Tampilkan postingan dengan label Google. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label Google. Tampilkan semua postingan

Sabtu, 29 Agustus 2015

Artists, It's Your Copyright - Don't Apologize for Defending It!

[An extended version of my article below originally appeared in Digital Music News this past week -- full link, with supporting graphics, here.] [Note - image to the right is via dreamtime.com]

We live in a world where many share the belief that content is “free” -- and of fast-growing piracy of movies, television, music and all media.  Yet, most of us don’t know that.  In fact, most believe that earlier rampant piracy has been significantly curtailed by new legitimate services and business models (like subscription streaming).  But, it just ain’t so.  Cisco forecasts that file sharing in North America will grow a massive 51% from 2014-2019 and analyst firm NetNames, in a study commissioned by NBCUniversal, concludes that virtually all of that P2P file sharing violates copyright.  On the music side, Bain & Company is reported to have concluded that recorded music sales would be 17 times higher in a piracy-free world.  And, on the video side, recently, at least 4 HD pilots of upcoming CBS shows leaked to pirate sites weeks before their scheduled premieres

Piracy robs creators, plain and simple.  In the words of Alex Ebert, lead singer of indie band Edward Sharpe and the Magnetic Zeros (and a tech innovator himself), “it degrades the craft.”  The act of creation is their work – it is their livelihood.  Circumventing payment for the results of that work (music, movies, television) is like asking someone to build you a house (or even a doll house) – and then refusing to pay for it.  No one can defend that.

Most creators in all forms of media will attest to that (i.e., that the product of creativity is no different) … at least privately.  So, why is it so hard for artists and other content owners to come out and say that publicly?  And, even more, to take the action necessary to proclaim “enough is enough!” and stop the madness (which has, for some, somehow become “right” in some strange twist of fate)?  The answer, my friends, is that artists and content owners today are saddled with the history of the past -- a history that has led us to today’s parallel universe where, for some, the act of stealing from creators has become accepted (and frequently encouraged) behavior and where the “good guys” are the ones frequently depicted with black hats. 

Let’s go back in time to see how this all happened first in the music business – and to discuss what the creative community can do about it for movies, television, and all forms of media – unapologetically. 

The digital age dawned on a mass scale just prior to 2000 – and mass piracy of music followed suit.  Two enablers of choice in this brave, yet completely unregulated and frequently abused world, included the original Napster and Swedish-born KaZaA (which, in an ironic twist, was born by founders who later started Skype and music streaming service Rdio – for which they expect customers and advertisers to pay).  Yes, artists and their representatives “felt” that something wasn’t quite right – that their “products” were disappearing from the shelves in a form of looting on a mass scale.  But things got out of control so fast -- and no real tools existed to do anything about it – that little was done to stop illegal downloading of content. 

Little couldbe done.  The Internet itself – and the technology enabling that piracy – were still new to everyone.  There was no mass education by artists connecting piracy to their livelihoods.  Few in the creative community really understood it.  And many artists didn’t particularly care as a result of a “system” they felt failed to treat them and pay them fairly.  So, no one (even the creators themselves) really talked about it.  P2P piracy was anonymous.  No visible victim.  And seemingly everyone did it.  After all, it kind of felt “good” – getting great stuff … all for free!

Except it wasn’t.  Not “free” for the artists and creative community who, like all of us, need to make a living – and whose “paychecks” were soon slashed to a fraction.  Yes, this happened to major artists whom got the most visibility (and the most blowback under the guise of greed when they tried to begin the conversation – perhaps most notoriously, Metallica).  But, it happened equally to smaller indie artists and creators -- musician “mom and pops” – hitting them right where they live.  As an example, since 2000, the number of full-time songwriters in Nashville plummeted 80%.  Once artists and the creative community fully grasped the severity of the situation – and the mass global de-valuation of their “product” virtually overnight – the music industry struck back with the only tool it knew in those early, frenzied, frightening P2P days.  That tool was the good old American lawsuit – a tool that was both horribly imprecise and wielded with an equally horribly imprecise strategic hand.

As a result, that so-called “strategy” – which seemed to initially focus most on the leastegregious cases of piracy rather than on major pirates – failed.  Most importantly, it failed miserably in the court of public opinion, with serious repercussions to artists’ and industry brands and images.  In a dark form of alchemy, the most egregious wrongdoers proclaimed themselves to be most in the “right” and reveled in stories of 12-year-olds and grandmothers being sued (which purportedly demonstrated pervasive greed across all elements of the music industry).  Mass infringers somehow successfully defined a narrative that deflected the real issue -- and defended their virtual online mass looting of hundreds of millions of creator dollars when virtually no one in their right mind could defend mass theft in the physical world.  Imagine a warehouse filled with stolen CDs from your favorite indie artists – and then multiply that exponentially (because that was – and remains -- the reality in the virtual P2P world).  Right?  Wrong?  You be the judge.

