Google video posts
FeedPosted Sep 30th 2009 1:00PM by Brian White (RSS feed)
Filed under: Products and services, Competitive strategy, Google (GOOG)
Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) is dominating online video just like it does internet searches. In August, Google's various video properties went past the 10 billion video view March. In all, the Mountain View, Calif., company took in 40% of all online video viewership, according to comScore.
Of course, the answer to Google's fortunes in online video viewership was YouTube. Google Video didn't account for much at all, as YouTube accounted for 99% of all video viewed on Google's video properties. The only problem: Google continues to not monetize YouTube very well, which has been a point of contention since the 2006 acquisition for $1.65 billion. The good news: YouTube has grown like gangbusters at the same time, and the YouTube acquisition has kept Google at the top of the video viewing field ever since.
Continue reading Google surpasses 10 billion video views in August; 40% market share
Posted Mar 15th 2008 4:40PM by Douglas McIntyre (RSS feed)
Filed under: Industry, Competitive strategy, Google (GOOG), Yahoo! (YHOO), Walt Disney (DIS), Viacom (VIA)
Google's (NASDAQ: GOOG) YouTube continues to gain visitors. It competitors have to be dismayed. Why bother posting video content at all when YouTube owns the market.
According to comScore, YouTube had a 34.3% share of all videos watched in the U.S. during January, an improvement of 1.7 share points over the previous month.
The competition barely registered. AOL, Yahoo! (NASDAQ: YHOO), Viacom (NYSE: VIA), and Disney (NYSE: DIS) had embarrassing share figures, none posting a figure better than 3.2%.
Visitors to Google video sites spent an average of almost 110 minutes per viewer. No other large internet site was above 33 minutes.
Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.
Posted Aug 13th 2007 4:30PM by Kevin Shult (RSS feed)
Filed under: Consumer experience, Competitive strategy, Google (GOOG)
Google (NASDAQ:
GOOG) has confirmed it will end a 19-month experiment that looked doomed from the start. According to the
Wall Street Journal, Google Video, the service that sold and rented the right to watch a wide range of videos for anywhere from a couple of dollars to $20, will stop showing paid programming on Wednesday. The service was expected to underscore Google's intention to create a revenue-based online video forum, a la
YouTube, which Google owns. It obviously didn't work.
Donna Bogatin of
InsiderChatter.com called Google Video a "YouTube wannabe" and jokingly questioned Google's recent decision to pull the plug on a service where many of their pay-to-see videos were actually YouTube videos on a Google viewer.
To compensate customers who will no longer be able to use the videos they purchased, Google is providing a refund in the form of credits that can be used in conjunction with its online payment service,
Google Checkout. Check out the email they sent to users on
Cnet news.com. Google declined to reveal exactly how many people purchased videos through Google Video or the total refund amount to its customers, but a spokesman said it would not materially impact the company. With YouTube and hundreds of other websites that provide free clips on the internet, it's clear that Google didn't have to cough up a lot of refund credits to the viewing public.
Posted Jul 7th 2007 11:40AM by Douglas McIntyre (RSS feed)
Filed under: Consumer experience, Competitive strategy, Google (GOOG)
According to a report at TechCrunch, Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) is working on programs that will drive adoption of video advertising online. CPMs, the rate that advertisers charge customers, are estimated to be over $40 for online video. This is much higher than the rate for simple banners.
Google obviously has an edge, if it can come up with a program that both advertisers and content companies will accept. Due to its ownership of YouTube and Google Video, the company has the largest audience for video content. What it still lacks is a broadly accepted program to move TV advertising to the web.
One of the issues facing Google and competitors is whether people are willing to watch ads that are much longer than 10 or 15 seconds. Longer ads clearly offer a better opportunity to explain product features, but if web visitors will not take the time, it does not matter.
The other substantial problem is where the ads go. Do they belong in the programming or in some other spot on the web page.
With display advertising growth rates slowing and text search ads reaching a level where their year-over-year numbers are likely to be less robust, the battle for internet revenue may well turn to video.
Douglas A. McIntyre is a partner at 24/7 Wall St.
