David Card2008-05-16T13:46:52Ztag:weblogs.jupiterresearch.com,2008:/analysts/card//4Movable TypeCopyright (c) 2008, David CardSecond-Day Thoughts on CBS-CNET2008-05-16T13:46:52Z2008-05-16T13:10:53Ztag:weblogs.jupiterresearch.com,2008:/analysts/card//4.98392008-05-16T13:10:53ZI'm not quite as bearish on CBS-CNET as colleague Barry Parr. Barry's critiques of CNET ring true -- they're a former leading online media innovator that still has some good content, but has fallen behind on many of the new trends in online media distribution and networking. And Barry says...David Cardhttp://www.jup.com
I'm not quite as bearish on CBS-CNET as colleague Barry Parr. Barry's critiques of CNET ring true -- they're a former leading online media innovator that still has some good content, but has fallen behind on many of the new trends in online media distribution and networking. And Barry says "CBS needs more distribution and network power and fewer content businesses," riffing off his analysis in this thoughtful Jupiter report.
But I'd argue that, while content and distribution are separate businesses, they needn't be separate companies. And as Barry points out, CBS' roots are as a distributor. The thing is, networks aren't just distribution. They're audience aggregation and ad sales. And, especially for premium advertising, he who owns the page -- really, he who owns the audience -- keeps most of the ad dollars. (Barry will correctly say that, although I can talk a good game on 21st century networks, I'm still too fond of old-school portals.)
So if CBS and CNET can actually figure out how to sell ads across what is now a more diverse audience in a broader variety of contexts, they might have something. CNET adds tech, games, and a couple of weak lifestyle/entertainment properties to CBS' TV promotional site, sports, last.fm, and a weak online news offering.
The result is a hodgpodge. It's not a general-purpose network or portal yet, and it doesn't own any verticals, though it's strong in tech and sports. I still believe in synergy, and I see some cross-promotion potential in sports, tech, and games (young males, anyone?). And of course, bulking up in digital could help the folks running the thing get attention, focus, and resources from a media conglomerate that's weighted towards slow-growth markets like broadcast TV, book publishing, radio, and outdoor.
Some ad buyers seem to like the combo, or are at least being very polite, according to Paid Content.
Signs of the End of Western Civilization, Part CCC2008-05-15T00:15:33Z2008-05-15T00:07:12Ztag:weblogs.jupiterresearch.com,2008:/analysts/card//4.98332008-05-15T00:07:12ZFrom a PR email: "We’d love to see a post of it on your site for feature and/or preview. The show could best be described as “The Darwin Awards meets Faces of Death,” telling the true stories of actual deaths and recreating them through awesome comic-book style graphics, acting, CGI,...David Cardhttp://www.jup.comMedia
From a PR email: "We’d love to see a post of it on your site for feature and/or preview. The show could best be described as “The Darwin Awards meets Faces of Death,” telling the true stories of actual deaths and recreating them through awesome comic-book style graphics, acting, CGI, and colorful narration....If you do feature the show, can you please send us a link?"
Should I send 'em this link? Do they bill their client by "blogger" column-inch? Do they bill if I don't mention the show's name? Or the network? Oh yes, it's a real network.
Online Ad Forecasting Poll2008-05-14T18:29:04Z2008-05-14T18:25:52Ztag:weblogs.jupiterresearch.com,2008:/analysts/card//4.98322008-05-14T18:25:52ZIt's online ad forecasting season, and we really would like Jupiter clients input. The survey on our site is too small to be useful -- so I'm not posting any results except to say it looks mighty bullish to me (a plurality says 25% growth or better), and the results...David Cardhttp://www.jup.comMedia
It's online ad forecasting season, and we really would like Jupiter clients input. The survey on our site is too small to be useful -- so I'm not posting any results except to say it looks mighty bullish to me (a plurality says 25% growth or better), and the results otherwise are all over the map. So come on, Jupiter clients, let your voice be heard.
