Tag Archives: predictions

Online Video

“Punchy” Predicts Seven Online-Video Events for 2010 & Tells His Story

14 Comments

Last year while shooting HBO Labs “Hooking Up,” a fellow named Bobby Jennings introduced himself. Turns out he’s the guy you know as “Punchy” from the popular series by Wicked Awesome Films on YouTube (see also the group’s website). He was the first online-video guru to respond to my invite for guest-blog contributions this month. Here’s his contribution:

punchy

Wicked Awesome Films – A YouTube Story by Bobby Jennings

I’m from Massachusetts. I went to film school at Emerson College in Boston. I interned at MADtv in Los Angeles and stayed here.  I took some classes at the Groundlings and in the earlier half of this decade I made some comedy videos and put them online.  The most successful link we ever had was in 2004 from CollegeHumor and it crashed my meager web site.  Then along came YouTube.

My YouTube Story is pretty typical.  I was watching SNL in December of 2005 with my friend Kevin Brueck.  It was another mediocre episode until the screen went black and the words “SNL Digital Short” came up.  The short was, of course, “Lazy Sunday” with Andy Samberg, Chris Parnell and written and produced by The Lonely Island. We loved it.  We loved it so much we really did NOT say a word to each other as we rewound TiVo and watched it six more times in a row.

“We can do this,” I said.  Kevin agreed.

When I went into work on Monday, I talked to co-workers about the sketch.  Some had seen it. Others hadn’t.  Like millions of others, I decided to google-search the video and the first viable link that popped up for me was on a site called YouTube.  I remember thinking to myself, “What a corny name for a web site.”

My Google-searching led me on a stalker-like rampage as I learned that Andy Samberg had two talented partners in crime with Akiva Schaffer and Jorma Taccone.  I also learned that they had produced a great show called “The ‘Bu” for an LA-based monthly video festival called Channel 101.  Apparently every other aspiring comedian with a Panasonic DVX100 had heard it too because the January screening of Channel 101 was packed to see what it was all about.  I remember seeing Jack Black there and the look on his face said it all — “This used to be a cool indie thing. WTF?”

Kevin and I had already signed up to YouTube but we rarely posted.  We spent most of 2006 producing 5-minute pilots for Channel 101 that never made it into the show.  Finally fed up, we wrote a few sketches in Fall 2006. In January of 2007 the YouTube editors (back when people chose what was on the front page) put our sketch “Punchy” on the front page.  It blew up.  Lucky for us, at that time YouTube didn’t have all the techno-power that it eventually would so Punchy appeared in a heavy rotation quite a bit.  At one point we were #6 most-subscribed Comedians.  I remember thinking, “That’s cool, I guess…”

Ah, the good old days.

We made a classic blunder.  The whole idea, from our point of view, was to get noticed enough online so that we could have “real careers.” We almost were on several television shows, almost had our own TV show, almost made a low-budget feature sketch movie… almost, almost, almost.  Meanwhile, while our focus was elsewhere, YouTube was rolling out the partner program. We gladly accepted and kept posting whenever we could. But the big mistake we made was not putting all of our time and effort into creating regularly delivered programming to our YouTube channel.

In 2008, as we watched the YouTube community explode, we weren’t producing as much and we were losing our audience.  In general, subscriberships went through the roof and YouTubers were making careers.  Most of these channels with huge constituencies were one-man bands, or “vloggers” for the most part.  I didn’t have big boobs and neither did Kevin, so how were we expected to compete!? (I kid, I kid…) I was watching, trying to understand why, but the answer was clear – Nalts knew – the audience was connecting with personalities who posted frequently, not our once-a-month comedy sketch.

I admit my online video hubris.  And I’ve learned some key lessons. You may have already heard or read these somewhere else, but anyway, here they are:

  • Communication with other YouTubers is great but collaboration is essential to growing your channel
  • Communicate with YouTubers by making video responses, commenting on videos, reply on Twitter – just engage. It’s really that simple. Oh, and make decent videos.
  • Most YouTubers I’ve met are far cooler, nicer, smarter and more talented than I anticipated (seriously)
  • If you have a channel with more than one “owner” also create a “personality-focused” channel.  I started contributing to my own channel BOBJENZ in January 2009.  While having far less subscribers than Wicked Awesome Films, the engagement level is arguably the same and in some instances higher because of the more-frequent video posting (simpler sketches and a sporadic rip-off of Philip DeFranco’s news commentary show). It’s also because there’s a lot of “direct address” to the camera – Nalts understood this far before I did and that makes the jerk smarter than me.
  • The most successful YouTubers I know swear by this – it’s gotta be close to the golden rule – say when you’re going to post videos and deliver consistently.  Shane Dawson delivers every Saturday.  Phil DeFranco delivers almost every weekday.  Fulfill that promise to your audience with consistently good content and you’ll have a loyal, growing audience.

It’s important to note that this is all catch up for me.  This is old hat to the many successful YouTubers out there now.  It’s also important to note that YouTube changes constantly and that it will affect your viewership, but the thing that I believe will never change is again – say when you’re going to deliver and never break that promise.  Do that consistently well and you’re golden.

