving this newsletter at brian.bobo@gmail.com as part of your membership with MediaPost. If this issue was forwarded to you and you would like to begin receiving a copy of your own, please visit our site - www.mediapost.com - and become a complimentary member. For advertising opportunities see our online media kit. If you'd rather not receive this newsletter in the future click here. We welcome and appreciate forwarding of our newsletters in their entirety or in part with proper attribution. (c) 2009 MediaPost Communications, 1140 Broadway, 4th Floor, New York, NY 10001

Search Insider: One More Time, For Those In The Cheap Seats

One More Time, For Those In The Cheap Seats by Kaila Colbin , Tuesday, June 16, 2009 If I were on some weird reality show (I know, the "weird'" is redundant), where they made me hire a search strategist, and they only let me give one instruction, it would be this: To understand search, you have to understand human behavior.   Query length is about human behavior. The desire to game the system is fundamental to human behavior. Split A/B testing is about human behavior, about saying, "Forget about our opinions; what do people actually do?" And our choice of search engine is most definitely about human behavior. This may seem obvious to you, but it is evidently not obvious to everyone. It's not obvious to the person who commented on my column last week saying there was no "pain" associated with switching search engines. The pain of changing a habit is one of the worst pains there is. Habits can easily trump cash -- otherwise, Microsoft would have had it nailed once it offered Cashback. Habits can cause us to spend more than we should, use outdated legacy systems, or stay in unfulfilling relationships. If you are a student of human behavior, then you already know that we are far more driven to avoid loss than we are to seek gain. In her 2004 TED talk, cognitive researcher Nancy Etcoff described the "negativity bias" -- effectively, the imbalance between these two drivers. We detect sweet at 1 part per 200, but bitter at 1 part per 2 million. If we were governed only by pleasure-seeking, says Etcoff, we could not survive. We are eternally preparing for famine and Judgment Day, where our survival will depend on how many cans of food we managed to stockpile. If you want me to give up my can of Google, you can't just be offering me a can of something a little bit better. What if I give up my Google and your Bing is no good? I've just condemned my family to starvation. If you are a student of human behavior, then you know that we are both rational and predictably irrational. The economics of our actions aren't always dollars-and-cents tradeoffs, but they are almost always benefit-loss tradeoffs -- and the calculation isn't 1:1. Thanks to the negativity bias, the losses are given greater weight. In addition, we tend to downgrade potential benefits because of the risk that they won't eventuate. Sure, on that search Bing's results were more appropriate, but on this one Google's are better. What if I switch and it turns out Google's are better 70% of the time? The negativity bias is why I believe that Google will be unseated not by a new and better search engine (which will require us to change our habit) but by a new environment that renders the old habit obsolete. The Yellow Pages were replaced by our migration to the Internet, not by the Orange Pages. If you are a student of human behavior, then you know that we give brands a mental context. Brands are effective because they act as a behavioral shortcut -- push this type of lever, get this type of reward. Go to Starbucks, get a certain type of experience. Go to The Gap, get a different type of experience. Brands do not automatically extend beyond their original context; if they did, Chrome would have more than 2% market share. Or Microsoft would already have won the search war. I'm a long-time Windows and Office user. I'm a long-time Google user. Both companies have changed our lives, in my opinion for the better. So my purpose here is not to be a hater. It's to remind, reinforce, and reiterate that to understand what drives search, we have to understand human behavior. Because at the end of the day, search is, and always will be, about people. This commentary is insightful. I recommend it to others. Post your response to the public Search Insider blog. See what others are saying on the Search Insider blog. Kaila Colbin blogs for The Web Genome Project, a movement to create a virtual topography of the World Wide Web. Search Insider for Tuesday, June 16, 2009: http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=108049 You are receiving this newsletter at brian.bobo@gmail.com as part of your membership with MediaPost. If this issue was forwarded to you and you would like to begin receiving a copy of your own, please visit our site - www.mediapost.com - and become a complimentary member. For advertising opportunities see our online media kit. If you'd rather not receive this newsletter in the future click here. We welcome and appreciate forwarding of our newsletters in their entirety or in part with proper attribution. (c) 2009 MediaPost Communications, 1140 Broadway, 4th Floor, New York, NY 10001