What Happens if a Story Breaks, but Nobody PRs It?2008-05-14T14:46:58Z2008-05-14T14:38:15Ztag:weblogs.jupiterresearch.com,2008:/analysts/card//4.98292008-05-14T14:38:15ZYouTube's announcement of rudimentary buzz-targeting -- that is, placing its ad overlays on videos as they become popular -- strikes me as at least the most important tech news that broke yesterday. I mean, c'mon, Carl Icahn? Craigslist lawsuits? Yet, most of the tech blogs, and all of MSM have...David Cardhttp://www.jup.comMedia
YouTube's announcement of rudimentary buzz-targeting -- that is, placing its ad overlays on videos as they become popular -- strikes me as at least the most important tech news that broke yesterday. I mean, c'mon, Carl Icahn? Craigslist lawsuits? Yet, most of the tech blogs, and all of MSM have nothing on it as of this morning.
Cnet re-wrote the press release early
Alleyinsider had some actual analysis, and had it early
Mediapost has a decent story, you know, with people they actually called up, today
Gosh, I guess the old PR roadshow trick -- which Google disdains -- still sets the news agenda. Whoulda thunk?
Google, Yahoo Remain Favorite Brands Online2008-05-09T17:28:51Z2008-05-09T17:18:03Ztag:weblogs.jupiterresearch.com,2008:/analysts/card//4.98142008-05-09T17:18:03ZGoogle's nosing ahead of Yahoo as the top online brand, according to a Jupiter consumer survey. But the kids like the social media. The question asked respondents to pick their top two favorites. Clients can check out the data on Quantify, and compare it with the results last June....David Cardhttp://www.jup.comMedia
Google's nosing ahead of Yahoo as the top online brand, according to a Jupiter consumer survey. But the kids like the social media.
The question asked respondents to pick their top two favorites. Clients can check out the data on Quantify, and compare it with the results last June.
Why Sync, Indeed?2008-05-07T02:47:11Z2008-05-07T02:30:27Ztag:weblogs.jupiterresearch.com,2008:/analysts/card//4.98032008-05-07T02:30:27ZI like this post by Microsoft's Mesh team, too. It makes a great case for "fat client" personalized UI engines that manipulate data that is temporarily stored locally. It seems that locating that data in the cloud would solve a lot of the sync problems created by multiple local data...David Cardhttp://www.jup.comMedia
I like this post by Microsoft's Mesh team, too. It makes a great case for "fat client" personalized UI engines that manipulate data that is temporarily stored locally. It seems that locating that data in the cloud would solve a lot of the sync problems created by multiple local data stores. Yes, in some ways, syncing is a problem, not a solution.
I think it'll be a long time (make that "never") before cloud computing does great UI (voice reco? gesture-based manipulation? 3D graphical manipulation? hard-coded privacy/identity/authorization?). Have you used a Web app -- other than a browser -- lately? But I'm still waiting for Microsoft to do a decent job of "data mining, indexing and transformations on" local data stores. Have you used Outlook "find" lately? That's one reason why Microsoft has to duke it out with Google, and why Google cares about client-based search (and not browsers or operating systems).
How Ya Gonna Stop Google Now, Part II?2008-05-05T01:01:25Z2008-05-05T00:56:39Ztag:weblogs.jupiterresearch.com,2008:/analysts/card//4.97932008-05-05T00:56:39ZOf course, Yahoo needs a strategy for competing with Google, too. Unlike Microsoft, Yahoo is not competing with Google to be the leader in supplying core technology platforms. However it is competing for search ad dollars and users. More important, Yahoo, like Microsoft, is talking about ad-buying and –selling marketplaces...David Cardhttp://www.jup.comMedia
Of course, Yahoo needs a strategy for competing with Google, too. Unlike Microsoft, Yahoo is not competing with Google to be the leader in supplying core technology platforms. However it is competing for search ad dollars and users.
More important, Yahoo, like Microsoft, is talking about ad-buying and –selling marketplaces that integrate search and display, and build off of targeting aided by understanding consumer behavior. And, since Yahoo sees its portal homepage and email as key Web starting points, it must ensure that Google’s search doesn’t dilute its homepage influence, and that Yahoo mail and IM ddon’t lose communications share. Oh, and Yahoo offers core mobile and mapping services, has a classifieds business, and needs to do something about YouTube.
