TubularInsights (fka ReelSEO) - Latest Comments in Online Video Continues Ridiculous Trajectory

Re: Online Video Continues Ridiculous Trajectory

Jordan — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 11:32:45 -0000

Hey Jeremy -- great piece! Next time we get together, though, coffee's on you: Google Analytics tells me my average time on site is 3.73 minutes.

Re: Online Video Continues Ridiculous Trajectory

Jeff Bach — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 11:31:58 -0000

Hi Jeremy
Good article. Glad to continue seeing trends that are going in the right direction for online video.

But.....the devil is in the details. For me, even after considering those details, online video STILL emerges as something that needs to be in the mix. Somehow.

Detail #1 - The first question is always going to be "unanswerable". Is the person viewing the video in "entertainment" mode or are they in "information searching" mode? I find this question to be huge. It is the difference between more of a passive entertainment mindset and more of an active problem-solving mindset.

Consuming entertainment implies a need to gain mass audience and use more of a dumb advertising approach, much like the existing TV model. Problem solving implies showing a more motivated viewer a more targeted video that answers their problem and/or a targeted ad that matches their selected topic. Niche content fits the second more than the first.

In the stats you quoted, I wonder:

#2 - how much viewing is porn? Does the 3.8 minute number reflect that content being removed? Unless you are connected with that content, I would think that all of that time/content/volume needs to be subtracted out. Unless you have figured out a way to advertise against it and make it a family friendly piece of media. If not, even if we remove half of 3.8 and use 1.9 minutes, we still have a very good number for time spent in one spot.

#3 - in the 3.8(1.9) minute stat, can anyone tell anything about the details of that visit? I think viewer attention span is not 3.8 minutes long, but I do not have any stats to back up my opinion. There are a myriad of details in there that would confirm the value of the 3.8 minutes, e.g.:
- when the viewer quit watching but left the player going?
- or if the player was going while other tasks were in process,
- any demo knowledge of the viewer,
- was there an in-video ad, a banner ad around the video, an overlay ad on the video?
- the time of day that the view occurred could even be significant.

If that 3.8 minutes is simply derived from total Youtube serving time divided by number of Youtube viewers, the industry is going to be in trouble. Picture another bubble bursting sooner or later, although some video serving players have already been extinguished.

We have the history of the other media to look at for comparison. I wonder when in the lifecycle of the older media, did anyone actually start making any money on that particular media?

Would love to see a statistic showing money made for each unit of video viewed.

Interesting times.
Jeff

Re: Online Video Continues Ridiculous Trajectory

nigelcornish — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 09:07:54 -0000

Very useful stats; thanks for posting. Are there figures available for outside US; eg Europe or UK?

Re: Online Video Continues Ridiculous Trajectory

Jeremy Campbell — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 16:03:02 -0000

What an incredible viewing stat, it makes you wonder when online video will reach over 90% of the American population. It seems like every month the numbers get more impressive, but it's just too bad that the advertising dollars aren't growing quite as fast.

Re: Online Video Continues Ridiculous Trajectory

preetam — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 09:28:17 -0000

what's ridiculous about it?

unprecedented, yes...ridiculous...no way! ;)

Re: Online Video Continues Ridiculous Trajectory

Mark Robertson — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:15:42 -0000

no fix needed - you had it right Jeremy..

Re: Online Video Continues Ridiculous Trajectory

Jeremy Scott — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:58:57 -0000

Oops. Yeah, my bad. Thanks for fixing it Mark.

Re: Online Video Continues Ridiculous Trajectory

baronmeister — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:12:46 -0000

i'd compare hulu to the 49ers this year instead of the detroit lions. so close and yet, just not close enough...

Re: Online Video Continues Ridiculous Trajectory

Mark Robertson — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:23:12 -0000

Dina - one in the same right ;-) 40.2 is correct for Google and likely, 99+% of that is YouTube so both answers are likely correct. Thanks for your comments.

Re: Online Video Continues Ridiculous Trajectory

Mark Robertson — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:21:32 -0000

Sorry Jeremy... I only spent 2 minutes reading this. ;-)

Re: Online Video Continues Ridiculous Trajectory

Dina Meek — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 15:32:57 -0000

Oh, hey Jeremy...double check that "google 40.2%" reference in this article. Did you mean YouTube?

Re: Online Video Continues Ridiculous Trajectory

Dina Meek — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 15:26:42 -0000

Jeremy, in researching a piece for a client, I Googled "online video news" and found your great article. Thanks for sharing this info. I had bookmarked some other articles about CNN and Yahoo boosting their video content; yours rounds things out very nicely. I will link back to you!