Posted Mar 15th 2007 10:21AM by Zac Bissonnette (RSS feed)
Filed under: Bad news, Products and services, Consumer experience, Newspapers, Google (GOOG), Scandals
Just as it's becoming easier to filter out spam e-mail (my free Gmail account filters out nearly all spam e-mail: thanks Google!), spam is cropping up on another important internet destination: YouTube and Google Videos. The way it works is that the spammer will add a list of popular keywords to a video to get hits. According to Wall Street Journal [subscription required], searching for popular videogame devices such as Playstation, Xbox, Nintendo and PSP on Google Inc.'s (NASDAQ:GOOG) YouTube returned "a nine-minute promotional clip for Argentine tourism, steamy shots of fashion models, footage of a parade in Germany, and an apparently pirated clip of a concert by the band Queen."
Most disturbingly, YouTube is likely to become a common place to promote get-rich-quick schemes and other "products" likely to be scams. For example, the Journal brings a clip titled "Hot Blonde Tells You How She Wants to...," which was nothing but, of course. The clip, which directed some 500,000 users so far to a "How to Make Buckets of Cash" site, is now No. 6 on the "Top 10" list on Google Video. More than 100 misleading keywords were attached to the clip, "including sexually explicit terms and Harry Potter."
A few weeks ago, I reported on a bulletin board company that was using YouTube to promote its stock to investors. A chart of the recent performance of the stock shows that the video coincided with a pump and dump of the company's shares.
Hopefully, users will be smart enough to ignore the spam and give it low ratings so that others are less likely to view it.
Posted Jan 26th 2007 11:43AM by Brian White (RSS feed)
Filed under: Before the bell, Rumors, Products and services, Consumer experience, Internet, Competitive strategy, Google (GOOG)
What is Google, Inc.(NASDAQ:GOOG) doing with Google Video now that it has bought YouTube? Well, not a company to just jettison a product that had quite a bit of initial fanfare, Google is making a wise decision and will be
turning Google Video into a "video search" site that will be a search engine for video content all across the web.
Wow -- I wonder if purveyors of video content will get as mad at Google as the websites (news websites, generally) that get all miffed when Google indexes content into its search engine?
Google continues to try and "democratize" the Internet and it's gotten quite few enemies int he process --- but I like what the company does. For one, it levels the playing field and tries to wrangle absolute control over freely-available content from one central source out into the whole wide world (web).
So, while paid video downloads from Google Video will probably go away soon,Google Video will still be an important tool for customers looking for specific pieces of video from websites across the globe. Hey --- can't YouTube be used for this purpose now already via clip
tagging?
Posted Oct 31st 2006 2:41PM by Brian White (RSS feed)
Filed under: Rumors, Industry, Consumer experience, Blogs, Competitive strategy, Google (GOOG), Marketing and advertising
Google, Inc. (NASDAQ:GOOG) continues to push the boundaries of traditional advertising models, and I think it's just smashed past another one. I never thought I'd see the day when major advertisers like Coca-Cola Co.'s (NYSE:KO) Coke would agree to submit ads that could be attached to content outside its control. But hey, now it's happened.
Google Video is now testing advertisements on user-generated content (UGC) uploaded to Google Video. Google says that Coke has even responded with a made-for-content advertising in order to participate in the test -- a first for a major brand to actually attach itself and its brand name to content created by, gasp, consumers.
This bodes incredibly well for the future of Google's YouTube subsidiary, as the major sticking point in that acquisition was the large looming question on how Google was going to make money on the property without driving away YouTube's existing customer base. If Google can prove with this test that it can get large advertisers to commit to marketing themselves on UGC the YouTube extravaganza may just be the start of a Google-led advertising revolution.
Posted Oct 11th 2006 12:39PM by Brian White (RSS feed)
Filed under: Rumors, Products and services, Launches, Internet, Google (GOOG), Apple Inc (AAPL), Marketing and advertising
With Google's purchase of YouTube.com, there are about a billion questions swarming around the web today. Google, Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) faces new challenges as it enters the uncharted territory that may bring even more riches to the Internet search leader as it desperately tries to jump out of the shadow of being a one-trick pony (Internet search).
