The moral of the story is simple. You should see Heavy and YouTube as opposites in strategic error. Heavy doesn't create enough value consistently enough to be able to exert enough pressure to capture a significant share. YouTube, on the other hand, is creating a great deal of value - but also can't exert enough pressure to capture a significant share.
Bubblegeneration Strategy Lab
2 comments:
One of the comments left by Chartruse:
"The problem, as I see it, is with advertisers."
"They key figuring out how to monetize users. Put the advertising tools in there hands and the whole thing explodes."
It seems to me that the mistake that many make in the judgements that owning content is the only way to make money is to fail to see that the new thechnologies are disruptive.
Chartruse makes a good point. And I wonder what how advertizing will look in 10 years?
I found Microsoft's advertizing for their Expressions software interesting--the free Beta part especially. Not really comparable to YouTube's situation, but just an example of advertizing changing in response to a new environment Evil One
Good Lord, I can't believe how much I need spell checker! I wonder why I don't use it?
I saw a post Now Than's a Different Way to Use YouTube that's about a company which makes student loans looking to fill a position for Marketing Director. Calling for "video resumes." We assume we know what the content of places like YouTube will be, but I'm not so sure I do. It seems to me there must be ways to make money from this employment angle better than Heavy.com's women in bikini's wielding leaf blowers!
Gad, I didn't know what Heavy.com was. I know I'm old, but that site is an offense to the eyes!
Post a Comment