The result?  Artists and the creative community were hit where it hurt most – their livelihoods, threatening many from the very act of creation that the most egregious pirates proclaimed they purportedly fostered through their illegal actions.  Edward Sharpe’s Alex Ebert passionately punctuates this point, underscoring piracy’s potential to create a generation of “hobbyist musicians” unable to focus their lives on the arts (and our enjoyment of it).  “To master anything, you must be able to devote your whole life to it,” he explains -- something that is increasingly difficult for creators.  That means a generation of lost art – songs, shows, movies that we will never hear or see.

Yet, many of those same creators shied away from protecting their own work, their own intellectual property – fearing losing their fans’ support (ultimately their most valuable resource) and frequently lacking motivation in an aging system not equipped for the brave new Internet world.  And, in the process, artists and the creative community essentially capitulated to a “not-very-brave” new world of “well, that’s just the way it is.”

So, here we are today.  What is different today than before?  What can (and should) be done now that wasn’t done then? 

On the music side, the answer is a three-pronged strategy that is properly defined, clearly articulated, and fairly carried out: (1) economics – the new monetization realities and consumer Zeitgeist of our digital-first world demand re-evaluated artist/label and distributor royalty structures, especially since – as Ebert points out -- many consumers are willing to pay only if they believe their money is going directly to the artist; (2) education – we all know (at least intellectually) that P2P piracy is wrong; artists and creators need to be motivated to openly support each other and be in a position to actively articulate piracy’s impact on their lives … on their art; and (3) technology– we now, for the first time, have the right set of tools to protect artists and content owners, target the most egregious pirates with precision, and seek reasonable restitution efficiently and privately.  Forget the 12-year olds and grandmas – focus on the real bad guys -- those with the virtual warehouses of stolen CDs in the sky.

On the technology front, one leader is Rightscorp (note -- a client), a company supported by industry heavyweights like Peter Paterno, Joel Katz and David Lowery and that counts Warner Bros. and BMG as clients.  Rightscorp identifies precisely where music, movies, and games are illegally uploaded or downloaded and then discretely (i.e., no names are made public) sends a series of low-cost offers to privately resolve violations.  There are no surprises here -- and the creative community can take back what’s rightfully theirs … their livelihoods.  Rightscorp alone has returned more than $1,000,000 of stolen creativity to date. 


With a significant percentage of all current Internet traffic used to illegally distribute copyrighted content without compensation, artists and content owners are victims still of mass theft valued at multiple billions of dollars just for music.  Isn’t it time for the creative community to take that back – unapologetically-- and help point the way to restoring what Ebert calls “the sanctity of the arts” in the eyes of all of us whose lives profit so much from the creative work of others? 

Selasa, 21 April 2015

Tesla - Almost BK & Acquired by Google When I Was Buying My Model S!

Imagine my surprise yesterday when I, a Model S owner, learned for the first time that Tesla was running on fumes and almost BK when I ordered mine in mid-April 2013!  That surprise was doubled when I learned that Google's Larry Page and Tesla CEO Elon Musk had reached a handshake deal for Google to bail out Tesla.  But, as fate would have it (happily!), Musk's and the company's fortunes turned dramatically upward precisely as the lawyers were papering the deal.  In a matter of weeks, Model S "word of mouth" -- and resulting sales -- radically changed, skyrocketing Tesla's stock upward.  The company immediately achieved profitability in the ensuing quarter and, as they say, the rest is history.  (That's me picking up my Tesla -- at essentially the precise moment when, unbeknownst to all of us -- Tesla's fortunes changed.)

I love my Tesla -- have had it for nearly 2 years now -- and have nearly 40,000 miles on it.  I have written several times about it (here is my original post about my buying experience two years ago) -- including my recent post about how the car essentially saved my life, or at least great bodily harm (I really believe it).

I also have frequently predicted that Apple ultimately will buy Tesla because the two companies -- and their respective founders -- share similar DNA (here is my overall analysis of this tantalizing possibility from nearly 2 years ago -- well before such rumors hit the mill).

But, Google?  Didn't see that one coming!

Then again, that was long ago ... and in far, far away land.

Tesla is a very different company now of course.  And, it will have a radically different outcome ....

