| ||||||||||||
PRINT
COMMENT
SUBSCRIBE
RSSThere's a great amount of buzz about "TV Everywhere" -- everywhere! And while many consumers will be thrilled to have access to the video content they pay to see at home -- everywhere -- independent content producers have good reason to worry about the "big boys" moving in on their turf. After all, wasn't the vacuum created by the lack of legal super-premium content the reason for the great success of independent video over the last four years?
Not completely.
It's true that independent video filled an important void for those looking to watch something interesting during their lunch hour (or "other" time), but who weren't interested in (insert-clichéd viral -video reference here). Yes, the fact that quality independent video took off was due in large part to a lack of serious competition, but also because it was engaging, well-produced and often compelling.
Now, those independent producers face an uphill battle in holding onto and growing their audience. They'll be battling with some of the very best content in existence for very limited consumer attention spans. Because lunch hours (and even "other" time) are only so long, even compelling content isn't enough anymore. To stay in the game, independent producers must assign equal importance to the editorial and business sides of their ventures:
1) Compete on quality. There's simply no excuse for anything other than professional-looking video. Consumers will offer no forgiveness for something that looks like my school play, circa 1986. And of course, the content itself needs to be special. Use real talent and scout real locations -- or better yet, just make it look as if you did.
2) Compete on price. Although nothing's been made official yet, it sure is starting to sound as though there will be a consumer cost element to super-premium content, either out-of-pocket or as part of a home subscription. My guess is the cost will be reasonable and worth it. But free outweighs reasonable, or at least competes with it. If you do decide to give the content away, your venture needs to be paid for it somehow. Which brings us to...
3) Compete on advertiser-friendliness. To generate ad revenue, it's no longer enough to offer work-friendly content, or even aggregate a reasonable amount of eyeballs. There is so much video inventory available today that agencies are now bringing traditional targeting criteria online -- including psychographics. Yes, there will continue to be reach or "run of site" buys, but an increasing number of RFPs are looking for a specific market segment: be it early adopters, Luddites, environmentalists, skeptics -- the list goes on. When planning your content, keep in mind that you'll need to attract a unique audience -- not just "views."
Lastly, if you plan to charge a higher ad CPM than the average for your category, be prepared with a strong rationale for why. Agencies are increasingly exerting price pressure, so producers will want to make a strong case for why their content and audience mix commands a premium price.
It is exciting to see the Internet become a distribution point for independent, premium and, increasingly, super-premium content. To stay relevant, producers will need to ensure that their offering is compelling from both a content and business standpoint.
4 people recommend this article.
RSS FEEDS
However, the two above are kind of chicken-n-the egg. You can't scale alone with any one of them and none of them explode without the other one. If the Indie producer can manage the two with a good story telling, I believe he/she can compete well with primetime content.
In addition, promotion is crucial. By offering niche content that appeals to a specific audience and allowing fans to share videos across the social web, independent producers can quickly expand their fan-base and, with the right video publishing and distribution platform, monetize their content wherever it goes.
Our research at Futurescape.TV indicates that the really savvy indie video producers are already pre-empting the RFPs for “early adopters, Luddites, environmentalists, skeptics.”
They’re following what we call the WeVision paradigm of creating Web shows for specific Web communities via a 4-step process:
1. Match advertisers with the show and its community
2. Engage with an enthusiastic community
3. Inspire engagement via charismatic figures
4. Co-create the show with the community
Shows such as The Guild and Diggnation are way ahead of the game in genuinely communicating with – not broadcasting at – online communities of interest, not artificial consumer segments.