OnlineSpin: Extra! Extra! Tweet All About It: The News Is Social

Last week Joe wrote "Digg This: Digg's Newest Innovation Will Save Advertising." Michelle Cubas wrote in response, "A new slant on an old idea -- Word-of-Mouth advertising. This was always the most powerful form of monetizing 'flattery.' Extract a referral and we're on to the next one! Show up, serve your clients, be reliable and not trendy, and you'll be surprised at the loyal following you'll have." Michael Senno wrote, "When I saw the Digg announcement last week, I just wondered why it took so long. Though I frame it differently than your perspective of rewarding marketers with cheaper prices, the bottom line is publishers need to take control of the process and add value for the three constituents - marketers, users, and publishers themselves. My perspective is to give users control over which ads they see, as Digg is planning. It incentivizes better, more innovative marketing, gets consumers to interact more with the advertising, hopefully leading to a mutually beneficial cycle where consumers want to interact with ads because marketers make them just as interesting and relevant as the surrounding content. In the end, the inventory becomes more valuable...."

Tuesday, June 16, 2009 Extra! Extra! Tweet All About It: The News Is Social By Joe Marchese There is no content in the world more inherently social than the news. Be it local or international, the news binds people together. The news begs for people to discuss and share it. Long before we had the tools offered today by Twitter, Digg, Facebook, blog commenting or email, people found ways to share the news -- and, more important, their interpretation of the news -- with each other. In all its forms, the news is a baseline for a significant portion of all conversations. Can anybody really argue that job number one for news media outlets is to better understand and utilize the tools that will change the way news is socialized?   Sure, I know there is that pesky little matter of making money, but staying the course isn't exactly solving that issue. Why would people pay money, or tolerate their attention being traded to advertisers, when the industry isn't providing them with the best product? That is, when the industry isn't delivering to the fullest potential, given available technology. In his keynote at the American Association of Advertising Agencies in New Orleans, Bob Schieffer said that if the railroad companies had thought of themselves as being in the business of transportation, rather than just the business of railroads, they'd likely own all the airlines today. If the news media believes itself in the business of selling newspapers or aggregating television viewers, rather than being in the business of delivering the highest quality news experience over the best available media, they have already lost. Even worse is if news media outlets believe themselves in the business of delivering advertising rather than news. Meet Joe Marchese at OMMA Social NYC! Joe Marchese will be there moderating a panel on "Buying Social Media: What is the AgencyÂ's Role in Managing ClientsÂ' Social Efforts?" on June 23 at 12:00 PM. Have your questions ready, and be sure to introduce yourself! Register today and save. A few weeks ago the New York Times was the news, when it appointed Jennifer Preston ( http://twitter.com/NYT_JenPreston) its first Social Media Editor,  to mixed reviews (to my surprise). To me it made an immense amount of sense for the Times to establish a role like the one described for Preston in a leaked internal memo. Figuring out social media isn't as easy as understanding what tools are out there and how they work, and even that is a tall order with how fast the social landscape changes. For the Times, this means understanding how to better serve their readers using social media, while establishing a business model that can sustain a world-class news organization. In a recent segment ("End Times"), "The Daily Show"'s Jason Jones delivered scathingly funny and at times overly harsh commentary on how dated particular methods of news distribution are fast becoming. As it's said, it hurts most when it's true. Interviewed by Jones, Bill Keller, the Times executive editor, noted that the paper is "the best package of firsthand witnessed, thoughtful analysis, intelligent commentary on what what's happening in the world that you ought to know." RIGHT. And nowhere in that sentence did Keller point to the Times' ability to distribute newspapers or sell advertising, nor should he. The winning combination would be for the Times to deliver the package that Keller describes in a way that takes full advantage of the all the mediums at the paper's disposal. Sure, there are times when the idea of news outlets using social media goes totally wrong -- usually when the outlets use social media just because they can, regardless of whether it adds value to the delivery of the news. CNN is probably guilty of this more than anybody, but that's OK. It's better to be misusing/overusing it, rather than not using at all. Trial and error is the best way to learn. Even local news is tapping into social media's potential and starting to see some success --  maybe. I don't have answers to how the business model evolves for news media, but it seems to be clearer every day how the consumption of news will change -- or more accurately, evolve. I am a huge believer in the need for news organizations like the New York Times, which can afford to be an unbiased, well-informed -- and, most important, accountable -- voice. So, knowing that you can't fight the social nature of the Web, and the social nature of news: What's the best way to be in the business of delivering the news, and not end up owning all the railroads? Leave a comment below, or drop me a line and get involved in the conversation on Twitter: http://twitter.com/joemarchese This commentary is insightful. I recommend it to others. Post your response to the public Online Spin blog. See what others are saying on the Online Spin blog. Joe Marchese is President of socialvibe. Online Spin for Tuesday, June 16, 2009: http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=108008

