Recently I heard the head of digital at a major agency lament the fact that although his company was one of the first to adopt dynamic ads years ago, they have executed only a handful of campaigns. Creative production and operational complexity are real issues for the agency. Shortly thereafter, I spoke to a major online publisher who is spearheading new advertising solutions by combining audience insights with dynamic creative. However, their efforts are the exception rather than the rule, while thousands of advertisers still struggle with the idea that every online display campaign should be dynamic and are overwhelmed …
My good friend Tod Sacerdoti posted a provocative article last week titled "Mobile Video Advertising Is Irrelevant," making the argument, and I'm paraphrasing, that video is video no matter where and on what screen that video is viewed on. This is a subject we've thought a lot about as you can imagine, and I wanted to point out that he is wrong for one big reason: specificity works.
f you watch a music video three times in a row and can't remember a lyric or chorus, there must be another reason you're wasting time at work. Such is the case with White Knuckles, the latest video from the band OK Go.
I feel strongly that mobile video advertising is fundamentally irrelevant and will eventually be removed from the pool of industry jargon. What makes me think this? Mobile video is irrelevant because the medium doesn't change anything about our ability to offer scale, targeting, optimization or performance media to our advertisers. In addition, mobile video advertising is served in a nearly identical way to online video (i.e., a forced view before the consumption of free content), so the experience of viewing the ad doesn't change the way it's consumed or performs.
In his Archive of American Television interview back in 1997, Hugh Downs, who got his start in radio, said this of TV's first years: "I thought it was a gimmick like 3-D movies and it would just go away... I saw in a relatively short time that it was here to stay, and that I'd better move toward participating in it." There is a similar conflict happening now between the established medium of television and original Web content.
In the past, we've looked at how YouTube can generate more revenue and what Facebook can expect as it wades increasingly into online video. Today, we'll look at Yahoo in the context of the rumor that the Sunnyvale-based company is gunning for 1 billion users and $10 billion in annual revenues within three years, or 2014.
When Steve Jobs previewed Apple TV, he demonstrated the "one-click" video push system of moving content to other screens. Jobs had outmaneuvered the incumbents. Many multichannel providers who either already had the same feature working on an engineer's bench, or were preparing to roll it out in 2011, must have watched in disbelief.
Over 40 million people saw "Avatar" in 3D at their local multiplex, the vast majority of them experiencing 3D video content for the first time, but certainly not the last. Closer to home, in time for the holiday season, every consumer electronics manufacturer will be shipping 3D products throughout the home theater equipment chain, including 3D DVD and Blu Ray players, TVs, and glasses. Despite their ubiquity, movie theaters and 3D TVs are nowhere near as accessible as the high resolution, 3D-capable device you already own: your PC.
Statistics abound showing the overall booming growth of online video consumption, but in this still-nascent channel, there's a great deal of debate over what kind of video people want to watch online. Will it be user-generated or professional? Film and television features or programming created specifically for the web? Entertainment, how-to, short form, or long form? But rather than focusing on the WHAT of video consumption, I'd like to talk about HOW people watch online video, as I think it's key to unlocking and monetizing the next waves of video online.
YouTube's main problem remains the massive supply of inventory that pummels sale-through and ad rates. Back in 2006, YouTube's users were adding about 5 hours of videos every minute. Today that number has soared to 24 hours of content each minute. Here are four things YouTube should do immediately: