Will Video for Food » Yahoo Video

The Secret Sauce of Viral Video? Falling Off a Stage. And Dressing Like a Dork in Public. July 10, 2008

Posted by Nalts in : Yahoo Video, advertising , 43comments

It’s now officially my Halmark. I like falling off the stage when I speak. This morning I did it at a Yahoo! conference in Toronto, and practically caused the organizer to go into labor early (sorry, Adina).

Here’s the highlights, and includes some footage for a future video called “Dork Runner.” Thanks to mugglesam for finding the costume store and working camera on this footage. Dork Runner will be in Philly’s YoTube event Friday, NYC on Monday, and LA on Wednesday. Stay tuned for a montage.

On Slideshare, you can download the presentation I showed here, which is called “The Secrets of Viral Video Marketing.” The embed is below, and you can click thru to get to the download page. Please attribute it to willvideoforfood.com per creative commons or whatever.

| View | Upload your own

Secrets of Viral-Video Marketing (final deck) July 9, 2008

Posted by Nalts in : Yahoo Video, YouTube, advertising , 12comments

Thanks for your feedback on the attached deck. Here’s the final version, and now I have 3 minutes to get dressed and get to the meeting room. You can download it at Slideshare.

| View | Upload your own

Kevin is a poopie head July 5, 2008

Posted by Nalts in : AOL, BlipTV, Blogs on Video, Contest, Diet Coke, Future of Online Video, GooTube, Google, Making Money, Making Videos, Mentos, Nalts, Online Video, Profit, Revver, Search, TechCrunch, Uncategorized, Video, Video Advertising, Video Business, Video Contests, Video Gear, Video Online Tools, Video Sites, Video Software, Videocameras, Viral Video, Web 2.0, Yahoo Video, YouTube, advertising, apple, copyright, google video, marketing, metacafe, poopie head, popular videos, video cameras, viral videologist, vlogging, xlntads , 33comments

discuss!

Is Yahoo TV Closing or Widening Chasm Between Online Video & Television? March 25, 2008

Posted by Nalts in : Making Money, Making Videos, Online Video, Video Advertising, Video Business, Yahoo Video, YouTube, advertising , 13comments

Which online-video site is mostly likely to be part of the bridge between television and the Internet? You can fault the model, and question it’s sustainability. But Yahoo TV is well poised to leverage its partnerships with Verizon and TiVo to start serving its bite-sized video content via television sets equipped with broadband boxes.

Take, for example, Yahoo TV’s “Prime Time in No Time,” a show hosted by Frank Nicotero that recaps the prior evening’s television shows. It’s interesting on at least two levels:

It appeals to TV junkies. I’m not sure there’s a market for general prime-time recaps (since audiences tend to form around tighter niches). But it’s clearly targeted at TV viewers who maybe need some hand holding to start consuming via Yahoo’s mini-TV play. With some prime time promotion, I can see this audience growing.
The ad model is interesting. Verizon gets a brief intro (not a preroll that I noticed), some banner wrap-arounds, and even a logo tucked nicely in the host’s corner frame. It’s dominant without being obtrusive.

So we’re still in the infancy of the “TV and online video” collision, which is clearly going to take much more time than we hoped. I’m far less interested in television administered in once-a-day pills (instead of intravanious drips). I find the more fascinating side to be the amateur creators gaining broader exposure than they currently get (assuming they’re good enough, and have consistent content that appeal to steady audiences even if relatively small).

While YouTube is still better poised for the latter, Yahoo comes at the web more like AOL: looking more like TV on the computer than web video as most consume it now. So we see less and more polished content, but fairly superficial interaction between the content and its audience. It’s still “one to many” unlike the magic of online video “many to many” play.

It’s Amazon not eBay.

As an example, one of my few popular videos on Yahoo has 90K views but just 90 comments. While one in a thousand comment on Yahoo Video, most of my YouTube videos get 1-2 percent of viewers commenting. My Mac Air spoof got 27K views with 13 comments, while the same Mac Air spoof on YouTube got 374K views and 1564 comments.

Typically the initial online successes are “pure plays” and not an offline entity moving in. This is true with almost any industry: gaming, retail, travel and media. But it will take a few failures along the way. YahooTV is bringing TV and online video ever so slightly closer together — even if it ends up being a log over the river.