Kamis, 16 April 2015

Netflix - The Champ's Achilles Heel


Netflix is killing it. And its investors are on a high – literally. Its stock is at an all-time high on the heels of reporting its highest quarterly subscriber growth numbers ever. What could go wrong? You have Netflix. I have Netflix. We all have Netflix. And, that “We” is increasingly global (since more than half this past quarter’s growth came from outside U.S. borders).
But, make no mistake. Netflix’s long-term challenges are real, they are daunting, and they come directly from Netflix’s Achilles Heel – its own one-dimensional business model (for an excellent separate detailed analysis of Netflix's relevant metrics and financials, read "The State and Future of Netflx v. HBO in 2015" by Liam Boluk, recently published in Redef).  
You see, Netflix is a pure-play video service.  The company monetizes that subscription service only.  That means that Netflix must be profitable based on content revenues alone (unless and until it finds a way to expand beyond that – (more on that later).
Compare that to Apple. Remember them? Oh yeah, digital media’s worst-kept secret is very much alive again -- i.e., Apple hopes to launch its long-anticipated (overdue?) OTT “Netflix Killer” subscription service by fall. Apple's business model is fundamentally different than Netflix's.  For Apple, its "coming soon" OTT video service can be (and likely will be) a loss leader -- a losing proposition that ultimately wins for the Cupertino crew.  Here’s why.
Apple's core DNA is unlike Netflix's.  Apple benefits from multiple revenue streams. And, although the company frequently positions itself more broadly as being a media company, its primary stream is very un-Netflix-ian – it is hardware-driven pure and simple. Apple makes money (boatloads of it) by selling “cool” metal -- iPhones, iPads, Apple Watches, Apple TVs (and ultimately the iTV?).  That means that Apple's new subscription video service essentially will be a "marketing" expense that drives incremental hardware sales.  That also means that Apple can (and will) subsidize its content licensing costs in order to keep its subscription pricing down. Netflix can’t do that.
So, how scared should Netflix (and its investors) be of Cupertino and the host of other behemoths soon invading Netflix’s OTT turf? And, what can Netflix do?
First, let’s be clear. Netflix has a formidable head start and I’m not saying that the “mother of all OTTs” will go away anytime soon. But, that alone is not enough. After all, unlike Netflix, Apple is expected to offer both VOD AND live/linear TV (likely including both ESPN and HBO).  And, switching costs are low (essentially non-existent). All you need to do is go online and cancel.
So, Netflix can try to contain the inevitable Apple threat (and the threat of all other Apple-like behemoths) in at least five ways – the first two of which also lead to diversification: 
  • Take its formidable lead and find a way to effectively mine and monetize the data it has already collected on all of us;
  • Continue to develop and feature kick-ass exclusive original content like House of Cards and Orange Is the New Black that can monetize not only via individual subscriptions, but also via global content licensing deals. That original content can also deflect at least some of the Apple threat in a very HBO-like way. After all, will those passionate audiences abandon their favorite characters? Likely not;
  • Continue to offer and deepen its pool of content (including via exclusive licensing) that Apple can’t match … at least for a long time;
  • Emulate Apple, Sling TV and now also Sony VUE by adding live/linear TV programming to the mix (including the critical ESPN ingredient); and
  • Offer lower pricing with an $8.99 monthly new sub charge that Apple and others likely won’t match (after all, under its recently announced deal, Apple will charge Apple TV customers $14.99 for stand-alone OTT HBO Now by itself). 
Of course, many of these counter-attacks will be increasingly harder to do based on the significant costs involved – and the pressure they place on Netflix’s Achilles Heel. 
But, there’s also always M&A. After all, the much-anticipated Apple threat is not just a threat to Netflix. It is an ear-splitting shot across the bow of myriad global players in the video game. So look around. Which of those players have multi-faceted business models (like Apple), a heavy dose of media in their strategies (like Apple), and plenty of cash to make a run at Netflix? Hmmm … let me think …. Google, Samsung and Amazon come to mind ...
… I’m just sayin’….

Senin, 09 Maret 2015

VR 101: Lesson 1 -- DISTRIBUTION (& Its Challenges) -- #1 In a Series

[The following is the first in a series of posts about the burgeoning world of Virtual Reality (VR) by guest blogger Omar Noureldin of Manatt Digital Media.  He previously wrote a VR-focused "Cheat Sheet" overview of the VR space (and key players in it).]