So what do we need to hear from Yahoo execs?
- How Yahoo’s as-yet-unproven ability to target ads effectively (thus raising remnant inventory CPMs) will produce higher growth rates in online advertising (it’s promising 25% per year) than Jupiter is forecasting for 2009 and 2010.
- How Yahoo can gain search query share. It has already shown it can earn more profits from Google’s search ad network than from its own. Yahoo needs to prove to its content and communications users that its own search is better than clicking away to Google.com. If it can’t, it can go on collecting revenue-share from Google – assuming no hostile governments call it anticompetitive – but will probably eventually lose query share and thus search revenues.
- But keyword search should also fuel those consumer insights that lead to better targeting. If Yahoo essentially concedes search, does that dilute the effectiveness of its display networks and exchanges? It might not, but advertisers and publishers need to be assured of that.
- And I want to hear Yahoo’s plan for walling off Google in search. How is Yahoo’s display network going to gain share from Google’s contextual AdSense business, and keep AdSense locked into simple text ads? How is it going to gain share versus AOL’s networks? Yahoo has a decent pitch for publishers, but it’s based on a product that isn’t shipping yet, and outside of some newspapers, has few marquee publisher partners.
I’m completely unconvinced that social media technology is air or electricity or whatever other “open” metaphor you like. What I see are two big social networks – MySpace is producing ad revenues and Facebook has all the mindshare about social graphing, whether from advertisers or developers. Even though Yahoo, MSN, and AOL are better equipped, through their direct sales forces and branded content programs, to help advertisers tap into social marketing, it’s Facebook and Google that get the attention. Yahoo showed some social platform demos; where are the marketing programs?
So How Ya Gonna Stop Google Now?2008-05-05T00:55:19Z2008-05-05T00:48:23Ztag:weblogs.jupiterresearch.com,2008:/analysts/card//4.97922008-05-05T00:48:23ZAssuming Microsoft doesn’t take another run at Yahoo, what does it do now? I don’t love big mergers, but I understood why Microsoft wanted Yahoo. Yahoo was the best way for Microsoft to: - Gain share in advertising fast - Put its search technology in front of a lot more...David Cardhttp://www.jup.comMedia
Assuming Microsoft doesn’t take another run at Yahoo, what does it do now? I don’t love big mergers, but I understood why Microsoft wanted Yahoo. Yahoo was the best way for Microsoft to:
- Gain share in advertising fast
- Put its search technology in front of a lot more eyeballs
- Try to integrate and scale ad-buying and -selling marketplaces and targeting and tracking technologies across both display and search
- Try to integrate two big bases of communications users, and establish standards in contact and presence management, and possibly unite core identity, authentication and authorization services
- Achieve commanding leads in key online media categories: personal finance, entertainment info, and automotive, and beef up strong positions in news, sports, games, maps, and jobs
- Double down on consumer mobile offerings
All from a profitable company with a huge group of loyal users. Buying AOL, or integrating MySpace or Facebook doesn’t do nearly as much. Hey, Viacom’s market cap is only $25 billion (Disney or Time Warner are worth more than $50 billion). I’m only half-kidding.
As I’ve said too often, this is about Microsoft vs. Google for platform dominance, and all the other Internet and media players are pieces in that game. Google has replaced Microsoft as the most important company in all of IT, as consumer and Internet technologies ripple into enterprise IT and consumer electronics. Search is a more powerful user interface metaphor than Windows, and Google’s APIs and web-based services are starting to attract serious numbers of developers. And as Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer told the Financial Times over a year ago:
Today, the big phenomenon that we can embrace - the big fat thing for us to think about, embrace, endorse, compete with - is what does ad-funding mean? Whether it is for search, or whether it is for business-services, or whether it’s for other online services, what does that funding mean as a competitive business model and do we embrace it as is? Do we modify it? Do we just compete with it, with more of a transaction or subscription model? But how we deal with that is a Job One issue.