Note that Yahoo Video (the quasi amateur section) still exists, but it’s not part of the primary menu on Yahoo. In fact, I almost gave up in my search for it, so it’s not likely drawing in many Yahoo users (Alexa won’t let me isolate http://video.yahoo.com/ from Yahoo.com, so I don’t know how it’s fairing). The featured videos seem to get paltry views relative to YouTube features, and even the Yahoo Video Awards blog post has just 35 comments 4 days after announced (by contrast, most top 100 YouTubers get that kind of views and interactions within an hour of posting).

P.S. Updated 3/27: Check out what InsideOnlineVideo has to say about Yahoo.

Even My Boss Knew About This Video December 5, 2007

Posted by Nalts in : Blogs on Video, Future of Online Video, Google, Killer Video, Making Videos, Online Video, TechCrunch, Video, Video Sites, Viral Video, Web 2.0, Yahoo Video, YouTube, google video, popular videos , 3comments

It’s not often my boss mentions YouTube, and I usually try to avoid eye contact when he does. But at today’s staff meeting he mentioned that a friend from a former employer had a YouTube video called “Here Comes Another Bubble” by The Richter Scales. It’s a wonderful satire on the absurdity of web 2.0 which, indeed, begs for another bubble burst. It’s done to the music of Billy Joel’s “We Didn’t Start the Fire.”

No sooner had I forgotten about his Bubble video did I discover that it trumped me on the “highest rated video of the day on YouTube. And I had actually done a storyboard for my “iPod Angel & Devil” video, which involved makeup, script, and a wicked amount of editing time (parenthetically this iPod video was born out of my frustration about overlooking the free AT&T phone by signing up directly with AT&T instead of Mac, and a quote that popped out of my mouth in a meeting this week: “I just paid $400 to eliminate jealousy.”).

Kudos to the Bubble video, which will be one of the seminal viral creations. If I’m going to be beat I’m delighted to see something this entertaining (versus musical montages of funny cat photos). This was cleverly written, jampacked imagery, and self depricating (it depicts a blog post with “another lame web 2.0 music video”)

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fi4fzvQ6I-o[/youtube]

YouTube Versus Long Tail December 1, 2007

Posted by Nalts in : Blogs on Video, Future of Online Video, Online Video, Video Business, Video Sites, Viral Video, Yahoo Video, YouTube, popular videos , 11comments

Want to get your stuff seen? Should you obsess with YouTube or go for the “long tail“? Let’s explore this important debate, and obviously the right answer is “do both.” But don’t hold your breath waiting for a million views on YouTube, or kill yourself getting your video on the homepage of some niche blog that gets 20 visitors a day.

When you look at the share of online videos by comparing various major players, you’ll find YouTube dominates — whether you’re measuring via ComScore’s roughly 1 million panel or Hitwise’s 25 millionish data via internet service providers). YouTube’s slice can vary, depending on your data source and how you define the pie (for instance, including MySpace or not).

Although YouTube is indisputably the biggest with more views than the next several largest sites combined, this recent press release by ComScore puts things in perspective. Although more than 90 percent of my average video views occur on YouTube, that’s not representative.

Together we all viewed 9 billion videos online in September. But only 2.6 million of those were seen by 70 million people via Google/YouTube (representing 28.3%). (Note that more than 38 million people viewed approximately 360 million videos on MySpace.com, yet MySpace TV accounted for 766,000 viewers and 1.1 million videos. But aren’t some of these YouTube videos?).

When you’re looking at pure-play online video sites, the cliff drops sharply after that. Just 4 percent for Yahoo and 4 percent for Fox. Then the other major networks are in the low single digits.

So here’s the interesting thing. Only about 50% of the views are coming from the top 10 sites. That means the rest of the industry is hyper fragmented… aka the “long tail” of video.

Pandemic Labs (a “revolutionary marketing agency”) has a blog that criticized my recent AdAge article’s statement: “The vast majority of online viewing occurs on YouTube. Putting your videos on a bloated-product.com site is the online equivalent to running television commercials on a kiosk hidden in an abandoned cemetery.”

Says the blog: (Nalts) is unfairly sidelining some very powerful sites and not taking into account the power of viewer targeting which is crucial to viral success for marketers. The wording of this lesson accidentally makes it seem like YouTube is the only site worth seeding a video on, even though that is probably not what he meant to imply. Pandemic Labs has a network of over 50 sites that we use to seed videos. We don’t use all of these sites for every campaign, but it is critical to the spread and success of viral videos to reach specific target audiences on larger sites such as Break, Metacafe, and Kontraband, all the way down to small sites like SuperDeluxe, JibJab, and Dorks.com.