To understand what the virtual reality (VR) distribution pipeline will look like, a stroll down memory lane vis-à-vis online video will be instructive. It took time for the online video ecosystem to develop into what it is today -- and that was largely because of disjointed and competing distribution platforms in its early years. Anyone with a smartphone, tablet or computer knows that YouTube -- despite new "real" significant challengers like Facebook -- continues to dominate this space with over 1 billion users.  But, this took time (and an acquisition by Google, which merged Google’s less than stellar Google Video platform). Still, the vast majority of YouTube’s content is user-generated.

Then there are the premium content platforms like Netflix, Hulu and Amazon, all of which have turned the prime-time TV model on its head. First, by reusing content, and now by creating original content. Vimeo is a growing player in this space (among numerous others) and has laid its stake in the ground by focusing on high-quality, high-resolution content and on content creators -- and it is now dabbling in VOD and SVOD models.

So, what does this mean for VR? What is the opportunity?

Well, the opportunity is for new digital distribution platforms to emerge that focus solely on VR content. The reason some believe nnovation will happen with these new distribution platforms, rather than from giants like YouTube, is because VR distribution will require advancements in packaging and transferring vast amounts of data across existing networks that are not necessarily ready to handle that kind of traffic.

Herein lies a massive challenge. High-quality VR content is not mobile friend ... at least not yet ... for a couple of fundamental reasons. First, current bandwidth capacities limit the amount of data that can be transferred, and mobile devices are limited in their storage capabilities. Second, mobile processors literally overheat and melt when trying to play high-quality VR content that is more than five minutes long.

Today, the big online video distributors are all about mobile, which creates a disconnect in strategy and focus if they want to move full force into VR. Moreover, YouTube is still trying to figure out how to be profitable in the traditional online video space, so many pundits believe that makes little sense for them to spend a lot of time, money and effort to develop new distribution channels for VR (especially when YouTube is now focused on developing its own premium original content, as original premium VR content is a ways away).

Instead, many predict a proliferation of VR-focused distribution platforms and companies experimenting with different ways to deliver the content—Vrideo is one of them. The company recently hosted a VR Meetup and panel discussion on this very topic in Santa Monica. As discussed earlier, there will need to be technological innovation at every level of distribution—packing, transfer, storage and processing.

Do not get me wrong, there is already talk of the big media and online video companies (Google, Amazon, Netflix, Disney, etc.) and telecoms (AT&T, Verizon, etc.) eventually going to war to acquire these smaller VR distribution companies.  But, it is likely to be an M&A war, not a technological advancement war.  Google has already invested a whopping $500 million into MagicLeap, which is developing VR technology that merges the real and virtual worlds -- so-called augmented reality.


Massive sums of money are being poured into VR right now -- and distribution is one of the keys to unlocking its potential.

[NEXT IN OMAR'S CONTINUING VR SERIES WILL BE LESSON 2 -- SOCIAL, followed by Lesson 3 -- Hardware, Lesson 4 -- Advertising, and Lesson 5 -- VR Rights.  Stay tuned ...].

Selasa, 20 Januari 2015

Tech Giant Buys Hollywood Studio -- Happens In 2015? Here's Why

Yes, THAT may happen in 2015.  A tech giant may very well buy its way significantly deeper into the content game this year by acquiring one of the major Hollywood studios.

Content is increasingly "king" in our multi-platform, smartphone-driven, millennial-focused world.  That small screen -- and the digital-first eco-system built on top of it -- changes everything (I recently wrote about this for TechCrunch, Variety and VideoInk).  That's where consumers (especially the young eyeballs coveted by marketers) engage.  And, that small screen and our increasingly digital-first world absolutely are critical to tech giants like Apple, Samsung, Amazon, and Google, each of which has a fundamentally different core business model that ultimately is driven by content.  I'll repeat ... that is driven by content!

Let's take a look at those business models.

Apple and Samsung are all about hardware sales (iPads, iPhones, Galaxies).  Everything else is a Trojan Horse to drive those sales.

Amazon is all about e-commerce.  Everything else is a Trojan Horse to drive more and more consumers into its virtual store to buy goods.

Google is all about advertising.  Everything else is a Trojan Horse to maximize eyeballs and ad sales.

CONTENT is that Trojan Horse.  Apple iTunes, Samsung Milk Music and Milk Video, Amazon Prime, and YouTube are the names of those individual stables.  And, the goal of each service is to have the deepest and best performing stable of horses -- and increasingly unique ones (i.e., exclusive/original programming) -- so that consumers jump on and ride their services instead of the "other guys'."

