Very interesting observation from Fred Davis is a senior partner at the entertainment law firm Davis Shapiro Lewit and Hayes:
1) That we are in the very early stages of this transformation. Very early not because the consumer is catching up to new technology, but the reverse. New technology is catching up to the consumer. Ever since the birth of Napster in 1999, the under-25-year-old-consumer has been leading the charge. Content owners, technology companies, and the ecosystems around them have been trying to catch up. Everyone is screaming that Spotify is “the solution” in Europe. What is Spotify focusing on? Two strategies: allowing you to base your digital library with streams (as opposed to owning MP3s) and ubiquitous access (iPhone/android apps/ISP bundles). But their distribution model is only the beginning. What is TV Everywhere but ubiquitous access to content? What is Hulu but ubiquitous access to content? There are many, many more examples.
2) That no one has truly figured out how to successfully monetize access vs. ownership. Content companies were great at monetizing ownership. Monetizing access is a very different expertise – and content owners have relatively little experience in implementing it. By studying the data about access to music and video, one has to realize the potential of monetizing access. If you add up the views of music videos on YouTube and the audio streams of music on MySpace alone, they are in the billions per year. The popularity of access is enormous. The value of access is enormous. The monetization potential is enormous. But try to remember, for a moment, how long it took the radio industry to evolve into a profitable TV industry? (Hint: a lot longer than a decade.)
As a new media content company, I agree it’s all about a) creating great content and b) making it available to consumers. Mind you, for us (a non VC-backed company), we can’t give it away and have built a nice recurring licensing revenue business, but still… interesting read, more on Paid Content. I’ve also said that in 2009 we started to migrate from a licensing business model to an ad-supported business model. What kind of ad-supported model remains to be seen.
Digg this Blog
Share on Facebook
WatchMojo on Twitter
WatchMojo on YouTube
Add to Favorites
WatchMojo Newsletter
The seismic shift continues:
This year for the first time in 23 years, Pepsi will not have ads in the Super Bowl telecast. No Cindy Crawford, Britney Spears or Justin Timberlake. Instead it is redirecting the millions it has spent annually to the Internet. Pepsi has chosen to give away over $20 million in a social media play it is calling The Pepsi Refresh Project, debuting in 2010.
I wonder how many other marketers will follow Pepsi’s move? Read more.
We can shop online, meet people online and even take care of our finances online, so why are we surprised?
According to over the phone research we are seeing a spike in the amount of time that people spend online.
Survey results published by Harris Interactive suggest that adult Internet users are now spending an average of 13 hours a week online. About 14% spends 24 or more hours a week online, while 20% of adult Internet users are online for only two hours or less a week.
It looks like facebook is truly connecting people, but those people are already married…
Divorce lawyers are seeing a rise in divorces since social sites like Facebook and Bebo have tempted people to cheat!
According to their research “the most common reason seemed to be people having inappropriate sexual chats with people they were not supposed to.”
Flirts messages and e-mails are now being used as evidence in court. It’s even being used as a way to let your significant other that you’re no longer interested.
“One 35-year-old woman even discovered her husband was divorcing her via Facebook.
Conference organiser Emma Brady was distraught to read that her marriage was over when he updated his status on the site to read: “Neil Brady has ended his marriage to Emma Brady.”
Continue Reading HERE.
Don Dodge might have raised some eyebrows when within his first week of joining Google from MSFT suddenly developed an aversion to MSFT products in favor of Google ones, but in a recent interview, he both gives a lot of praise and dishes out diplomatic criticism of his former employer. This part stands out in general about the evolution of tech companies:
What’s your opinion on Microsoft’s future? Are they innovating as successfully as they have in the past?
I think Microsoft today is a lot like IBM was in 1985. When I started my career IBM dominated the tech world. In the late ’80s Microsoft started to dominate the software world, first with desktop software and later with server software like Windows Server and SQL Server.
Microsoft is still a powerful company – $60 billion in revenue and very profitable – but I think after 20 years they are losing the innovation edge. The most innovative companies today are Google, Apple and Facebook. Very few companies can dominate an industry for more than 20 years. It is just the natural competitive cycle. Another factor – Bill Gates leaving the company. The transition was smooth, but not having Bill there every day has far-reaching implications.
To find out which companies are best positioned online over the next decade, visit our list.
