Very true. The time has passed to make anything significant (ad or profit wise) from the video. They should start discussing what to do for the next big "Susan Boyle" type of video...if there ever is another one. Great article.
-Bryan A.
thisisdavid
· 7 months ago
Just shows ITV's backwards veiw of new media - have you tried to use ITV player, dear lord
okinawa
· 7 months ago
I bet Paul Potts didn't have this happen to him! I guess she really caught them off guard?
Ryan Morrison
· 7 months ago
Actually the state ITV is in at the moment a couple million dollars might just make or break them.
Unfortunately videos of this magnitude happen very rarely - although if they can get the follow up (maybe her winning) with advertising - especially if she does a different song - then they may just make that money anyway.
salvationisapopsong
· 7 months ago
Ohhh poor old media... sad face :( I don't think they can get their act together- by the time it takes for the board members of a TV network to get together for a meeting a viral trend could develop, reach its peak, and start its decline. My predication: old media will never catch up to new media and will die a very slow death due it's greedy ways!
Cédric Bozzi
· 7 months ago
I'd rather commend ITV for taking a stand against overlay ads (assuming that's their main reason, as the article's writer does) than say they share half of the blame. (If blame is to be laid for refusing to put ads on a video.)
There's something to be said for not giving in to a bully. "Oh, we'll keep on our site that video that we totally acknowledged you own, and we're not gonna make any profit off of it either until you accept our standard terms, nyah nyah nyah!" Really? How do they even get away with that?
Len Kendall
· 7 months ago
Have to disagree here. This was an absolute win for iTV. A superbowl ad costs you 2-3 million dollars. They got that for free. The opportunity cost (or rather profit) is very high. Don't look at it from the perspective of generating sales, look at it as free branding which leads to higher ratings which leads to more ad dollars.
Adam Ostrow
· 7 months ago
Definitely a bigger win for ITV than YouTube anyhow - they will, as you say, get higher ratings. YouTube actually loses a good bit of money on bandwidth from this.
Brendan
· 7 months ago
Um, no.
The viewer is *already* on YouTube where are other clips being promoted. Clips that YouTube does make money from.
Also, me and most of the world don't actually live in the UK. Most of us can't get iTV. I went to their site to see if I could watch something and I got a technical error message. Nice.
Huge win for iTV? No.
Timothy Sykes
· 7 months ago
haha i love corporate incompetence!
Tony Santos
· 7 months ago
I think what this clearly illustrates is that the old practice of media buying and selling can't keep up with the internet. Companies all want a viral sensation but there doesn't appear to be a business model in existance that can move quickly enough to keep up with a viral trend they happen to create, so I'd put the blame on both google and itv.
To say that youTube decided they weren't going to make any moeny off this is crazy, because the hosting costs of that video were signifigant, so while iTV did manage to get a free promo for their TV show essentially youTube/Google ended up giving away a ton of free media. To Len's point how much would you pay for that kind of exposure on traditional broadcast? If content producers want to make money advertising when their content makes it on the web they need to figure out how to move faster, and if online publishers want to be able to cash in and sell adspace in their new media channels they need to come up with some tiers of advertising that can be quickly decided on and enabled. This was a failure to act at the speed of the internet by both parties.
Felipe Coimbra
· 7 months ago
And who wins in this story? Us! We don't have to put up with meaningless advertisement. I hope they never get to an agreement.
Adam Ostrow
· 7 months ago
haha, that's a good alternative point of view :-)
Andrew
· 7 months ago
Very true and greed (ITV) vs power (Youtube) roars its ugly head again
melby46
· 7 months ago
Susan deserves some type of compensation regardless...She may want to get legal representation eh?
miberry
· 7 months ago
Yes, she should. God bless Susan!