For these tech behemoths, content (movies, television) essentially functions as pure advertising.  Content is the means to an end, and ROI is not measured by the content service itself.  That's why stand-alone highly challenging economics that apply to pure-play services like Spotify, Pandora and Netflix don't apply to these tech behemoths.  Content is essentially a loss-leader.  That content is THE most critical form of advertising to fuel their underlying business model.

But, merely because this is the reality (i.e., that content is viewed as a marketing spend) isn't necessarily a bad thing from a creative (or consumer) standpoint.  In fact, the fundamental goal of all story-telling -- including in this "Trojan Horse"/advertising scenario -- is to captivate an audience.  The better the story-teller, the more listeners they will attract.  How they monetize those listeners IS the question.

Let's take a look at the flip-side of this -- i.e., the studios.  The smartphone's small screen is having major impact on the studios.  These studios have played effectively for years in the big/bigger screen worlds of theatrical and TV.  But, small screen, digital-first, millennial-focused video content is not in their DNA.  That's why Disney bought Maker Studios for up to a near-$1 billion.  And, this confusing new multi-platform smartphone driven world order makes "traditional" major studios (and the moguls who run them) feel vulnerable.  And, that vulnerability makes them more open to possibilities.

And, that leads to the perfect M&A storm.  Tech giants who increasingly covet content.  And, content-creators who increasingly scratch their heads about their next act (but are experts in story-telling and creating bigger screen premium content).

This is simple math that leads to one logical conclusion -- a tech giant could very well buy one of these major studios this year (this was #5 of my 8 predictions in my TechCrunch guest article).

Which studio?  One logical choice could be Warner Bros.  Remember, Rupert Murdoch made a big play to swallow Warner Bros. up last year -- an attempt that failed, but perhaps exposing a crack in the veneer of this and other major studios.  How about Sony?  It certainly has had its well-publicized challenges.

Which of these tech giants is most likely to make that bold move?  Apple certainly has signaled its willingness to move in that direction, buying Beats on the music side for $3 billion.  How about Samsung?  Its newly-launched Milk Video service needs to differentiate -- and studio content could be the ticket.  Amazon?  Bezos just scored big wins as a premium TV-like content creator at the Golden Globes. It has also quietly created its own YouTube alternative universe. Movies are the natural "next act" (in fact, Amazon just yesterday announced a major theatrical motion picture slate strategy and "traditional" media exec to run it).  And then there's Google.  Yes, you would think that it needs to be Swiss (neutral) with the "mother of all video distribution platforms" that is YouTube.  But, don't forget that Google has wanted to play hard in the premium video content development game for some time -- and is widely reported to be undertaking bold new major content development initiatives.

Think this is a stretch?  Not at all.  Each of these tech giants certainly has the cash to pull it off.  Yes, THAT is likely in 2015.  A tech giant may buy its way into the content game this year by acquiring one of the major Hollywood studios.

Content is increasingly "king" in our multi-platform, smartphone-driven, millennial-focused world.  That small screen -- and the digital-first eco-system built on top of it -- changes everything (I recently wrote about this for TechCrunchVariety and VideoInk).  That's where consumers (especially the young eyeballs coveted by marketers) engage.  And, that small screen and our increasingly digital-first world absolutely are critical to tech giants like Apple, Samsung, Amazon, and Google, each of which has a fundamentally different core business model that ultimately is driven by content.  I'll repeat ... that is driven by content!

Let's take a look at those business models.

Apple and Samsung are all about hardware sales (iPads, iPhones, Galaxies).  Everything else is a Trojan Horse to drive those sales.

Amazon is all about e-commerce.  Everything else is a Trojan Horse to drive more and more consumers into its virtual store to buy goods.

Google is all about advertising.  Everything else is a Trojan Horse to maximize eyeballs and ad sales.

CONTENT is that Trojan Horse.  Apple iTunes, Samsung Milk Music and Milk Video, Amazon Prime, and YouTube are the names of those individual stables.  And, the goal of each service is to have the deepest and best performing stable of horses -- and increasingly unique ones (i.e., exclusive/original programming) -- so that consumers jump on and ride their services instead of the "other guys'."

For these tech behemoths, content (movies, television) essentially functions as pure advertising.  Content is the means to an end, and ROI is not measured by the content service itself.  That's why stand-alone highly challenging economics that apply to pure-play services like Spotify, Pandora and Netflix don't apply to these tech behemoths.  Content is essentially a loss-leader.  That content is THE most critical form of advertising to fuel their underlying business model.