You are receiving this newsletter at brian.bobo@gmail.com as part of your free membership with MediaPost. If this issue was forwarded to you and you would like to begin receiving a copy of your own, please visit our site - www.mediapost.com - and click on [subscribe] in the e-newsletter box. For advertising opportunities see our online media kit. If you'd rather not receive this newsletter in the future click here. We welcome and appreciate forwarding of our newsletters in their entirety or in part with proper attribution. (c) 2009 MediaPost Communications, 1140 Broadway, 4th Floor, New York, NY 10001

Video Insider: Ease of Purchase: The Key To The Paid Web

Ease of Purchase: The Key To The Paid Web by Eric Franchi , Monday, June 15, 2009 Two years ago, few could have predicted that the subscription model would be receiving so much airtime right now. Advertising was growing at a steady clip, particularly online, and CPMs were healthy. But then, few could have predicted the severity of the recession that was to begin in December 2007, which caused the acceleration of permanent change in some industries (banking and automotive) and has a few others on the ropes (newspaper and real estate). On another note, did you know that the average U.S. recession has lasted 17 months since 1854? Statistically, we could be out of the woods as I write this in June 2009. But I digress. Barry Diller -- whose IAC brand oversees businesses that have both subscriber and advertising-based models -- delivered a highly controversial keynote at the Advertising 2.0 Conference last week, where he called the advertising-only model unsustainable for the Web. You can read coverage in CNET. What was particularly interesting was his comment that the iPhone and its App Store is the reason why he has so much faith in the paid model. Why? A few flicks of a finger and your content or software is delivered instantly, and your account is debited or billed. Diller believes that the success of the paid Web will be largely ushered along by the ease of purchase phenomenon. This has profound implications. Right now, it is either ridiculously easy to buy content (think Amazon, iTunes, or the App Store), or somewhat difficult. As an experiment, I intentionally searched for an obscure topic in a past Wall Street Journal article. I was taken to a page where I needed to create an account with a partner who manages archived content. Surely it is a process I would have completed if I was on a real mission for a particular piece of content, but more to the point, it illustrates just how easy the App Store is by comparison. Last week, Steve Robinson penned a Video Insider article on the possibility of Hulu moving to a subscription model. While I don't know if that is in the cards for Hulu -- my take is that the mainstream appeal of the site (not to mention its backing by the networks) will keep it ad-supported -- he makes very good points. Quality content combined with ease of purchase is already a real business online not only for Apple, but for the MLB and Netflix. With iTunes, the App Store and AppleTV, is Apple showing us what the future will look like for the paid Web?   This commentary is insightful. I recommend it to others. Post your response to the public Video Insider blog. See what others are saying on the Video Insider blog. Eric Franchi was part of the team that launched Undertone Networks in 2002, and currently serves as senior vice president of business development. In this role, Eric oversees the company's business development initiatives, which include forging strategic relationships and developing new revenue generation programs, while working closely with the executive team on critical endeavors. He began his interactive career at About.com. Video Insider for Monday, June 15, 2009: http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=107950 You are receiving this newsletter at brian.bobo@gmail.com as part of your membership with MediaPost. If this issue was forwarded to you and you would like to begin receiving a copy of your own, please visit our site - www.mediapost.com - and become a complimentary member. For advertising opportunities see our online media kit. If you'd rather not receive this newsletter in the future click here. We welcome and appreciate forwarding of our newsletters in their entirety or in part with proper attribution. (c) 2009 MediaPost Communications, 1140 Broadway, 4th Floor, New York, NY 10001

Search Insider: Bing: Built For Mobile?