That's why, unlike some observers, I believe Microsoft needs to be in the consumer Internet media business to compete against – and take profits from – its most dangerous threat: Google. Other than Yahoo, what are its options?
- Attempt to wall off Google in search, by winning the display ad platform and network battles. AOL and Facebook would help here, or MySpace.
- Attempt to wall off Google from enterprise IT. I don’t get paid to analyze that industry any more, but I don’t think this requires buying Oracle or SAP. But I don’t see any obvious path to diluting Google’s impact on network services, cloud computing, and the very real threat of a marginalized desktop OS as the source of UI conventions and navigation/interaction APIs.
- Minimize the impact of ad-based IT technologies and services by owning small business computing – small business is where ad-based IT plays out. Intuit would help, as would Adobe.
- Keep Google technologies out of mobile, and off of the TV set. I think it’s too late for Microsoft to do something with Nokia; Microsoft has long struggled with carriers and telcos (so will Google); and what do you think Xbox is for?
See how hard it will be? See why Yahoo, difficult as it might be, at least makes logical sense? We need to hear from Microsoft how it intends to beat or fend off Google post-Yahoo.
This Just In: American Idol May Be Fixed2008-05-01T04:30:04Z2008-05-01T04:23:41Ztag:weblogs.jupiterresearch.com,2008:/analysts/card//4.97822008-05-01T04:23:41ZStoopid judges expose Idol as Quiz Show, 21st century edition. Wotta surprise. And who cares? It's pop entertainment, people. As Mr. Seacrest anxiously glanced offstage for help, Mr. Jackson, beside Ms. Abdul at the judges’ table, gently prompted her to make comments “just on the first one.” Confused, Ms. Abdul...David Cardhttp://www.jup.comMedia
Stoopid judges expose Idol as Quiz Show, 21st century edition. Wotta surprise. And who cares? It's pop entertainment, people.
As Mr. Seacrest anxiously glanced offstage for help, Mr. Jackson, beside Ms. Abdul at the judges’ table, gently prompted her to make comments “just on the first one.” Confused, Ms. Abdul said to Mr. Castro, “I thought you sang twice.” After realizing what had occurred, she then explained that she got her notes mixed up and had meant her comments to be about the next singer, David Cook. But instead of repeating that she thought Mr. Cook had given an uninspired performance, she told him, “You were fantastic.”
AOL 1Q08 Ad Revenue Details2008-05-02T00:25:52Z2008-05-01T01:36:46Ztag:weblogs.jupiterresearch.com,2008:/analysts/card//4.97802008-05-01T01:36:46ZSome more details on AOL's ad business after I finally got to listen to Time Warner's 1Q08 earnings call. Overall advertising was up 1% to $552 million. That's down 11% from Q4. Besides screwing up its sales force, management blamed that result on: - $19M accounting difference a year ago...David Cardhttp://www.jup.comMedia
Some more details on AOL's ad business after I finally got to listen to Time Warner's 1Q08 earnings call.
Overall advertising was up 1% to $552 million. That's down 11% from Q4. Besides screwing up its sales force, management blamed that result on:
- $19M accounting difference a year ago
- Ad.com's biggest customer, Apollo (aka University of Phoenix) only spent $17M this Q versus $56M a year ago. Apollo generated $250M$215M in revenues for AOL last year.
- It got rid of $10M worth of bounty fees from an unprofitable sponsorship deal with Goldrush
- CPM compression was was "an issue of our own yield management" -- ie they sold too much network inventory instead of premium O&O inventory
Display ad sales on AOL's own properties were down 18% to $191 million. This was blamed mostly on the sales channel conflict between the network ad sales force and the AOL properties sales force, which should be fixed now (though full benefits beyond Q2). Users are flat (relatively good as AOL access business fades) and page views and pages/users were actually up nicely.
Third-party network sales were up 25% to $188 million. If you strip out Apollo and acquisitions, growth was "much higher."