Just today, Google
unleashed its Google Docs and Spreadsheets web-based threat against office productivity suites like Microsoft Office. So Google is definitely in the game of trying to move outside the pure search arena and gain revenue streams from other areas (mostly with advertising vehicles). This is good, and as I've said many times before, this is a strategy Google has needed to follow for a while, and 2006 is shaping up to be a watershed year in that direction for the Mountain View, CA company.
With YouTube.com, though, the bad areas that crop up according to bloggers -- even
famous ones -- are intense
issues with copyright violations that *may be* plaguing the social video-sharing website right now (and in the future). Google will surely clamp down on the sharing of copyrighted content in an effort to remind copyright holders and content producers that it can have a socially-responsible video-sharing website that is not a haven for stolen pieces of video.
But, like Apple Computer, Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL) and its apparent negotiations with movie and music studios, Google may have to enter the policing stage to ensure that if it wants to use YouTube to recruit advertising, it won't have questionable and stolen content all over the place. I doubt Google will put in place the strong,
DRM-laced controls that Apple uses, but you never know.
Posted Sep 29th 2006 3:25PM by Brian White (RSS feed)
Filed under: Good news, Products and services, Consumer experience, Internet, Competitive strategy, Google (GOOG), Marketing and advertising
Google Video has been used for many interesting purposes since the web search leader allows just about anyone to upload video segments that the whole world can then view for free (except for pay service like network TV shows). What are some good uses for Google Video? How about education? UC Berkeley is now using Google Video to deliver college courses free of charge, according to that university.
Google and the University of California at Berkeley
have joined forces to allow for the first University-branded page on Google Video that delivers full college content to anyone who wants to view it. This is an example of a disruptive partnership if you ask me. Although MIT has had its
Open CourseWare available for some time now, the video aspect of this Google and UC Berkeley partnership is far beyond downloads of lecture presentations and professor notes.
The ability to see a professor in action engages the consumer (student) much more than a static webpage or MS Word document that outlines a chapter of a university textbook, yes? This kind of "Coursecasting" is allowing students from all age groups to download audio and video content directly to their PCs and portable media devices for playback anytime and anywhere. The question of the day is this -- are we missing an intangible piece of the pie by not having actual human interaction any longer? Seems like the virtual world is replacing the real world by leaps and bounds. Psychologists and sociologists, please take notice.
Posted Sep 26th 2006 12:44PM by Brian White (RSS feed)
Filed under: Rumors, Industry, Consumer experience, Internet, Competitive strategy, Google (GOOG), Yahoo! (YHOO), Marketing and advertising
Although YouTube gets plenty pf press these days, video postings and sharing at MySpace.com topped all online video offerings in July, beating Yahoo! Videos, Google Video and the venerable YouTube.com in the
number of videos served.
Over 37 million viewers collectively watched over 1.4 billion videos on MySpace pages in July. This is not surprising considering that the audience at MySpace.com is so large -- the web property rivals Google, Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) for the amount of visitor traffic it gets. In other words, the law of averages probably came into play nicely here.
But there is a difference. YouTube has amateur videos and all kinds of clips ripped from copyrighted sources (no matter how much it's policed). MySpace.com probably has the same kind of content, but my guess is that the teenage to upper-20s demographic that inhabits most of MySpace makes the videos that are there fitting to that demographic. That's a total guess but seems rational.
On the other hand, the array of content available at Google Video and YouTube spans generations and ages easily. But the difference here comes to targeted advertising. With News Corporation (ASX: NWS) now owning MySpace, the corporate media behemoth will have a pretty influential voice into the targeted online advertising that MySpace visitors and users view (and hopefully, respond to en masse).
Google Video visitors are also served targeted advertisements, but the visitors must be much more varied than MySpace.com video visitors. What is the difference here? Hmm, not sure there is one -- depends on who is the larger overall base.