MonTemplar
· 7 months ago
Somehow, I doubt that Simon Cowell (who is the real winner) will be losing much sleep... he will be hard at work getting Susan Boyle into the studio to record an album so he can make even more money! ;)
vanderleun
· 7 months ago
Cue Bob Dylan singing from Desolation Row
"Ezra Pound and T. S. Eliot Fighting in the captain's tower While calypso singers laugh at them"
Tonis_Troubles
· 7 months ago
I agree, and it goes to show that (media) companies still have a long way to go in using SMM. At the same time it surprises me (strangely enough) that YouTube doesn't use this extremely high amount of views to sell adds to companies that are linked to the rated video's. ITV's point of view I try to understand, they're relatively new at social media, if at all? (at the other hand...it's 2009, you should know how to use SMM to the fullest by now), and YouTube should wake up and finally learn where their "profit" is. Am I wrong in thinking TouTube is waiting for (interesting)advertisers instead of actively finding them? Great loss for both parties on this one...
angrykeyboarder
· 7 months ago
Are we talking about the same video. The one I've seen (that has over 41m hits as of this writing) is still very much up and running (at least it was when I wrote this). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lp0IWv8QZY
Miguel
· 7 months ago
This is just unbelievable.
Oldnetman
· 7 months ago
SUSAN BOYLE - Quick! Get to a studio and cut your own video, then make a revenue share agreement with youtube !!! You deserve it more than the suits do,
Don Strevel
· 7 months ago
Susan Boyle has a voice that just amkes me leap for joy. She is such a humble and pure person. I hope she geta a good atty!!
Don in Las Vegas
faithsonshyne
· 7 months ago
Is it really that important to 'monetize' everything? I cant stand those ads that pop up on Youtube. And what about Susan Boyle herself? Where is her 'money'? I will bet You $18.65 that when she does make money she will give a lot to Charity.
gerry
· 7 months ago
Wow, I am in total disbelief and shock!
Total disbelief and shock that you do not recognize the real loser in all this is Susan Boyle herself.
Suddenly we are concerned with internet site's inabilties to generate monies off of the talent of someone else? Are you for real? We should all be totally devastated and broken up over this?
Yes, I see your point. But this is nothing new. Just as it is nothing new that these sites feed of the fortunes and misfortunes of others.
Boo Hoo Hoo for ITV and YouTube.
Michael Grade
· 7 months ago
ITV are just stupid, I don't get it just look at BBC and try to copy ? is it rocket science, are these people that dumb!
Your Name*sherry williams
· 7 months ago
Susan you're totally dynamic. I havent the words to express how beautiful your voice is . Go girl, you're amazing!
Richard
· 7 months ago
It's certainly going to have members of both corners blushing, but I assume ITV may be happy to wait for the release of Susan's next performance, and throw as much advertising into that.
If this is so, or not, makes no difference to fact they have missed out. A couple of million dollars would make a massive impact for ITV and I would agree that such a sum of money could be the difference of their survival.
To say that this is a win for ITV on the assumption that they can now secure advertising for future shows... that may be the case for Britian's Got Talent, but across the board ITV have seen almost all their large advertising pull out. So I'm sceptical as to what impact this may have.
At the end of the day I'd love ITV to capitalise from this. If they can rake in some much need cash then fantastic. Either way this will hopefully have been the new media wake-up call they needed.
YouTube already has pre-rolls on some of their videos, so I'm thinking there's some bad info at the heart of this post. It makes sense that YouTube would resist demands to implement pre-rolls since the move could negatively impact traffic, but since they're already in place there must have been some other reason why they couldn't finalize a deal.
Internet advertising needs to get it together! Nice review.
the Jim Gaudet
· 7 months ago
Epic FAIL!
murari tikmani
· 7 months ago
why is author so much into money? I know money solves 99% of your problem and the revenue system for susan boyle video should be there so as to exploit the so called technological-unaware-people( as a lot of viewers don't click on adds anyways). even if it isn't there - can't the author leave this topic, if he can't he should be the richest man in the world to defend it.
Patrick
· 7 months ago
The greatness in this tragedy is how our company is working to cure both sides of this problem and let the power of the people always be the lead. There is SO much waste going on in the convergence of Video.
It is great to have the Internet being a vehicle that allows for a much faster, Global, raw and robust Video experience but anyone that believes it is their "right" to be given this without some type of advertising or premium fee attached is living in Neverland. To survive we need advertisement.
