Comments on: Is Online Video Ready For Primetime?

By: Paul M. Banas

Paul M. Banas — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 15:18:23 +0000

@Nick
The Radiohead example is a good one from an artist standpoint, since they have made more money through “pay what you like”, than they would have normally, since they aren’t having to cover a lot of record company overhead costs.

The problem both the motion picture and music industry companies face is that they are the overhead costs. Anything less then what they make now shows a downward pointing arrow on their revenue charts.

I do think that the charging for extras will come about. Like banks, they will figure out that a lot of little charges and fees can add up to big money, and help cover part of their lost revenue streams.

By: Nick

Nick — Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:20:20 +0000

I guess there are workable models with some of the recent “pay what you want” music ideas. Takes radiohead and NIN. Maybe the motion picture industry should attempt such a strategy? Series can be “pay what you like”, but charge for exras, behind the scenes, scripts, cuts, extended versions, high definition.. etc?

By: Paul M. Banas

Paul M. Banas — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 02:39:44 +0000

@Nick
I like your point about measuring free. I’m sure the television and motion picture industries have seen what has happened to music on the net and are trying to figure out how to respond differently, but still make money. It seems that the BitTorrent protocol doesn’t seem to care how much it costs to produce a TV show these days.

By: Nick

Nick — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:52:18 +0000

As with most big corporate machines, the concept of the web is alien to them. In my experience, it is always down to quantifying gain and it is difficult to put a measurement on giving things away for free. Nice post. Also, I didnt realise TV Guide had a section for online video!
http://www.onlinevideowatch.com/tv-guides-online-video-guide-lacks-original-online-content/

By: Paul M. Banas

Paul M. Banas — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 03:01:29 +0000

@Frank C and Robojiannis
One thing I need to keep in mind is how certain media sites I talk about are unable to be accessed by readers in Europe and the rest of the world. I apologize.

Is it just me, or is the concept of a World Wide Web an implicit promise towards accessibility that US media companies simply aren’t honoring?

By: robojiannis

robojiannis — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 18:21:56 +0000

I don’t think sites like youtube will manage to compete with television. As you wrote the quality of the tv productions is too good to leave it.
But I’ve heard that some channels Fox, NBC are putting their shows (Heroes, Prison Break, House) online for free. Maybe for us europeans these are not accessible, but still it’s a step towards online video.

By: Frank C

Frank C — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 15:01:23 +0000

I’ve been on the Hulu beta since November and I’ve really enjoyed it. I do wish the show selection was more extensive at times but the quality of the viewing has been quite good, even at full screen. I also like that they allow you to embed clips on your blog, the only problem being that they aren’t viewable outside the US.