Posted Sep 19th 2006 10:15AM by Brian White (RSS feed)
Filed under: Products and services, Launches, Industry, Consumer experience, Blogs, Competitive strategy, Microsoft (MSFT), Marketing and advertising
In what can be interpreted as a direct attack on <
insert video service here>, Microsoft unveiled today that it now has an online video download service available. After reading
this blog post over at 24/7 Wall St., I am inclined to agree here -- Microsoft seems to be playing catch-up these days in every possible way when it comes to the "next big thing" on the Internet. That, or its timing is perpetually off-key when it comes to the public announcements of its newer services.
"MSN Soapbox", as it's called, will most directly compete with established online video websites such as
Google Video,
YouTube and
AOL's new video API that encourages video development on AOL's platform. In other words, Microsoft wants customers to come to the
new MSN Soapbox (which has not even launched yet) to share their videos and personalities in an attempt to grow an audience for the new service -- and cash in with some type of advertising most likely.
With Microsoft's apparent obsession of copying tricks and tools from other established media players in the online space, will it miss the boat with this new offering? There are many indications that it already has. With the recent Microsoft Zune announcement, time will tell if Microsoft and its hundreds of millions will be able to crack the Apple iPod kingdom with a superior product and service integrative experience (which would be a first).
And, just like that, this new MSN Soapbox service may prove difficult for Redmond to take share in such a new online category since it is years late. What will make a YouTube or Google Video customer go over to MSN Soapbox and upload videos there to share with people and friends? If Microsoft does not want to continually be seen as making "me too" services, it'll need one big value proposition here.
Posted Aug 28th 2006 10:30AM by Brian White (RSS feed)
Filed under: Rumors, Industry, Consumer experience, Television, Competitive strategy, Google (GOOG)
Either Google has a "slight of hand" trick, or the company is "doing no evil" by telling TV execs not to fear the Internet. Comparing the Internet as a revolutionary tool akin to the printing press,
Google's Marissa Mayer told TV execs in Scotland that Google itself was TV's innovating friend, not its rival. Mayer said, "We're computer scientists -- we're not brilliant storytellers or content creators."
To this point, Mayer is pretty dead-on. Google is the ultimate indexer of information across every imaginable boundary that exists. The company is bridging the gap between old types of media -- from Shakespeare to
The Wall Street Journal -- to bring information to the world's population in the most efficient and relevant manner. That transportation vessel just happens to be the Internet, which is why Mayer calls Google a company of "computer scientists".
Unlike competitor Yahoo!, Google has very little of its own content -- it just aggregates it in nice, easy-to-use repositories and makes sure anyone and everyone can access the information whenever possible. My guess on why Google has not gotten into the content business? That's not its aspiration -- it wants to become the world's largest "connector of dots" and riding along with that become the largest advertising network ever assembled.
Why? Because along with fickle consumer tastes that change like the seasons -- among other things -- there will *always* be a buyer and seller for something. Google wants to
connect these dots and profit from the interaction. Hence, being the relevant advertiser. Once Google digitizes the world, it can mediate the connections between information provider and seeker -- and that's one plum spot.
Posted Aug 25th 2006 2:01PM by Brian White (RSS feed)
Filed under: Products and services, Consumer experience, Internet, Competitive strategy, Google (GOOG), Yahoo! (YHOO), Employees
When Rupert Murdoch's News. Corp purchased the incredibly-popular MySpace.com social networking portal, the global media behemoth promised not to distract the founders from what they do best -- provide a great environment for a certain age demographic. They said they would let MySpace continue to be the virtual "mall hangout" for millions.
So far, that has held true, and of course, News Corp. wants to have advertising displayed all over the social website to cash in on those lucrative and captive-audience ad dollars. To that tune, Google signed a rather high-profile deal with MySpace just a few weeks ago worth $900 million to do just that. Off to the races we all go now...
But are there signs of change at MySpace lurking beneath the proverbial covers? Recently, after some worry-filled days and nights, the MySpace laid-back, but intensely-focused, culture was uprooted as its headquarters was moved from Santa Monica to Beverly Hills, where News Corp. was consolidating its Internet properties. Tom Anderson -- co-founder of MySpace -- is now going through regular corporate drills like budget reviews and executive meetings.
