.tv Hollywood.tv and Demand Media - Another great move.

[TheBulldog]

So there I was checking out what my wife was telling me.

On http://perezhilton.com/

And I see a story about Britney Spears. Naturally.

But WAIT, the video was from Hollywood.tv and had their logo on it, and I was thinking "Woo-hoo, this is nice" until I saw the watermark at the bottom.

Myspacetv.com.

Now why in the world is Demand media doing this? Eat the friggin bandwidth costs, and put a "me.tv" watermark on his videos and host the friggin things for him. Talk about wasting free publicity.

Sheesh, business 101 here.

 

[*AllThings.tv*]

So there I was checking out what my wife was telling me.

On http://perezhilton.com/

And I see a story about Britney Spears. Naturally.

But WAIT, the video was from Hollywood.tv and had their logo on it, and I was thinking "Woo-hoo, this is nice" until I saw the watermark at the bottom.

Myspacetv.com.

Now why in the world is Demand media doing this? Eat the friggin bandwidth costs, and put a "me.tv" watermark on his videos and host the friggin things for him. Talk about wasting free publicity.

Sheesh, business 101 here.

I am not aware of a deal between Demand Media and Hollywood.tv that compels Hollywood.tv to use ChannelMe.tv's video upload feature exclusively for those videos released on the Internet.

In addition, Hollywood.tv will take all measures necessary to maximize exposure for its videos. Hollywood.tv wants to the masses (like the rest of us) and should therefore upload to the top video sites, like MySpace, as it does.

The video that appeared on perezhilton.com appeared there because Perez (or one of his his site admins) saw the vid on myspace and grabbed the embed code.

Nevertheless, I can understand your frustration but its important for people reading this to appreciate the nature of the situation when you upload your videos to more than one video site...you lose control over the video embed code that third parties use to promote your content.

 

[TheBulldog]

Dude, I completely understand ALL of that.....

Demand took the time and the effort to get this man to move his site over to me.tv, which is CLEARLY a less robust template then he was using before. My "frustration" comes from Demand getting a major temptress like this onto their system and then completely NOT taking advantage of it.

They could very easily have said " Hey man, come over here, host your videos on our dime, do this do that, it's all free, we just want you to have this watermark instead of myspacetv.com"

That's it.
That's my problem in a nutshell. Demand media has someone like this on their templates, and they didn't have the advertising sense to take the two extra steps to make themselves known to more people? They host the videos, and Automatically the Me.tv logo is there no matter how many other hosts it goes through, youtube, metacafe, myspace, doesn't matter. At leat me.tv would be on there.

No disrespect, but there is simply no way you could say it makes smart business sense for them to have Hollywood.tv on their platform and NOT go out of their way to also host the videos.

If you are saying that it is good that they use someone else's bandwidth because of cost, then you are by default saying that demand media has to pinch pennies on bandwidth because they are so underfunded that they can barely afford free bandwidth for people that do upload to their servers. Is that what you are saying? Because if so, then this company is seriously hurting for cash which should be a concern for all who tout Demand media as doing well.

 

[tvman]

So there I was checking out what my wife was telling me.

On http://perezhilton.com/

And I see a story about Britney Spears. Naturally.

But WAIT, the video was from Hollywood.tv and had their logo on it, and I was thinking "Woo-hoo, this is nice" until I saw the watermark at the bottom.

Myspacetv.com.

Now why in the world is Demand media doing this? Eat the friggin bandwidth costs, and put a "me.tv" watermark on his videos and host the friggin things for him. Talk about wasting free publicity.

Sheesh, business 101 here.

In all respect, I agree, hard to understand why hollywood.tv would use such a limited service with as many limited templates to offer thousands of .tv sites
on their platform, but i believe sharaz and richard have some sort of deal together, I tried to get Dubai.tv for a month watched it drop, and go directly to shiraz AS a Premium...... of 1000 per year ?????????????????????

He also has LA.tv, Sports.tv, history.tv, medicine.tv, millionaires.tv, billionaires.tv, ???NFL.TV??? ..... ???NASCAR.TV???

So I can kind of see a trend there, and why a deal may have been struck.

It may have worked as I have noticed a lot of vanity and useless (LisaAndMom.tv) .tv domains popping up on me.tv platform daily, so they must be reaching some end users.

Just to end this post on a positive note, with one man having so much success in the entertainment biz, and having rights to so many powerful .tv names, kind of gives you a feeling .tv could really go somewhere, with the right promotion (which no one can figure out, judging by all the whinning and crying about .tv value as of late)

Happy whatever

Me

 

[*AllThings.tv*]

Dude, I completely understand ALL of that.....

Demand took the time and the effort to get this man to move his site over to me.tv, which is CLEARLY a less robust template then he was using before. My "frustration" comes from Demand getting a major temptress like this onto their system and then completely NOT taking advantage of it.