Finally, some predictions for 2010:

  1. YouTube will ditch the “Friends” altogether and use a “Follow” model (sub to videos, comments, ratings, etc of a user)
  2. YT Partners will be able to communicate via “text broadcast” to all subscribers
  3. YouTube will allow for live streaming on partner channels
  4. The YouTube Channel will get yet another UI overhaul; in this it will encourage users to curate & share more effectively
  5. The Apple Tablet will work directly with your TV to get a real-time two-screen experience; but this will lead to something even cooler — every TV remote control will have a touch screen, supplementary data, polls, ratings, even advertising on it in next couple years – maybe we’ll see the first of these in 2010
  6. Shane Dawson will be the #1 most subscribed channel on YouTube by May 2010. He’ll also get a TV deal.
  7. iPhone will open up even bigger when Verizon gets a deal, mid year – more video consumption
book, Online Video

Online-Video Experts Share 2009 Highlights and 2010 Predictions

22 Comments

First of all… the snow. Does it stay or go? I kinda like it, but when a vlogbrother says it’s “gotta go” it gives you pause.

I just invited a few of my favorite thought-leaders in online video to write a guest blog post about 2009 highlights and 2010 predictions. If you’re steeped in online video (as a creator, industry expert, marketer, journalist) and can write goodly, please feel free to e-mail me your own short guest post.

As 2009 wraps up, I am going to review my annual predictions (nailed some, but been quite wrong on others) and put some serious thought into where 2010 is headed.

I’m still surprised at how fast AND slow this online-video space is maturing.

Some amazing things have occurred in 2009 (we’re seeing networks, cable companies, marketers and technology firms getting quite serious about online-video distribution). But a few of my long-standing predictions have not yet proven accurate.

  1. I thought we’d see a popularity shift from amateur vloggers to professional creators (that still doesn’t appear to be happening). The most-viewed video creators are still individual “web stars” with minimal costs and largely 0ne-man bands.
  2. We still haven’t have broken down the gaping chasm between “lean forward” computer-driven online video consumption and “lean backward” viewing on that giant monitor we call still call a television set. Sure some of us are using some band-aid approaches (Roku, Boxee, AppleTV, Netflix, web-enabled televisions, and home-grown tricks). But I’m truly surprised we don’t yet have a broadly marketeted, low-cost ($200 or less) hardware device that allows us to surf web video from our television using a simple processor, wireless receiver and wireless keyboard/mouse. Then again, it was 1998 when I almost purchased a Dell “media” device to enable this. Unlike mobile, this area seems to be caught in a Catch22, and some fierce protectionism by big-stake players.
  3. Most importantly, I remain perplexed at how cautious media buyers have been. We’ve seen tremendous shifts from other mediums to online-video, but the advertising inventory remains widely available. I believe this is due to buyers using banner metrics to assess a different medium. I’m trying to echo my mantra that “an impression isn’t an impression unless it makes one,” and show advertisers that they’re underestimating the persuasive impact of online-video advertising because they’re obsessed with CPMs (cost per million impressions) and click-thru rates. If we had held television to those criteria, we’d probably still have 3 television networks and perhaps be viewing black & white programming.

As most of you WillVideoForFood readers know, I’m writing a book with Wiley publishing (tentatively called “Beyond Viral Video”). So I am hoping these guest posts awaken me (and you) to dimensions I don’t see as a marketer & YouTube personality.

Stay tuned for what I hope will be some interesting insights!

advertising, book

The Devil is in the Device: How We’ll Consume Online-Video Via BoobTube in 2008

8 Comments

old_tv_set_rc.jpgI’m going out on a limb here, but I predict that independent web-to-tv boxes will be (albiet perhaps temporary) an inevitable part of the pending collision between our television sets and Internet. We’re past that debate about whether TV or online-video will prevail. There will be a hybrid model, and quite frankly I can’t wait to consume my online-videos with the ease of TiVo surfing. I just don’t watch television anymore and the cable and telcom providers have made that an easy withdrawal.

Months ago, I would have bet that cable and telcom monoliths could successfully dominate this space with their own connectivity, equipment, and customer base. But Verizon’s latest release of its Fios TV video interface has convinced me of otherwise. It’s rather hopeless, and we should expect nothing more.
Despite continued investments by cable (Comcast) and telcom (Verizon) providers — which includes fiber and expensive capital —  they’re going to be dissintermediated in the short term. Sure they’re winning customers with competitive bundled deals for cable, phone and television. And they have a built advantage because we want a turnkey solution and it’s hard to bypass them unless you want a satellite. But they’re big, slow, and focused more on securing their market position than innovating.

