See what thought leaders from Avenue A/Razorfish, Bolt, Brand New World, Burst Media, Eyeblaster, Real Girls Media, TACODA, Winstar and more say about Google's acquisition of YouTube.
Editor's Note: This article is part of our special series on Google's acquisition of YouTube, with commentary and analysis from practitioners and thought leaders throughout the industry, including:
A roundup of news from around the net
Search Editor Kevin Ryan wondering, where's the ROI?
Criticism of mainstream coverage by columnist Mark Naples
Briefings of the deal's implications from top online marketers
Perspective on where YouTube will fit into Google's growth
A look at potential new marketing opportunities
How AdSense may be integrated within YouTube
Ranging from the 30,000 foot perspective to the deeply practical, our contributors will help you make sense of the latest shift in the media landscape.
One of the best things about my job is that I get to chat with smart people on a regular basis. On my Tuesday morning drive to work I realized that I was wondering about how some of these people were reacting to the Google/YouTube announcement. So, I put out a call, asking folks if they could drop everything and send me a few sentences about why this deal is interesting and important.
Many responded (to those whose schedules didn't permit them: no worries, next time), and so I wanted to share those responses with you, our iMedia readers.
On a purely factual basis, the best tidbit came in from Kate Thorp's husband, Chas, who sent in something he saw on the front page of the San Francisco Chronicle: "The $1.65 billion price works out to $31.83 per second of the site's 20-month existence, assuming 30 days per month."
Sifting through the responses, I tried to organize them along thematic grounds and ultimately gave up: What you see is organized alphabetically by the last name of my correspondent. You'll find riches all the way to the end, so keep reading!
David Berkowitz, Director of Strategic Planning, 360i
Google's acquisition of YouTube will change some of the rules of engagement for agencies involved with media buying.
The old rules (the ones in place today) were that marketers would turn to search marketing agencies, or whatever agency they've been using that offered search marketing services, to buy media through Google, and this would be predominantly text-based and direct response. Video-related ads would run through the client's interactive agency or rich media provider, and branding would be a primary goal.
Google has been blurring those lines for some time with image and video-in-banner ads, but as Google rolls out more formats specific to video, and to the viral user-generated content that has made YouTube its billion-dollar baby, those lines may disappear entirely.
Search marketing agencies will now be tasked with buying text and video ads and gaining more stewardship for achieving both direct response and branding goals, while agencies that have traditionally handled rich media and video will now work more closely with Google, giving them more leverage with the largest online advertising company.
Aaron Cohen, CEO, Bolt Media
Yesterday was an inflection point in media history. The great brands of the 20th century -- particularly ABC, CBS and NBC -- will find themselves increasingly marginalized by upstart, disruptive media ideas that grow huge audiences swiftly.
Those who said that YouTube would collapse under a mountain of lawsuits need to understand the changing dynamics of the media industry. We live in a radically more creative, more collaborative society.
A prediction on the next big merger: Yahoo! and Viacom.
Along the way you will see consolidation in the online video space. Companies to watch include Heavy, Break, Broadband Enterprises and Bolt.
Sarah Fay, President, Isobar U.S.
YouTube launched... what, a year and a half ago? And today it is worth more than $1.6 billion in the eyes of Google. If this doesn't illustrate the speed of change and the power of community then I don't know what....! I saw Chad Hurley just Friday, when he came to speak at our management conference in San Francisco. He didn't mention the deal of course, but he did look a little bleary eyed. He smiled a lot too, as he told the story of how YouTube got started. Do you know it wasn't developed against a business plan? Just some friends looking for a simple way to share videos with each other (okay a few genius friends who were from the founding team of PayPal-- but still!) Simplicity is the key-- YouTube is a simple, simple way to share videos. You don't need to sign in, you can share every which way-- just point, click, watch. And today they are up to 100 million views a day (they say they represent 57 percent of videos watched on the web). Astounding!
Is it worth $1.6 billion? Maybe so, given the parallels between search behavior and consumers' increasing inclination to access video on the web. Also, its a natural fit given the hand-in-glove relationship between the two-- search is the tool of choice in accessing video content (and in fact there has been a fruitful partnership between Google and YouTube-- until recently, Google Search was the primary way to reach the YouTube audience. I think its a fit-- the pairing of two ground-breaking behavioral behemoths.
One small thing-- the world will be watching to see how Google skirts the potential copywrite wars (now that there is a bigger wallet to go after).
Every big internet deal goes through five stages: rumor; shock; ridicule; curiosity; and envy. In eighteen months, other media companies will be envying Google for being willing and able to do the YouTube deal.
Jarvis Coffin, CEO, Burst Media
YouTube is not especially well-aligned with the notion of fast reliable search, the core value that made Google so successful after the start-up generation of search engines -- Yahoo, Excite, Lycos, Infoseek, Alta Vista -- decided to become portals. YouTube is content, and Google is in the content business now. There is no harm in that unless Google does not accept the transforming nature of this transaction to their business. Is it a technology company or a media company? $1.65 billion later it is a media company.
And, I'm off to launch a new search engine.
Adam Guild, President & CEO, Interep Interactive/Winstar Media
This deal will cause several things to happen. First, Fox will have to react swiftly to plug the hole YouTube may create on MySpace. Fox was not ready to buy YouTube because 80 percent of YouTube's traffic originated with MySpace-- so the duplication in unique users did not make sense to pay for.
It did make sense for a Google. Google just bought a lot of Fox Interactive users (smart). Remedy: Fox should buy a company like VMIX.com -- pound for pound as good technically as YouTube, but a start-up -- so Fox could get VMIX at a comparable bargain.
Fox will also have to watch themselves with Photobucket -- another company whose success they made via MySpace -- that will be the next to go.
For the industry, this move punctuates the value of the online community. MySpace was one of the first to get it right, and they tossed their nets wide.
Future communities will be locally focused and/or laser-focused on specific topics (e.g., herbalist.com will announce the launch of their community site at the end of this month), which will rival or complement local media like TV, radio and cable… if they can get their acts together.
It's all good. I love when interactive people kick ass!
Next: Tom Hespos, Jeff Lanctot, Dave Morgan, Pirouz Nilforoush and Tony Quin