See, the problem here is that people seem to think that advertisers are just looking to throw away money. :)
I seriously don't know why people expect videos about uninteresting (except to "the audience of ten") topics to EVER be monetized. As far as I know, there's not an example YET of that happening. If anyone knows of one, feel free to post and let me know. What *I* see happening here is MSM picking up people or internet video production companies that have proven their ability to get, maintain and grow an audience. Meanwhile, in the other direction, I see production companies that have been trying their hand at getting into television starting to make series for the internet to get exposure, make contacts and hopefully get a buzz started about their company that will catapult them back into television or Hollywood. Like I've been saying for ~ 6 months, without a way to verify and quantify demographics, you have NOTHING to offer potential advertisers. NOTHING. Your only hope is to have some kind of niche program content that will prompt a sponsor to back your play and support you financially to get your show made. I'm not talking about some adsense dollars or revenue-sharing from viral videos. People seem to be WONDERING when the advertisers are going to show up with their money, and that's going to be AFTER someone can guarantee them the proper ROI. I've seen a lot of talented videobloggers with shows that aren't sponsored AT.ALL. I think conversations that focus on "When are videobloggers in general going to be monetized?" are completely disingenuous. I think a better conversation (and also more useful to the community) is "How is someone going to figure out how to quantify demographics similar to what's done already in MSM so that the talented videobloggers can be properly recognized and sponsored?" I mean, look at public access television. You don't have to pay to have a show on public access..... OTOH, you don't GET PAID either. :) You do it because you like to do it, and there are rules (at least in Manhattan, NYC) that prohibit you from advertising, because you're not paying anything for your broadcast slot in the first place. The question could be asked "When are they going to monetize public access shows?" :D Well... Just because someone has a show doesn't mean that ANYONE feels it's worth advertising on. Meanwhile, you have people that have shows like "Max on Boxing" that do public access for years, and demonstrate their worth and now Max Kellerman's on ESPN. He was the best and most passionate boxing commentator on television on his internet show, AND he was doing CALL-IN shows!!! Not like these guys that sit at a table with papers in their hands with their lines on them and teleprompters on the cameras and earpieces in their ears with producers telling them what to do and say! :D Max Kellerman should have been in MSM way before he actually was, because he was demonstrating passion, ability, knowledge and talent on public access that outdid the MSM sportscasters that were talking about the same fights at the same time.... AND he was giving his opinions on the fly to people that would call in randomly. The same thing's happening here with Amanda and Ask A Ninja and WallStrip and Hayden's new projects. People are demonstrating ability on the internet and getting "picked up". It's not like these are accidents or that they were all lucky. :D People are being selected for whatever their consistent, proven talents are. There's no trickle-down. There's no "matter of time". I think that if someone wants to be supported financially for their videoblog, they need to take a hard look at what they're doing and honestly ask themselves "WHY would ANYONE pay me to do this?" -- billcammack http://reelsolid.tv --- In [email protected], "Steve Watkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I remain skeptical on a number of fronts. > > For a start television, at least in the past, was just the perfect > medium for advertising. Mass audiences, in a state where they are > likely to absorb the message, have their attention focussed on your > ad, and where avoiding the advert required at least some effort. > > Now this is changing because of PVR's and tv on demand/iptv set-top > boxes, and of course the internet. > > But that doesnt mean that the internet will be as friendly or > desirable to advertisers. The more it starts to resemble TV, eg mass > audiences and lots of safe, controlled, professional content, the more > the existing advertising business with its billions of $ will be > interested, and will switch over. > > Now thats where I assume many of the $ we see on these charts that > predict future internet ad spend, will come from, if it comes at all. > And that may happen, but its certainly not the world im interested in. > Its still msotly the same players, its really TV on the internet and > it turns out that doesnt actually offer me much more than TV by > radiowaves, cable, satellite. > > I guess I just expect that if most of the viewers & cash go to the > internet, all the existing producers of TV shows will go to the > internet, although I suspect that whatever the technology, really huge > audiences are a thing of the past because there is always so much more > choice to fragment the audience. > > On a wider level I think humans, society & economy have exceeded their > own limitations when it comes to scale. Many of the different > challenges that humans face over the coming century will be about > scale. We've achieved many things that would not be possible if it > were not for the absurd scale they have been conducted on, largely > powered by the industrial revolution and its fossil fuels. But it > doesnt look like its sustainable unless the sci-fi mineral mining > multi-planet humanity becomes a reality at some point. So maybe the > solutions are all small, local, primitive compared to todays giddy > heights, but sustainable and less of a house of cards. > > Bug numbers are so cool and sexy right now, maybe there will come a > time when down becomes the new up, and I wonder if this is where > future economic realities may meet long-tail concepts. Until then > theres insane profit to be made by those that can ride the bohemoth, > so I doubt it will happen till its unavoidable. > > Cheers > > Steve Elbows > --- In [email protected], "Frank Sinton" <frank@> wrote: > > > > The shift will be faster than people think b/c of the demographics > of online > > video (the coveted 18-34 year-old crowd). It is common sense really > - when > > was the last time you heard a 20-something year-old talk about a TV > show? > > The buzz and chatter is all about online video, social networks, etc.. > > > > > > > > On a related note, the LonelyGirl announcement today was huge for indie > > video producers. I know it is a "hit", but regardless, it signals a > shift > > b/c it appears that LG licensed their content to MySpaceTV w/out > having to > > sign an exclusive or hand over creative control. Big shift for old media > > player Fox (although sometimes the devil is in the details, so it is > hard to > > say how good of a deal it actually was). > > > > > > > > -Frank > > > > > > > > Frank Sinton > > > > CEO > > > > frank@ > > > > http://mefeedia.com/user/franks/ > > > > > > > > http://mefeedia.com - Discover, Collect, and Share video blogs > > > > _____ > > > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Behalf Of Chuck > > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:29 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [videoblogging] Re: the ugly truth about online video > > > > > > > > This made me recall what Bill Gates said back in January: > > > > http://newteevee. <http://newteevee.com/2007/01/29/gates-tv-is-doomed/> > > com/2007/01/29/gates-tv-is-doomed/ > > > > Ad dollars to video is not going to change from TV overnight, but there > > WILL be a change over time and a significant one at that. > > > > Chuck > > > > --- In videoblogging@ <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com> > > yahoogroups.com, "caminofilm" <caminofilm@> > > wrote: > > > > > > interesting article about predictions for online video advertising > > > > > > http://mediabiz. > > <http://mediabiz.blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about-> > > blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/07/27/the-ugly-truth-about- > > online-video/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > >
