Making money with online video

There is now a chart to track which online services offer revenue sharing opportunities for filmakers. Scott is writing a book about online video for Ballentine Books (to be released "soon"). His blog, CinemaTech, is a must read!

At the same time, Brightcove has announced its revenue sharing plan. Now any professional filmaker can join the Wall Street Journal and other top publications on the Brightcove network, let Brightcove sell ads for them, and split the revenue down the middle.

Online video usage behaviors

Over the past year, I have experimented with delivering video both via iTunes (RSS feeds) and using web pages (on blogs, web pages, and through Google Video). These two methods are quite different and seem to serve audiences in different ways.

There seems to be something special about being part of a feed, as members who subscribe expect to receive updates. Each time I post a new file to the feed, regular subscribers automatically download it, and the rest of the feed archive receives more action as well. Each item gets picked over again and again when new pieces are sent off. This on-going increase in activity can last for a couple of weeks after a new piece hits the feed.

Web pages typically require notification for people to go get the featured piece. On the other had, a piece placed on a page that has a lot of traffic brings the material to wider audiences. The numbers "spike" for a period of a few days, bringing in huge numbers as people view the piece. Then, that page is no longer "new" and the number of views taper off to next to nothing. That page might still be on a site or popular blog, but people just don't go back to find it after the "featured" period is over.

A side benefit to web "features" is the feed subscription. Slowly but surely, a few people who are exposed to a feature find the feed and subscribe.

Here are some other perspectives, that mirror my experiences to some degree. With all of the recent focus on YouTube and other huge sites, these thoughts from the makers of an RSS video feed reader have relevance.

Basically, YouTube and other web-based sites have to pay for the bandwidth used by their readers/watchers. RSS feeds download as needed (without the users watching until the downloads are complete). The cost difference is enormous!

So far, I have not had a video "feature" outstrip my bandwidth, but it is conceivable that it could occur. The $7 per month I pay my ISP covers about 40,000 downloads, and I'm nowhere near max. For October, 46% of the bandwidth used has been for featured pieces, and the rest has been spread over the archive. The spread touches every single item in the archive each month. I feel it is healthy to have this mix. I'm finding ways to feature a piece and then attract a few new subscribers each time.

And yes, there is a thrill when someone (or several people) takes "one of each" from the entire collection. Through the RSS feed, it happens fairly regularly. So far, that is the best indication I have that my materials are serving my audience well.

Social video?

Are the big video sites becoming too big, overrun with predators, etc? Smaller video sharing sites are taking a different tactic: provide social networking platforms for others to brand and use to bring their audiences together around their theme.

This piece in AlwaysOn identifies a couple of entrants, Dave.tv and vSocial. Dave Networks powers the fan site, Stargate.tv, and vSocial is the platform behind a Chevrolet-sponsored site called Reduce Your Use.

From the article:

"These campaigns are akin to Google's self-service offerings, such as AdSense and AdWords. These self-service offerings are a great way to tap the long tail of publishers, which is the target.

Now, there is no doubt in my mind that these companies will have their hands full with business. More and more movie studios and television, down to free-agent artists and musicians will want to create social communities around specific shows or a specific brand to create buzz. Manufacturers, retailers and service providers will also find such services useful. Wal-Mart (WMT) is already using video to impart messages. I hear Monster (MNST), the recruitment firm, wants to start a video show with a social networking feature."

Online remix sites emerging

First, we heard that Yahoo snapped up JumpCut, and now another group has been funded. Eyespot allows groups to share their mixes.

SubscribeCast now pays

The first seemingly robust solution supporting for-pay distribution of user generated video? SubscribeCast offers a rate calculator, in which I've not been able to put out an unprofitable feed. It may be that my forecasts are optimistic, or that it's just not feasible to capture the audience and to make them pay this way. But if this works, organizations of all kinds should be able to improve their donations, revenue, and audience loyalty.

Podcast numbers emerging

There can be no doubt that Apple created a small industry by supporting podcasts through its iTunes distribution system. Of course, video podcasting represents a small portion of the total (I would guess it's no more than 10%).

Now a blogger has tracked the growth, by category. He makes his report as a screencast, and suggests opportunities for audio podcasts. His screencast is below:

What's it all mean... in video

There just can't be a better way to report this event than to watch what others are saying about it in their posts. Are video posts about this on YouTube better than the blog posts or newspaper articles? OK... maybe not better, but they sure are entertaining. No problem with identifying sources or locking down facts. Now we can get what news has always been: a reflection of how people feel, whether fact or fiction.

YouTube closes deals with Big Media, Google

What a week. With all the talk about videos through iTunes, Google, etc, YouTube comes out as the rose. Variety reports:

* YouTube to be acquired by Google for 1.6 billion

* CBS pacted with YouTube to provide daily short-form content from its entertainment, news and sports networks. Net will sell advertising around its videos and split the revenue with YouTube. In addition, CBS will use new technology, expected to launch later this year, from the Netco to identify user-uploaded content that violates its copyrights and will then decide whether to ask YouTube to take it down, or to keep it up and split revenue from related ads.

* Sony BMG Music Entertainment and Universal Music Group signed content licensing, revenue-sharing deals to put portions of their musicvideo catalogs on YouTube, along with other special video content. Both will also, like CBS, take advantage of YouTube's new technology to strike or make money from copyright-violating content uploaded by users. Warner Music already has a similar deal with YouTube.

* Sony BMG and Warner Music signed content distribution, revenue-sharing agreements for their musicvideos on Google Video. In addition to making money from ads on the search giant's video section, they will take advantage of its new syndication technology to put their videos on other Web sites, along with ads. They also will use Google technology to let users access some of their content to create their own musicvideos and will get a cut of related ad revenue.

Video sharing comparisons

There are a growing body of reviews about video sharing. It seems like 40 of them are fairly easy to talk about. This graphic came from MustSee and this item from DV Guru compares 10 of the top services to date.

Is YouTube profitable?

This has been circulating around recently, so it brings to light just how many people are watching videos online.

Basically, YouTube is selling ads on their homepage, with banners on each video page. They are investigating how to make more money, but it already seem to be breaking even. The gross usage numbers are staggering:

40 million video streams a day
200 terabytes a day of bandwidth (estimates by PaidContent)

Bottom line:

"So, finally, back to the numbers. Is YouTube "wildly profitable"? If we take the adjusted numbers and add in expenses, the answer is certainly "No."

Total Revenue is $4.65 million a month after sales costs and discounts.
Bandwidth/Hosting Costs: $3.9 million a month
Salaries, G&A and other costs: $450,000 a month
Profit = $300,000 a month or a net margin of about 6.4 percent."

Apples and Oranges... Network TV, Cable, and YouTube

This post points to what we already know: video over the internet plays to a sizeable audience. My 12 yr old daughter saw this video long before I did. I had no idea it has been viewed over 33 million times in 6 months!