But, merely because this is the reality (i.e., that content is viewed as a marketing spend) isn't necessarily a bad thing from a creative (or consumer) standpoint.  In fact, the fundamental goal of all story-telling -- including in this "Trojan Horse"/advertising scenario -- is to captivate an audience.  The better the story-teller, the more listeners they will attract.  How they monetize those listeners IS the question.

Let's take a look at the flip-side of this -- i.e., the studios.  The smartphone's small screen is having major impact on the studios.  These studios have played effectively for years in the big/bigger screen worlds of theatrical and TV.  But, small screen, digital-first, millennial-focused video content is not in their DNA.  That's why Disney bought Maker Studios for up to a near-$1 billion.  And, this confusing new multi-platform smartphone driven world order makes "traditional" major studios (and the moguls who run them) feel vulnerable.  And, that vulnerability makes them more open to possibilities.

And, that leads to the perfect M&A storm.  Tech giants who increasingly covet content.  And, content-creators who increasingly scratch their heads about their next act (but are experts in story-telling and creating bigger screen premium content).

This is simple math that leads to one logical conclusion -- a tech giant could very well buy one of these major studios this year (this was #5 of my 8 predictions in my TechCrunch guest article).

Which studio?  One logical choice could be Warner Bros.  Remember, Rupert Murdoch made a big play to swallow Warner Bros. up last year -- an attempt that failed, but perhaps exposing a crack in the veneer of this and other major studios.  How about Sony?  It certainly has had its well-publicized challenges.

Which of these tech giants is most likely to make that bold move?  Apple certainly has signaled its willingness to move in that direction, buying Beats on the music side for $3 billion.  How about Samsung?  Its newly-launched Milk Video service needs to differentiate -- and studio content could be the ticket.  Amazon?  Bezos just scored big wins as a premium TV-like content creator at the Golden Globes.   It has also quietly created its own YouTube alternative universe).  Movies are the natural "next act" (in fact, Amazon just yesterday announced a major theatrical motion picture slate strategy and "traditional" media exec to run it).  And then there's Google.  Yes, you would think that it needs to be Swiss (neutral) with the "mother of all video distribution platforms" that is YouTube.  But, don't forget that Google has wanted to play hard in the premium video content development game for some time -- and is widely reported to be undertaking bold new major content development initiatives.

Think this is a stretch?  Not at all.  Each of these tech giants certainly has the cash to pull it off.  Moreover, such a move certainly is not unprecedented.  Let's not forget that consumer electronics giant Sony bought its way into the content business 25 years ago when it acquired Columbia Pictures.  And, remember, competing CE company Matsushita, not to be undone and in rapid succession, bought MCA/Universal (which it unloaded soon thereafter to Edgar Bronfman and his alcohol dynasty).

Mixed results, for sure.  But, these are very different times indeed for the "media plus tech" equation.

The math is right.

The times are right.

Don't be surprised by it.




Senin, 28 Juli 2014

Samsung Will Buy Slacker

Musical chairs.  That’s were we are in the digital music world right now.  Behemoths are either finding their “match” -- or launching other major initiatives themselves.  Mega-moves in the digital music world are happening now.  Transformative moves.  Apple buying Beats for $3 Billion.  Google buying Songza.  Amazon launching Amazon Prime Music.  Samsung partnering earlier this year with under-the-radar San Diego-based Slacker to power its innovative Milk Music service.

Ahh yes.  Samsung.  While key competitors (primarily Apple) have bought their way into offering expanded digital music services, Samsung has chosen to partner.  So far.  But, partnering is a form of dating.  And, dating ultimately has the potential to lead to marriage  (I have experienced that myself with former companies).  In this case, I’d be surprised -- very surprised -- if Samsung was not already fully dressed and prepared to walk down the aisle to seal the deal.  Ultimately, Samsung -- just like other behemoths -- want more in control of their own destinies.  And, of course, Samsung and Slacker have been courting and making beautiful music together for several months.  Slacker’s parents -- its Board of Directors -- will expect a life-long commitment at some point, especially since they have supported their child (Slacker) for 10 years.  That’s an awful long time for venture capitalists to stay patient, especially since it is reported that they have invested about $50 million over those years.

Not sure if they funded that via Slacker’s 529 plan ....

Rabu, 02 Juli 2014

Google Buys Its Way Deeper Into Music for a Song(za) - Here’s Why

Digital music wars continue to escalate.  Apple/Beats (bought for $3 billion).  Amazon Prime Music (recently launched).  Samsung/Slacker (major strategic partnership).  YouTube Music (coming soon to a smart phone near you).