They could very easily have said " Hey man, come over here, host your videos on our dime, do this do that, it's all free, we just want you to have this watermark instead of myspacetv.com"

That's it.
That's my problem in a nutshell. Demand media has someone like this on their templates, and they didn't have the advertising sense to take the two extra steps to make themselves known to more people? They host the videos, and Automatically the Me.tv logo is there no matter how many other hosts it goes through, youtube, metacafe, myspace, doesn't matter. At leat me.tv would be on there.

No disrespect, but there is simply no way you could say it makes smart business sense for them to have Hollywood.tv on their platform and NOT go out of their way to also host the videos.

If you are saying that it is good that they use someone else's bandwidth because of cost, then you are by default saying that demand media has to pinch pennies on bandwidth because they are so underfunded that they can barely afford free bandwidth for people that do upload to their servers. Is that what you are saying? Because if so, then this company is seriously hurting for cash which should be a concern for all who tout Demand media as doing well.

If you underestimate the viral opportunity that uploading to myspacetv represents, then I understand why you are reacting the way you are.

It is not about bandwidth. Its about exposure.

This is about access to one of the largest online markets most coveted by advertisers.

Its one thing to host the site on the channelme.tv network, but its whole another thing to place limitations on Hollywood.tv's ability to promote its videos. In essence, you expect ChannelMe.tv to pay Hollywood.tv money to restrict Hollywood.tv's ability to promote its business simply because they managed to negotiate a deal to get Hollywood.tv on the Channelme.tv network.

Channelme.tv can host the videos produced by Hollywood.tv, but Hollywood.tv would be foolish to limit itself to uploading videos to only the ChannelMe.tv network. It is possible that Hollywood.tv is uploading to YouTube, Brightcove, Revver, Blip, and who knows what other sites.

You accuse DM because PerezHilton's site operator used an embed code from one of those sites rather than the embed code from the same video hosted on ChannelMe.tv. Or you are upset because Hollywood.tv didn't include a ChannelMe.tv watermark when it uploaded the video to MySpacetv...Or you fault DM for not requiring Hollywood.tv to include a ChannelMe.tv watermark in the video when it uploaded the video to MySpace,which would be ridiculous and look ridiculous with three watermarks (MySpace, Hollywood.tv, and ChannelMe.tv)

Stand back and tell me exactly who you fault and for what logical reason because it sounds like you have unrealistic expectations of what a reasonable business agreement between the companies may entail. DM doesn't own Hollywood.tv. The only situation where Hollywood.tv might use ChannelMe.tv exclusively for videos uploaded to the web is when DM shells out some major cash to buy the business.

 

[MillersCrossing]

Dude, I completely understand ALL of that.....

Demand took the time and the effort to get this man to move his site over to me.tv, which is CLEARLY a less robust template then he was using before. My "frustration" comes from Demand getting a major temptress like this onto their system and then completely NOT taking advantage of it.

They could very easily have said " Hey man, come over here, host your videos on our dime, do this do that, it's all free, we just want you to have this watermark instead of myspacetv.com"

That's it.
That's my problem in a nutshell. Demand media has someone like this on their templates, and they didn't have the advertising sense to take the two extra steps to make themselves known to more people? They host the videos, and Automatically the Me.tv logo is there no matter how many other hosts it goes through, youtube, metacafe, myspace, doesn't matter. At leat me.tv would be on there.

No disrespect, but there is simply no way you could say it makes smart business sense for them to have Hollywood.tv on their platform and NOT go out of their way to also host the videos.

If you are saying that it is good that they use someone else's bandwidth because of cost, then you are by default saying that demand media has to pinch pennies on bandwidth because they are so underfunded that they can barely afford free bandwidth for people that do upload to their servers. Is that what you are saying? Because if so, then this company is seriously hurting for cash which should be a concern for all who tout Demand media as doing well.

Absolutely.................!!!!!!!!

Sorry Kevin, but you are sounding like an apologist for DM..(IMO) Actually, having re read some of your points they have some substance.

It makes you think how hard exactly RR pushed for MYSPACE.TV instead of MYSPACETV.COM- to which all the .tv haters had a good chuckle at, including good old FS

...when RR wont even convince HOLLYWOOD.TV to get that watermark changed to market the extension throughout the grabs of code down the lines......

if he couldnt get the content without myspacetv.com - DONT USE IT!!!!!! THere is enough original content salivating to get ona site like HOLLYWOOD.TV......

I know enough people developing right now who would give their left arm before they gave up their own .tv watermark to You Tube or My Space by creating their own unique video content

What a shame
What a waste
What the hell is going on!!

all conspiracy theories are welcome - cause logic brings me to a jarring crash against a brick wall

 

[TheBulldog]

To be fair, and in retrospect to some other conversations around here....I am certainly not down on .tv, just disgusted by some of what is coming out of demand media that should be absolute no-brainers.