Fair criticism- don’t forget the long tail. While I don’t advocate trying to create a new video destination if you’re a brand trying to market (fish where the fish are), it is worth remembering that a viral-video marketing campaign is bigger than putting all your eggs in the YouTube basket.

Bottom line for you “scanners”: There’s a lot of viewing taking place on smaller video sites and blogs, and it’s much easier to get featured on them. More importantly, you’re now targeting. Para examplâ€… a view of my video for Holiday Inn Express is worth far more on travel sites than YouTube. Just don’t under estimate the labor associated with getting quantity of views on smaller properties, and watch that “point of diminishing returns” very closely.

Online Video Sites and Monetization Status November 21, 2007

Posted by Nalts in : Future of Online Video, Making Videos, Online Video, Profit, Revver, Video Sites, Yahoo Video, YouTube, advertising, google video, metacafe , 5comments

TubeMogul’s blog did a nice summary of the online-video sites it feeds, and provides user feedback about the site and monetization status (whether you can make money on the sites). You can also read the “Zagat’s”-like report as a PDF. Thanks to Mark from TubeMogul for bringing this to our attention.

The Best Tool for Uploading Your Video to Multiple Video Sites September 10, 2007

Posted by Nalts in : Future of Online Video, Making Videos, Online Video, Video, Video Business, Video Online Tools, Video Sites, Viral Video, Yahoo Video, YouTube, google video, metacafe, popular videos , 15comments

Nearly 9 months ago I begged for an alternative to uploading my videos manually to multiple websites. But shame on me. I’ve been uploading to dozens of sites for nearly two years, and we’re talking about nearly 500 videos. So that translates to several thousand times of doing the mundane “title it, describe it, tag it, upload, and wait.” Rinse, repeat.

Solutions have gradually developed, and all but one of these is free. So why have I waited until today to change this forever?

Very few credible solutions have emerged in this space until recently. I’d even spoken with developers to create a custom web-based application that would focus on simplifying uploads and cope with site-specific criteria (monetization requirements). The potential here is enormous because content-creators would make that site a regular stop, which would give power to the tool to permit less popular sites to receive content.
Most of my recent videos have been YouTube-specific and I’ve let my presence on other sites fade. Still, there are always a few that could have life beyond YouTube. And when I focused on Revver and Metacafe I made decent money for a short period. Ultimately my Revver and Metacafe dollars have dwindled as Revver views are low and few of my videos have hit the criteria for revenue-sharing on Metacafe.
Ultimately I’ve distrusted non-credentialed “uploader” applications because of the risks I may take. Do they keep a copy of the video, and what rights might they assume on them? More importantly, the mystery company owns YOUR passwords of each video website. Do you want them being able to change payment preferences in your Revver, Metacafe or YouTube settings?

It’s time to overcome this fear.

I’m starting with what appears to be the leader in the space: TubeMogul. I neglected to mention them in a recent post that sited two players, and I heard from you WVFF readers and from the company.

So here’s the current landscape of players. I am not brave enough to try them all, and in some cases I list the “deal breaker” that turned me away.

TubeMogul

Pros: Hands-down winner of the space. Registering and password process made me feel safe.
Cons: Limited sites supported: YouTube, Metacafe, MySpace, Yahoo, Revver, AOL Video, DailyMotion, BrightCove. Interface was frustrating because the process of defining the sites to monitor is very different from identifying the sites for uploading. This required me visiting each of the sites for various information at different stages: e-mail, password, URL of my video page.
Note: The site asked if I wanted to store the passwords, so I’m hoping I won’t need to teach it again. The status feedback hasn’t yet changed on the videos I uploaded an hour ago.

Vidmetrix

Pro: Simple interface, good analytics, easy to add account to site via interface.
Con: Too few sites supported - deal breaker until developed. They are exclusively allowing Google Video, Metacafe, MySpace, Revver, Veoh, YouTube. Typos on site and lack of contact information also made me weary to try.

HeySpread

Pro: Nice interface from developer that seems legitimate.
Con: Deal breaker: You need to remember your passwords, because they’re used in the “session” but not databased. This may have been to quell concerns about sharing passwords, but it seems like I’m just as vulnerable for password theft whether it retains them or not. And it’s a huge inconvenience.