MySpace is also about to roll out enhanced photo and video-sharing capabilities that will allow the site to complete with social photo-sharing and tagging communities like Yahoo!'s Flickr and YouTube -- two of the web's most popular sites for sharing photos and videos, respectively. Will MySpace be able to integrate advertising in such a way that it does not overwhelm and scare off its target market of teens and young adults? That remains to be seen. If it can, then Yahoo! and others may need to watch out. The community of the future may not be on Yahoo!'s immensely-popular portal, but on MySpace.
Posted Aug 16th 2006 1:12PM by Brian White (RSS feed)
Filed under: Products and services, Industry, Consumer experience, Internet, Competitive strategy, Google (GOOG), Yahoo! (YHOO)
Yahoo! has streamlined its video offerings in the last year, aiming to keep its title as the leader in online video viewing. Google Video launched a while back and has been improved quite a bit, and it's now prominently featured right on the Google homepage, taking the place of Froogle. But,
how about YouTube? The online video sharing website has seen growth that would boggle most minds, and it keeps on growing. There are illegally-copyrighted works available on YouTube (although the site is policed) and millions of user-generated video clips as well, making YouTube a huge repository for online video. But, so far, it's remained in the shadows of larger video providers (at least, from a media coverage standpoint) like Apple's iTunes, Yahoo! Video and Google Video.
YouTube, not one to rest on any laurels, appears to be talking to record labels about posting music videos at its website as it tries to break out of the "homegrown video" reputation -- it's much more than that, actually -- and into a mainstream online video provider. This would put it in competition with Google Video and Yahoo! Video, and the competition would become more fierce over time. But, as both Yahoo! and Google knows, having customers watch videos at both websites increases the likelihood that the customer will "stick" to the property itself (the Yahoo! or Google network), which in turn brings up more advertising revenue with Google (text ads) and Yahoo! (graphical ads for the most part).
Should Yahoo! Video and Google Video be alarmed at YouTube's move into their turf? No, and both companies should have expected this move some time ago.
The power of user-generated content is what has propelled YouTube into the limelight, and making deals with major content companies could spell some doom for the larger rivals like Yahoo! and Google. Yahoo! in particular has more exposure based on its video offerings, where Google Video has quite a bit of user-generated content just like YouTube.
Brian White has worked in various executive positions in technology and telecommunications and now focuses on editing and writing.Posted Aug 15th 2006 4:35PM by Brian White (RSS feed)
Filed under: After the bell, Good news, Products and services, Consumer experience, Internet, Competitive strategy, Google (GOOG), Marketing and advertising
Google shares closed up in a huge way today to end the trading session at $380.97, a sharp increase of $11.54 or 3.12% over Wednesday's close. What happened today to start the Google increase, you ask? Was it Google's
launch of a free online coupon service for advertising partners at its Google Maps service?
How about teaming with coupon vendor ValPak for this new service?
As this article over at The Fool points out, Google going old-school with its coupon service sends a mixed and strange signal -- is Google's online related services -- namely the just-removed-from-homepage Froogle service?
Maybe that's the mixed signal Google wants the market to teem over with analysis and rumor. Perhaps Froogle is doing fine as are Google's other e-commerce services. Maybe the recently-launched Google Checkout is waiting in the wings to steal gobs of marketshare and customer purchase dollars from established online marketplaces like Amazon.com and eBay. If so, Google is staying quiet -- very quiet.
Google may have quite a few initiatives in the recent past and even coming up in the product pipeline, but as
Sheldon writes here, Google still only has one revenue stream -- Internet search ad dollars. What is Google's plan to monetize all these other initiatives? Why, trying to continue recruiting advertisers for its network in a form or fashion, of course.
Brian White has worked in various executive positions in technology and telecommunications and now focuses on editing and writing.Next Page >
Google's plan for netbook PCs moves higher into the clouds
Closing Bell: Stock bulls and dollar death (DDRX,GMCR, PEET, SBUX, EBAY, CI, TECD)
So long peak oil, here comes peak uranium