Global search revenues were up 4%. US search was up in the high single digits. AOL.com search was up 89% but that was offset by the decline in AOL access (client software) searching.
Net domestic ex-TAC ad revenue was down 13% to $292 million. That's down 18% from Q4.
So, if you're keeping score, and my calculations are correct, worldwide online ad sales growth for Q1 is looking like this:
Google (ex-TAC)                              $3.75 billion, up 45%
Yahoo (ex-TAC)                              $1.1 billion, up 13%
Microsoft (minimal TAC included)   $619 million, up 39%
AOL (ex $60M-ish of TAC)             $495, down 2%
Time Warner Loves Day and Date VoD2008-05-01T02:42:24Z2008-05-01T01:30:12Ztag:weblogs.jupiterresearch.com,2008:/analysts/card//4.97812008-05-01T01:30:12ZA tidbit from Time Warner's earnings call. Warner Bros. et al are very pleased with VoD day and date trials. That is, releasing a movie to VoD at the same time it's released to DVD. (DVD used to have the earlier release window.) So much so it's planning to release...David Cardhttp://www.jup.comMedia
A tidbit from Time Warner's earnings call. Warner Bros. et al are very pleased with VoD day and date trials. That is, releasing a movie to VoD at the same time it's released to DVD. (DVD used to have the earlier release window.) So much so it's planning to release "essentially all" its titles that way this year.
Time Warner maintains that DVD sell-through is not affected -- it even claims sell-through is up a bit because there's less competition with used rentals. VoD margins for the studio are in the 60-70% range, while DVD rental margins are 20-30%, it says. So, Blockbuster and Netflix are the only victims.
TV Guide Talks Online Video Guide Strategy2008-04-29T17:29:08Z2008-04-29T16:49:29Ztag:weblogs.jupiterresearch.com,2008:/analysts/card//4.97712008-04-29T16:49:29ZPaidContent is wisely wondering about TVGuide.com's future if the proposed merger of TV Guide/Gemstar and Macrovision goes through, especially since Macrovision hinted it might unload the magazine. Meanwhile, among other things, TVGuide.com is attempting to establish itself as the guide to (professional) video content online. There'll be a lot of...David Cardhttp://www.jup.comMedia
PaidContent is wisely wondering about TVGuide.com's future if the proposed merger of TV Guide/Gemstar and Macrovision goes through, especially since Macrovision hinted it might unload the magazine. Meanwhile, among other things, TVGuide.com is attempting to establish itself as the guide to (professional) video content online. There'll be a lot of competition for that role.
Some things TVGuide.com is doing well
- TVGuide.com believes, as I do, that robots alone won't solve the problem. So it has its spiders and algorithms, but it also has a smallish (10 people) staff of editors doing content as well as promotion.
- TVGuide.com is embracing the notion of online networked media, and pursuing syndication via deals and widgets. It's also aggregating content on its site
- This might be controversial, but its editor is also its marketing VP. That makes sense to me for online networked media
- They demo'd a feature that made it pretty easy to create a little widget that creates an auto-refresh search. If you wanted to have constantly updated Justin Timberlake video content on your fansite blog, you could do so
Some things that need work
- It only spiders about 65 cable and broadcast sites for its professional content. It covers music videos but doesn't work with Yahoo, which is the leading site for them. Right this moment, the top video on Yahoo Music (no. 4 on AOL Music) is Mariah Carey's "Touch My Body." A Mariah Carey search result for that tune on TVguide takes you to iTunes. YouTube gets you the right video.
- Because it doesn't have deals with many suppliers, it's a very inconsistent user experience when you "click thru" on content. Sometimes it plays locally; sometimes it carries you off to a site
- You can embed feeds with one click in MyYahoo and iGoogle. But not in Facebook or MySpace, where people actually use widgets. "Open Social support" -- well, that and 5 bucks will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks
- The advertising syndication strategy is, as we analysts often say, "nascent"
- Notice how I had to give two links for the main site and the online video guide?
Net: strategy on-trend; some execution details TK.