Veoh

Pro: By uploading on Veoh, you can also add Google Video, MySpace and YouTube to the sites that receive the video. This is, to my knowledge, the only video site that provides that unselfish functionality.
Con: Veoh is supposed to be a revenue-sharing site, but I haven’t made a penny on it in the months and months I’ve tried it. It’s frustrating to even try uploading directly to Veoh on that basis. Not a deal breaker but seems like a waste of time.

VideoPostRobot:

Pro: Best diversity of sites. Supports: AOL Uncut Videos. Youtube, Google Video, Bolt, Putfile, Metacafe, Yahoo Video, MSN Soapbox, Myspace Video, Revver, Livevideo, Stupidvideos, Break, Brightcove, Grouper, Zippyvideos, iFilm, Veoh, Flurl, Blip.TV. $1 trial and downloadable application may simplify storing and using (although does present challenges for traveling uploaders).
Con: $19.95 is a deal breaker when there are free alternatives. Lack of company contact information and poor grammar on website makes me fearful to even try it.

Bottom line:

VideoMogul wins for easy upload features and strong statistic monitoring (its origins). The site is free, and fairly intuitive (although the user interface could use some simplifying). Ideally I’d like to set up my upload and monitor sites once, and then have a simple interface for each time I post or review statistics. I’d also value alerts for when a video happens to move. For example, if my Revver video got more than 100 views, my Metacafe video made it into the hermetically sealed “Producer Rewards” program, or I made my first penny on Veoh.

Is Soapbox a Zune? MSN Launches YouTube Competitor February 19, 2007

Posted by Nalts in : AOL, Google, Yahoo Video, YouTube, google video , 10comments

It’s been in talks since September 2006, but MSN finally launched a public beta of SoapBox (source: DigitalTrends). Although MSN has about 10% of the search market (compared to Google and Yahoo’s combined share of more than 80%), it does have the advantage of being backed by the world’s largest software company. While the world probably doesn’t need another user-generated video site, Microsoft might make Soapbox fly with sheer marketing might.

There actually are some features that make Soapbox unique:

Soapbox allows users simultaneously to watch videos and browse for new ones on the same screen. Something nice for those of us with vADHD. The result, however, is less of a community feel and more of a broadcast feel (like Yahoo! Video or AOL Uncut).
You can upload more formats than most sites: AVI, ASF, WMV, MOV, MPEG1/2/4, 3GPP, or DV file formats. And get this. While it’s uploading you can continue to surf the site (that’s extremely rare).
You can view them on Window’s Media Player (that still around?) or Flash. No Quicktime.
The interface is ‘perty (albiet not user centric). The player controls are very smooth. Videos appear to stream rapidly, but we also know that not many people are using it yet.

And now for some complaints.

When you select a video, the URL doesn’t change. That makes it difficult to link to specific videos. Only a savvy user will realize that you have to select “share” and copy the URL manually. So, for example, I can share this video of William laughing. But almost thought the feature was missing.
In a similar flaw, the URL doesn’t change based on the section of the site you’re in. So I can’t send you directly to the comedy category.
Sniff, sniff. I don’t smell any advertising revenue sharing. Hisssss.
No Quicktime viewing. Windows Media? Isn’t that obsolete?
Can’t download videos.
The comments are buried. Half the fun of YouTube is the dialogue around the comments. But Soapbox takes more of a broadcast model like Yahoo Video or AOL Uncut (where people almost never comment). We’ll probably see very little community build around Soapbox.

older posts »

The Secret Sauce of Viral Video? Falling Off a Stage. And Dressing Like a Dork in Public. July 10, 2008

Secrets of Viral-Video Marketing (final deck) July 9, 2008

Kevin is a poopie head July 5, 2008

Is Yahoo TV Closing or Widening Chasm Between Online Video & Television? March 25, 2008

Top Ten Stupidest Moments of Online Video in 2007 December 11, 2007

Even My Boss Knew About This Video December 5, 2007

YouTube Versus Long Tail December 1, 2007

Online Video Sites and Monetization Status November 21, 2007

The Best Tool for Uploading Your Video to Multiple Video Sites September 10, 2007

Is Soapbox a Zune? MSN Launches YouTube Competitor February 19, 2007

About...

Nalts Links

Recent Nalts Videos

Recent Posts

Funny Comments

Archives

Blogroll

Feeds