Bing: Built For Mobile? by Mark Simon , Monday, June 15, 2009 Microsoft is often referred to in the tech industry as "the ultimate platform player," because its considerable fortune has been earned by dominating platforms, most notably the Windows platform that most of the world's PCs use. Lately it has been adding platforms, notably Xbox, which has morphed from a games platform to an interactive device capable of serving all varieties of content, including streaming videos and access to social networking sites and services, and it continues to develop its Windows Mobile platform, whose latest iteration is version 6.5. There is no doubt in my mind that Bing will quickly be integrated into each platform to provide search services, and each version will be optimized to leverage the strengths of each. For example, its multimedia capabilities (including its innovative video preview via rollover) will be a part of the Bing experience on Xbox, whereas location-based search services will form a larger part of this experience on mobile devices. More important, it is clear that Bing's "less is more" philosophy toward the presentation of search results is a perfect match for the mobile platform, given that people on the go are more likely to be in a pragmatic state of mind in which they seek instantaneous results to real-world questions than are desktop-bound searchers. While it's true that mobile searchers often enter "research mode" (perhaps seeking an answer to a question that pops up in conversation with another), both the time constraints of busy travelers and the highly limited form factor of mobile device screens work against the kind of multipage results screens we take for granted on desktop displays, where screen real estate is practically unlimited. As a general rule, mobile searchers want results -- just one or two -- that are spot-on relevant, being highly intolerant to what Microsoft calls "search overload." Of course, the battle for mobile penetration on the part of the search engines has only just begun. All of the "big three" have aggressive initiatives in place to establish their brands as the default provider on carriers' devices, and each provides mobile-optimized versions of their desktop UIs tailored for the small screen. Any innovation pioneered by one of them will likely be quickly cloned by a competitor. Additionally, we are only at the beginning of what promises to be a rapid-fire period of innovation in the mobile device market that will shake up the way that people use these things. Some of these advances will be in hardware (Apple's latest version of the iPhone includes voice activation features with obvious voice-to-search potential), with many driven by third-party software developers whose services will hook into search providers via an API. Microsoft is well-positioned to provide a multitude of services for tomorrow's increasingly mobile computing environment, and it should be noted that many of its recent 2008 acquisitions (including Powerset, Fast Search & Transfer, Farecast, and Danger) all provide products and services relevant to the problem of executing search across multiple platforms in a range of contexts. Additionally, Microsoft has plenty of cash available to provide incentives to mobile carriers to place Bing as the default search service on their devices, plus preexisting partnerships with 50 smart phone vendors that have landed its OS on the smart phones of some 160 mobile carriers worldwide. Does all this make Microsoft the inevitable winner in the mobile search wars? Not at all. But it's hardly a company to be counted out, especially in light of the fact that the mobile search revolution is in its earliest stages, with many exciting developments just around the bend. This commentary is insightful. I recommend it to others. Post your response to the public Search Insider blog. See what others are saying on the Search Insider blog. Mark Simon is vice president of industry relations at Didit, an agency for search engine marketing and auctioned media management based in New York. You can reach Mark at msimon@didit.com. Search Insider for Monday, June 15, 2009: http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=107928 You are receiving this newsletter at brian.bobo@gmail.com as part of your membership with MediaPost. If this issue was forwarded to you and you would like to begin receiving a copy of your own, please visit our site - www.mediapost.com - and become a complimentary member. For advertising opportunities see our online media kit. If you'd rather not receive this newsletter in the future click here. We welcome and appreciate forwarding of our newsletters in their entirety or in part with proper attribution. (c) 2009 MediaPost Communications, 1140 Broadway, 4th Floor, New York, NY 10001