Advertising works when it is what we WANT to see and is relative to the content that we see. Not when it is a SWAG done by Media Buyers and Content Delivery Companies and THEIR best assumed interests, whether they are Broadcast TV or Internet Networks. This will all change soon enough. What will be cool, is that I will be able to see advertisements for things that interest ME, are related to what I watch and not the MASSES. This all can be achieved in the near future. We are working as fast as we can. It will be cool I tell ya.
Meanwhile I got to see these person sing...
Also in closing, YT made plenty of $$$ off the ads within their pages during the views. That is their business model after all. 99% of their revenues come via Ad Words.
"Ultimately, a couple million dollars isn’t going to make or break either YouTube or ***ITV***."
ITV is in serious money problems, it quite possible could do just that :P
joey baione
· 7 months ago
money! money!money!it'sthe same old shit....let this fine singing sensation make alittle so that she to can enjoy a little of the good life to..so called!the old saying "never judge a book by it's cover" has surely hit the bullseye here. i would love for her to pick up a broadway contract for something for she sure can sing, (at least that song, for sure!!) more songs from our "lady of the night!!!"...
Richard
· 7 months ago
I find it refreshing that some want the money issue to be dropped, and let the girl sing! That's all well and good, but I think like many people in this discussion, we are very aware of ITV's financial predicament.
To hear them miss out on an opportunity is a big shame, but more to the core of this is the fact that there seems to be some bickering between YT and ITV, and that the latter has missed the boat on what is going to be a very important means of revenue for all media companies in the very near future.
Patrick has outlined the obvious reasons why so much attention is being put on web advertising. If ITV’s broadcast advertising revenue is falling, then they need to get up to speed on web advertising and use opportunities like this to get back some cash that they are sorely missing.
I don’t want ITV to fall behind. I fear if they do (in any of the recent developments of on-demand or IPTV), what all people want – top quality TV – will be a thing of the past, and so will ITV.
Of course youtube wants to use the google ads and want to keep it that way, they should just give it all to her anyway
Angeles
· 7 months ago
Put aside the bickering, and you said it: old medias are... old.
Courteney Caley
· 7 months ago
yours waz funny
Courteney Caley
· 7 months ago
the voice that came out of that body was astounding!
phoebe tan
· 7 months ago
i appreciate the voice of susan boyle cz she has a talent to show like me im not pretty but i have a golden voice bcoz im a performing artist here in cebu but i didnt show it in internationally even here in our country philippines but onlyn here in my place and town home cebu and cagayan de oro
katrina
· 7 months ago
i thought she was very gd so i rate her 10/10% exelant . lol katrina xxxxxxx.
pernieca little
· 7 months ago
hey, people often judge people by the way they look and you can really miss out on a true blessing by judging the book by it's cover.
missy sexy 01
· 7 months ago
In fact they all looking at the wrong things, They wantt a perfect singer with a perfect body,and look like a hoochie hooker, Its all about lust in this world today, if you dont look a certain way they dont want you but,Susan Boyle GOD gave you a chance to be seen he will surely give you a chance to go all the way to the top ,watch and see forget TIV TCI and T31 who ever they are. Keep you head up the sky is the limit.
Much Love I Love You Girl and I give a shot out to Pine Bluff AR on the map
HORACIO
· 6 months ago
LA HUMILDAD EN SUSAN BOYLE ES UNA DE LAS COSA QUE MAS ME ENCANTO, ESTA DESTINADA GRACIAS A LA VOZ QUE DIOS LE DIO A SER UNA DE LAS ESTRELLAS DE ESTE MUNDO DE LA MUSICA, AGRADEZCO A UNA AMIGA EL HABERME ENVIADO EL VIDEO ADEMAS NO DEJO DE RECORDAR QUE JAMAS DEBEMOS PREJUZGAR A LAS PERSONAS POR SU APARIENCIA Y SUSAN ES UNA MUESTRA CABAL DE LO QUE DIGO. HORACIO DESDE ARGENTINA
Circus Monkey
· 6 months ago
Hope she is that ONE newly minted selebrity who doesn t change at all. Hope none of the slick and cruel media types hurts her feelings or attacks her self respect.