 

[smashfactory]

i guess i am confused- i thought he could not upload videos to me.tv channel site- so whether he uploads to youtube, myspace- isnt it going to show THEIR watermark?

 

[SKG]

If I shot my own content why on earth would I allow DM to watermark themselves on my work. It is one thing, if we have some agreement where I have to make some concessions in exchange for using there platform so that content displayed on me.tv is cobranded etc but an entirely different thing if I am distributing my content outside of Me.tv

I would think Hollywood.tv would use as many channels of distribution as possible and why not, I know I would? If you have a product that you can distribute for free through a hundred venues for free why would you not? Unless DM is going to pay Hollywood.tv to advertise on their content then I see no reason for Me.tv to be watermarked. This is not about loyalty to .TV/me.tv this is about a business that is a .tv leveraging video circulation via well known social video sites.

 

[TheBulldog]

Nope smash, my wife uploads HUGE videos all the time, and there is no problem with it. They are converted and display with no problems. Nothing like the short clips this guy would upload.

In the main screen they say "Host: ChannelMe.TV". These aren't press videos, or anything like that. Like Equity's family, they are simply family member uploaded videos. And the process is INCREDIBLY simple. I didn't even have to explain how to do it, which is a HUGE step.

Now here is the ironic part: NO WATERMARK.

That to me is a glaring oversight on potential advertising.

So, SKG, that eliminates the watermark part of your argument. Although it negates my argument that they should be doing it.

 

[smashfactory]

ok so you can upload videos to me.tv?

 

[TheBulldog]

Yes. She uploaded a few today from X-mas.

 

[equity78]

I see both sides to this discussion, but the one thing no one here knows is the relationship between Hollywood.tv and Demand Media. One person who I spoke to said there is none, nothing other than someone using the Channel Me tool nothing else. Is that true ? I don't know they could have been giving me disinformation.

BULLDOG how easy is it to upload the video? The site I built for my niece I did not do any of that. Thank you

 

[*AllThings.tv*]

Unless DM is going to pay Hollywood.tv to advertise on their content then I see know reason for Me.tv to be watermarked.

ChannelMe.tv should have a watermark when and only when it pays for a video to have the watermark or when a video is uploaded to the ChannelMe.tv network.

This is not about loyalty to .TV/me.tv this is about a business that is a .tv leveraging video circulation via well known social video sites.

I am glad someone understands my point and the business model underlying the web.

 

[smashfactory]

man how did i miss that

 

[TheBulldog]

EQ, under "manage" look in "video settings" for "upload or record video"

There is then an "ActiveX" install of VideoEgg that you need to do. After that, simple simon, just simple uploads. I can't tell you how many emails I get with links to our 1 year old doing something our 3 year old did.

And singing, oh, how kids love to sing.


*AllThings*, that is my ENTIRE point. My wife uploads videos all the time and sends them to family and friends, there is NO watermark.

Does that make any sense at all to you?

 

[*AllThings.tv*]

Nope smash, my wife uploads HUGE videos all the time, and there is no problem with it. They are converted and display with no problems. Nothing like the short clips this guy would upload.

In the main screen they say "Host: ChannelMe.TV". These aren't press videos, or anything like that. Like Equity's family, they are simply family member uploaded videos. And the process is INCREDIBLY simple. I didn't even have to explain how to do it, which is a HUGE step.

Now here is the ironic part: NO WATERMARK.

That to me is a glaring oversight on potential advertising.

So, SKG, that eliminates the watermark part of your argument. Although it negates my argument that they should be doing it.

If DM doesn't include a watermark for videos it hosts on its network then they are not leveraging it to their maximum ability. If that were your initial argument, I wouldn't have disagreed with you.

 

[SKG]

EQ, under "manage" look in "video settings" for "upload or record video"

There is then an "ActiveX" install of VideoEgg that you need to do. After that, simple simon, just simple uploads. I can't tell you how many emails I get with links to our 1 year old doing something our 3 year old did.

And singing, oh, how kids love to sing.


*AllThings*, that is my ENTIRE point. My wife uploads videos all the time and sends them to family and friends, there is NO watermark.

Does that make any sense at all to you?

This is great news. So this means we can shoot content, upload it at me.tv with our own logo, use (their storage/bandwidth), then embed anywhere! LOL! Sending you some rep!

EQ, maybe delete this thread before DM sees it.

 

[TheBulldog]

Yes, that is exactly what it means. I can't tell you how many times i have seen my daughter walking on video.

Lord knows I don't see it at night when she is pulling my icewater off the table....

 

[TheWatcher]

Reading this kind of argument doesnt help the business, it only bring negative effect.

When I saw Hollywood.tv with active content, well that's a good start to spread the word to our target audience. I don't care how they do it.

Cheers.