You Only Hurt the Ones You Love, Part XIII2008-04-29T13:30:48Z2008-04-29T13:21:20Ztag:weblogs.jupiterresearch.com,2008:/analysts/card//4.97692008-04-29T13:21:20ZWhat's wrong with this sentence? The marketing hoax is an attempt by the South Korean electronics company to overcome the commoditization of the television business. Perhaps this is an attempt at irony; surely it's not an accurate description of LG's marketing strategy. LG is trying to combat TV price declines...David Cardhttp://www.jup.comMedia
What's wrong with this sentence?
The marketing hoax is an attempt by the South Korean electronics company to overcome the commoditization of the television business.
Perhaps this is an attempt at irony; surely it's not an accurate description of LG's marketing strategy. LG is trying to combat TV price declines via design -- in this case, color. And promoting the idea via gimmicky marketing events, which to judge by the story, were largely successful.
If this is what happens when Murdoch takes over and threatens to fire a lot of editors, then I'm not impressed. C'mon guys, you're still my favorite newspaper.
Take It Away, Please2008-04-29T01:22:00Z2008-04-29T00:59:49Ztag:weblogs.jupiterresearch.com,2008:/analysts/card//4.97672008-04-29T00:59:49ZWell, it's only day one of NPR's new morning show, The Takeaway, but I'm distinctly underwhelmed. According to coverage in both the Sunday Times and the Journal the new show is an alternative to Morning Edition in major markets like New York and Boston that's supposed to feel fresher, using...David Cardhttp://www.jup.comMedia
Well, it's only day one of NPR's new morning show, The Takeaway, but I'm distinctly underwhelmed. According to coverage in both the Sunday Times and the Journal the new show is an alternative to Morning Edition in major markets like New York and Boston that's supposed to feel fresher, using live co-anchors. Well, it felt like amateur hour today.
The Takeaway debuted at 6AM in New York with dead air. Former Morning Edition host Bob Edwards, himself booted in a youth movement, was supposed to intro, but WNYC botched the feed. The co-anchors don't have any chemistry or rhythm yet and constantly talk over each other. An interview with an ambassador from Zimbabwe -- these things can always be risky -- not only produced the standard non-answers, but the ambassador nipped back at the interviewer and made him look as overmatched as Lesley Stahl trying to smile through her sparring match with Justice Scalia last night on 60 Minutes. Much ballyhooed "interactivity" -- it used to be called talk radio, but no listeners were actually on the air -- sponsored maybe 5 responses during the 6AM hour.
I'm left with my usual attitude towards live news: it's way less efficient at delivering the goods than properly edited programming. Case in point, the local 1-sentence weather update on The Takeaway was "temperature, raining," while it was "temperature, raining, and forecast high temperature" on Morning Edition. Which is semi-live, anyway. I'll give it a week, but if things don't look up, I'm switching over to WNYC AM, where Morning Edition is still on at 6.
Keeping Score: 1Q08 Online Ad Growth2008-04-25T15:56:52Z2008-04-25T15:43:24Ztag:weblogs.jupiterresearch.com,2008:/analysts/card//4.97592008-04-25T15:43:24ZMicrosoft/MSN showed solid online advertising growth, growing 39% in Q1 worldwide to $619 million. If you subtract aQuantive's ad revenue of $47 million, it still grew 29%. MSN, however, suffered over $200 million in losses. So, if you're keeping score, and my calculations are correct, worldwide online ad sales growth...David Cardhttp://www.jup.com
Microsoft/MSN showed solid online advertising growth, growing 39% in Q1 worldwide to $619 million. If you subtract aQuantive's ad revenue of $47 million, it still grew 29%. MSN, however, suffered over $200 million in losses.
So, if you're keeping score, and my calculations are correct, worldwide online ad sales growth for Q1 is looking like this:
Google (ex-TAC)                              $3.75 billion, up 45%
Yahoo (ex-TAC)                               $1.1 billion, up 13%
Microsoft (minimal TAC included)    $619 million, up 39%
AOL still to come.