Fios TV SucksWhile the bundling (phone, TV and internet access) is quite economically tempting, the television ‘user experience’ is what real-estate agents call functional obsolescence– it’s a deal breaker. For the past year I’ve suffered through Verizon’s slow, counter-intuitive, buggy and frustrating television interface and would have canceled long ago but for my wife and kids’ desire to watch news and children shows. A few weeks ago, Verizon rolled out an entirely new interface, which is prettier but almost as convoluted. Comcast, last I checked, wasn’t much better. I miss my delightful, buttery TiVo experience, and have two TiVo units depreciating because I can’t figure out how to get them to play nicely with the Fios-mandated Motorolas. And I’m not willing or able to pay a third recurring fee: a TiVo service fee, in addition to my monthly TV bill and rental equipment toll. If only I could just dump the Motorola and pay Fios a cable fee alone.

You see, Fios TV forces me to rent a Motorola media box (actually, I could rent a digital converter, but that doesn’t cost much less per month). I rent two of these stupid units (living room and bed room) and they communicate with each other like Hollywood stars in their 3rd month of marriage.

I expect a cable bill. But a monthly “rental toll” for a mandated unit is reminiscent of Ma-Bell charging $5 a month to my grandparents for a “model T”-like rotary phone (which everyone seems to overlook until the parents die, someone has to clean up the estate, and the children discover they’ve paid thousands in years of renting a phone that could have cost $2.99 at Walmart).

appletv.jpgMeanwhile, I almost tossed my AppleTV months ago, but have recently been spending a lot more time using it. It cost about $300, there’s no recurring fee, and the interface is getting better. I can enjoy any video I download or import as an MP4 (and my handy VisualHub takes care of the conversions for videos I download elsewhere). More importantly, it’s how I’m beginning to consume a lot of my YouTube videos.

On the negative side, iTunes has its share of limitations: a paltry video-purchase selection via the iTunes store, a ridiculous rental service I won’t soon use again (after a “Live Free or Die Hard” expired before I ever started watching it), and this baffling confusion of trying to synch media across various iPods and Mac accounts.

And frankly, I’m quite sick of being deprived by Mac of sharing or viewing my purchased videos and movies– legally, across my own digitalia.

ant farmThat makes me so angry, I’ve starting to resort to getting movies via other mischievous means. Last night I even fell for a Google text ad that boasted a $35 one-time “free movie downloads for life” scam. For my impossible-to-refund fee, I received a special log-in website, password and instructions… which basically provided me a link to LimeWire (a free p2p tool). Caveat emptor I suppose. I was reminded of when, at the age of 9, I bought a “remote-control ghost: flies as high as 100 feet” from a comic book ad. Eight weeks later I received a white plastic bag, a balloon, and 100 feet of string. Even Sea Monkeys and the Ant Farm were better deals.

But something promising occurred quietly in the past week. AppleTV pushed out an upgrade, and now my YouTube viewing is slightly closer to the experience of watching videos via YouTube.com directly.

Initially, YouTube viewing via AppleTV provided a fraction of the experience permitted on YouTube. I couldn’t even look at my subscriptions or sort recent videos by creator. This limited YouTube interface is part of the reason I dumped my iPhone after two weeks (AT&T’s poor connectivity was another reason). But now I can at least go beyond watching the top YouTube videos of the day. I can view a random subset of my subscriptions (for odd reasons, they only let me peer into my first dozen or so, which is a bit constraining when you’ve subscribed to 800 people).

If you’re not a YouTube addict, the AppleTV makes less sense, and Apple won’t soon penetrate the market with these units unless they improve the interface further, renegotiate failed content deals and partner with electronic manufacturers or bring down the unit price.

So what’s ahead in 2008?

  1. First, AppleTV needs to start embedding ads. As a creator, I’m not getting profiting from viewers using AppleTV and neither is Apple or YouTube yet. If Apple wants to leverage near ubiquitous high bandwidth, thereby circumventing or coexisting with cable/phone providers, it’s going to have to find an ad-supported model first.
  2. Watch for similar boxes that are inexpensive and provide access to online-video via television. I still haven’t opened my free Sling Box so maybe that’s a step in the right direction?
  3. If the programmers and networks (CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, etc.) were more organized, they’d cooperate to build a model that could dissintermedia cable and phone monopolies (or at least develop a media-friendly model that offsets the power of these dominatrix-like “last mile” providers. But that’s unlikely because the media companies hate each other, and monopoly legislation would hamper it.
  4. Instead, watch for a startup (whatever happened to Joost?) that creates something similar to the AppleTV experience: elegant, content rich, ad supported and no mandated monthly fee initially. They’ll share ad revenue with media companies or amateurs and create inventory that piques the interest of advertising networks.
  5. Once a few of these independent boxed units establish a base, they can begin charging a modest monthly fee. Heck, I’d pay AppleTV a few bucks a month just to ensure I can view YouTube without the current restrictions. How am I to choose between Lemonette, Renetto
  6. Naturally, the electronic manufacturers are trying to squeeze into this space, but it’s not a play built for either a phone company or consumer-product electronic manufacturer. The interim winner will be one that — ala Apple with its recent offerings — puts the user experience above all else.
  7. There are probably other players creeping into this spaces of which I’m not even aware. Know of any?