And now Google itself, announcing yesterday that it has acquired curated digital radio service Songza -- something previously rumored and something I just predicted last week when I wrote:

The M&A market will heat up again soon -- and don’t be surprised if the next major move is Google swallowing up Songza.

Initial reports when the Google/Songza news first surfaced indicated a price tag of $15 million.  But, due to an apparent wealth of suitors following initial rumors, Songza was picked up for significantly more -- music to its investors ears, since the start-up (which I use regularly) had only raised $1.5 million to date.  

Expect more M&A in this white hot space in the next several months, precisely because it is increasingly daunting for stand-alone privately-held services like Spotify, Pandora, Rdio, 8tracks, and Slacker to compete and profit amidst these gorillas (here is last week’s analysis about that very issue).  One obvious move would be for Samsung to buy its Milk Music partner Slacker.

Rabu, 21 Mei 2014

Happy Birthday Manatt Digital Media -- Our First Year ... And The Long-Awaited Promise of “Convergence” ...

Today we celebrate the first anniversary of our launch of MDM (Manatt Digital Media).  And, what a year it’s been.  Yes, I am proud of our accomplishments in Year 1 (click here or see the full press release below).  But, even more exciting to me is the passion of those on the MDM team.  For MDM’ers, it’s not just a job.  That’s why we blog at 4 am.  That’s why we finalize pitches at 2 am.  That’s why we enthusiastically make business introductions and connections.  That’s why we host Digital Media Meetups in LA, NYC, and SF.  That’s why we invest our own cold hard cash in innovative startups like DanceOn, MovieLaLa, Ninja Metrics, Trailerpop, Adomic, StrikeAd, Vadio and eXacly.me (all of these were made in the past 12 months).

Most significantly, however, is how much the digital media landscape has changed this past year.  Think about it.  Not a week goes by without some massive billion dollar plus deal (or rumored deal) in the world of convergence -- where the promise of content meeting technology to create “magic” is finally coming of age.

Facebook/Oculus Rift.  Disney/Maker Studios.  Apple/Beats.  Google/Twitch.  Yahoo!/RayV.

Who has time to sleep?

But, that’s the point!  All of us in the midst of this maelstrom should feel energized to be in the midst of it all -- not knowing exactly where it is going, but adding our own individual ingredients to push it slightly more this way than that.

We are in the midst of transformative engagement.

That’s our Year 1.

So, it's not so much that we are celebrating ourselves (although, it’s always good to fete landmark occasions).  Rather, think of it more like we are celebrating the fast-transforming eco-system all around us.  The transformative eco-system that, yes, can be daunting at times -- but which, at the same time, is full of massive opportunity with active engagement, experimentation and good old-fashioned creativity, innovation, tenacity and hard work.

(But, for those of you who want a more “traditional” Year 1 anniversary pronouncement, here it is ....)


MANATT DIGITAL MEDIA MARKS FIRST YEAR WITH SIGNIFICANT GROWTH, ENGAGEMENTS WITH LEADING INNOVATORS, EXPANDED BUSINESS CONSULTING TEAM AND RECOGNIZED THOUGHT LEADERSHIP

·       Firm Emerges as Innovative Market and Recognized Thought Leader in Providing Diversified Professional Services and Deep Industry Connections With Growing Client Base of Innovators
·       Manatt Digital Media Demonstrates Industry Expertise and Commitment With Significant Strategic Investments And Leadership in Prominent Digital Media Events

LOS ANGELES, CA — May 21, 2014 — Manatt Digital Media, a fully-integrated professional services division within Manatt, Phelps & Philips, LLP, today announced that within its first year, it has established itself as a leader in digital media and technology through the growth of its client base, strategic expansion of its business consulting team, and by providing overall thought leadership and connections in the worlds of media, entertainment, advertising and technology.

Since May 2013, Manatt Digital Media has engaged with and invested in high-visibility digital media and technology companies, including leading multichannel network DanceOn; innovative content-driven and social media-focused companies MovieLaLa, If You Can and Vadio; market-leading ad-tech companies Ninja Metrics, Trailerpop, StrikeAd and eXacly.me; and data-driven company Adomic.

“Manatt Digital Media is servicing players who are redefining the space through innovative technology and entirely new digital media business models,” said T. Hale Boggs, chairman of Manatt Digital Media. “We are gratified that in the course of a single year, Manatt has built a strong name for itself and emerged as a formidable influential player in Los Angeles — the entertainment and digital media center of the world — as well as other key digital media and investment hubs, such as New York City, San Francisco and Palo Alto.”

