Here’s further evidence that professionally produced video content is becoming a big business. According to the Diffusion Group, ad rates for professionally produced video is in the $30-$40 CPM range.
Check out this Silicon Alley Insider article for more.
I’ve recently discovered the blog Online Video Watch, which doesn’t an excellent job keeping tabs on the latest developments in the online video world. I particularly liked this recent post, which focuses on the migration from user generated content to professionally produced content on the web.
Now, I don’t think UGC is going away anytime soon. In terms of economic value, though, professionally produced content that is polished, smart, and sophisticated will have an edge. This is particularly true when large brands are concerned, as there is an even greater incentive to protect their core brand assets.
According to this NY Times article, Lorne Michaels and NBC has decided that Jimmy Fallon’s debut as host of Late Night will happen online. Instead of starting off on television, and potentially have a rough start like Conan did when he began his current tenure, the network thinks that putting Jimmy online will give him a chance to find his style and ease into his new role. It’s expected that the segments will be in the five to ten minute range, and will be published to the web every night at a set time.
Clearly, this is more evidence that video on the web is quickly becoming established as a viable medium that major brands and media companies will continue to leverage more heavily as time goes on.
This is NYTimes.com article is really exciting for a number of reasons:
We’ll be watching!
The folks at libertarian magazine Reason recently launched Reason.tv, a site focusing on videos promoting “free minds and free markets.” The site is already quite content reach, featuring dozens of videos. The highlight is the “Drew Carey Project”, starring the well-known comedian and tackling a number of hot-button political issues like NAFTA, drug legalization, and eminent domain. All in all, this is a great example of a well-done site that works on a publishing model rather than a brand marketing model.
Big news coming from Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers: soon we’ll be able to choose from a “nearly infinite variety” of top-level domains (instead of being restricted to old workhorses like .com, .org, .edu, etc.) So perhaps we’ll see a greater variety of video-friendly extensions in the near future, like .movie, .film, .show, or .network.
Last July, Mercedes-Benz launched what I think is probably the slickest of all the current branded video sites online: mercedes-benz.tv.
The site features Mercedes-oriented programming 24 hours a day, with separate channels focusing on lifestyle, cars, sports, history and innovation. And the execution is incredibly impressive: really high quality video, broadcasts in German and English, a wildly innovative (in a good way) navigational scheme. I’m looking forward to seeing how the site progresses from here on out.
This report is almost a year old, but still contains some enlightening statistics on the exploding growth of video on the web. From the report:.
Will It Blend? is a web video-driven viral marketing campaign from Blendtec, a company that makes industrial strength blenders. Each episode consists of founder Tom Dickson attempting to blend various items, including an iPod, golf balls, cubic zirconia, and a McDonald’s Extra Value Meal.
The campaign has been a huge success, landing the founder of the little known company on such national television programs as the Today Show (where he blended a half a chicken with Coca-Cola before feeding it to Meredith Viera) and the Tonight Show (where he successfully blended a rake handle.) Between YouTube and the Will It Blend? website, the videos have been viewed more than 100 million times. According to the company, “The campaign took off almost instantly. We have definitely felt an impact in sales. Will it Blend has had an amazing impact to our commercial and our retail products.”
This article on NYTimes.com raised my eyebrows, as the ISPs (remember the term - Internet Service Provider) set price tiers based on Internet bandwidth consumption. My initial reaction is indignation, after all, what is the $100/month high speed cable access for? The industry started pricing for connection speed and now are they planning to add additional charges on top of that? And it can’t be good for online video – it’s adoption and growth as a unique media format.
But perhaps it helps distinguish web video from the mass media, providing a competitive differentiation. We have the largest TV and movie producers distributing content and expanding their revenue sources on the backs of the Internet revolution. There is no doubt that watching full screen video online has enhanced the interactive experience, but if someone wants to watch a 2 hour movie, maybe they ought to get back on the couch. Perhaps the medium is better served by short-form, episodic video content with more opportunities for interaction – as long as it still plays in real-time.
I could argue either way, and of course prefer full speed, unlimited usage for free, but somebody has to pay for something.