“Our aim is to disrupt the traditional professional services approach to bring differentiated real-world entrepreneurial and operational digital media and technology insights to our clients through our wealth of expertise, relationships and venture capital experience,” said Peter Csathy, CEO of Manatt Digital Media. “We embrace disruptive new technologies and seek to empower our clients to be market leaders who further differentiate themselves from competitors by leveraging their innovative ideas as significant new business models and revenue streams.”

Key to its innovative approach, Manatt Digital Media has built a uniquely diversified team to provide its clients the industry’s most comprehensive and meaningful digital media professional services. As one example, the firm recently deepened its business consulting team by hiring leading consulting expert Eunice Shin, who brings more than 18 years of experience and deep relationships and connections in the media and entertainment industries. The firm’s expertise in content and intellectual property at the heart of digital media also separates it from all other consultancies, along with its unique combination of expertise in social media policy, privacy and data security.

“Today’s digital media world is interconnected and incredibly fast-paced, and it demands a bold and creative approach to professional, business consulting and legal services,” said Boggs. “With the growth of our client portfolio and the widely specialized executive team across legal, business and venture capital, we are building on the firm’s recognized legal experience to offer a full spectrum of world-class professional services, and we’ve seen that model benefit our clients of every size and every stage of development. We are not aware of any other organization that coherently ties together these capabilities in the digital media, entertainment or tech worlds.”

In addition to its growing team and clientele, Manatt Digital Media is widely recognized by top-tier media for its thought leadership and industry expertise. The company has hosted a number of high-level industry meet-ups and participated in several key industry events in the past year:

·       Manatt Digital Media Meet-Up — As part of Manatt Digital Media’s focus on supporting innovative entrepreneurs in digital media companies big and small, elevating new ideas, and creating a network of beneficial relationships in the digital media industry, the company hosted a number of exclusive Digital Media Meet-ups in Los Angeles, New York, and San Francisco. The events brought together a select mix of entrepreneurs, media company executives, artists, financiers, and key industry press and thought leaders.

·       UCLA Entertainment Symposium — Csathy participated as a moderator at the March 2014 UCLA Entertainment Symposium on its multichannel networks panel in the days preceding the recent acceleration of M&A activity in that space. The panel, titled “Multi-Channel Networks & Other New Premium Video Players — Their Impact on (& Opportunity for) Hollywood,” featured high-level executives of major players in the field, including Machinima, ICM Partners, Fox Networks and YouTube.

·       Siemer Summit— In October 2013, Manatt Digital Media sponsored the Siemer Summit, an invitation-only event that drew more than 500 of the most influential leaders in digital media and emerging technologies from around the world. Manatt Digital Media also provided joint funding to the winning startup of the Siemer WaveMaker Award’s Best in Show, which awarded the startup with the most innovative platform that was most poised for growth. The company will return as a leading sponsor in 2014.

·       Digital Entertainment World Expo — Manatt Digital Media sponsored Digital Entertainment World Expo in February 2014. The company served as the main sponsor of the 2014 DEW Startup Competition. Of the total prize, the winner received a $25,000 investment from Manatt Digital Media in the form of a convertible note, as well $25,000 of professional and business services from Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP.

“Our active involvement in the digital media space keeps us attuned to the leading ideas and technologies that drive the industry forward,” Csathy added. “As we continuously deepen our relationships among key digital media players and develop, sponsor and participate in major events — not just at the heart of content creation in Los Angeles, but around the world — we are ensuring that our clients are the first to know about critical trends and disruptive, innovative technologies and how they can positively impact their business.”

About Manatt Digital Media
Manatt Digital Media is a full-service digital media platform created by entrepreneurs for entrepreneurs, whatever the size or stage of the company, from startup to growth-stage to mature public companies. Manatt Digital Media uniquely offers a one-stop shop of professional services that is grounded in the legal and business experience of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP, one of the world’s most respected law firms in the media, entertainment and advertising industries. Manatt Digital Media offers its clients differentiated value and impact in multiple forms and across the life span of their companies — from venture capital to strategic relationship building and artist access to business consulting and creative deal-making, including content licensing, distribution and M&A. For more information, visit www.manattdigitalmedia.com.

About Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP, is one of the nation's leading law and consulting firms, with offices strategically located in California (Los Angeles, Orange County, Palo Alto, San Francisco and Sacramento), New York (New York City and Albany) and Washington, D.C. The firm represents a sophisticated client base — including Fortune 500, middle-market and emerging companies — across a range of practice areas and industry sectors. For more information, visit www.manatt.com.