Circus Monkey
· 6 months ago
Hope she is that ONE newly minted selebrity who doesn t change at all. Hope none of the slick and cruel media types hurts her feelings or attacks her self respect.
milagros_pelisco
· 6 months ago
she has reallu a powerful voice..........and its great!
Joly
· 4 months ago
Absolutely untrue and greedy. No one here had ever heard of ITV or their show or anyone on it except Simon, until Susan Boyle came along. Because of her video millions more tuned into that show and others of theirs, and multitudes more youtube sites. Millions of us had never bothered with youtube before. This notion that they did not profit is utterly and mindlessly absurd. Greed makes people blind.
All Comments
-Bryan A.
Unfortunately videos of this magnitude happen very rarely - although if they can get the follow up (maybe her winning) with advertising - especially if she does a different song - then they may just make that money anyway.
There's something to be said for not giving in to a bully. "Oh, we'll keep on our site that video that we totally acknowledged you own, and we're not gonna make any profit off of it either until you accept our standard terms, nyah nyah nyah!" Really? How do they even get away with that?
The viewer is *already* on YouTube where are other clips being promoted. Clips that YouTube does make money from.
Also, me and most of the world don't actually live in the UK. Most of us can't get iTV. I went to their site to see if I could watch something and I got a technical error message. Nice.
Huge win for iTV? No.
To say that youTube decided they weren't going to make any moeny off this is crazy, because the hosting costs of that video were signifigant, so while iTV did manage to get a free promo for their TV show essentially youTube/Google ended up giving away a ton of free media. To Len's point how much would you pay for that kind of exposure on traditional broadcast? If content producers want to make money advertising when their content makes it on the web they need to figure out how to move faster, and if online publishers want to be able to cash in and sell adspace in their new media channels they need to come up with some tiers of advertising that can be quickly decided on and enabled. This was a failure to act at the speed of the internet by both parties.
"Ezra Pound and T. S. Eliot
Fighting in the captain's tower
While calypso singers laugh at them"
I hope she geta a good atty!!
Don in Las Vegas
I will bet You $18.65 that when she does make money she will give a lot to Charity.
Total disbelief and shock that you do not recognize the real loser in all this is Susan Boyle herself.
Suddenly we are concerned with internet site's inabilties to generate monies off of the talent of someone else? Are you for real? We should all be totally devastated and broken up over this?
Yes, I see your point. But this is nothing new. Just as it is nothing new that these sites feed of the fortunes and misfortunes of others.
Boo Hoo Hoo for ITV and YouTube.
If this is so, or not, makes no difference to fact they have missed out. A couple of million dollars would make a massive impact for ITV and I would agree that such a sum of money could be the difference of their survival.
To say that this is a win for ITV on the assumption that they can now secure advertising for future shows... that may be the case for Britian's Got Talent, but across the board ITV have seen almost all their large advertising pull out. So I'm sceptical as to what impact this may have.
At the end of the day I'd love ITV to capitalise from this. If they can rake in some much need cash then fantastic. Either way this will hopefully have been the new media wake-up call they needed.
Richard
Business Video
http://www.businessvideoproduction.co.uk
http://www.youtube.com/Businessvideoprod
http://businessvideo.bttradespace.com
Here's an example of a YouTube pre-roll:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yU0KpRBkeMY&feat...
twitter.com/dneumann
It is great to have the Internet being a vehicle that allows for a much faster, Global, raw and robust Video experience but anyone that believes it is their "right" to be given this without some type of advertising or premium fee attached is living in Neverland. To survive we need advertisement.
Advertising works when it is what we WANT to see and is relative to the content that we see. Not when it is a SWAG done by Media Buyers and Content Delivery Companies and THEIR best assumed interests, whether they are Broadcast TV or Internet Networks. This will all change soon enough. What will be cool, is that I will be able to see advertisements for things that interest ME, are related to what I watch and not the MASSES. This all can be achieved in the near future. We are working as fast as we can. It will be cool I tell ya.
Meanwhile I got to see these person sing...
Also in closing, YT made plenty of $$$ off the ads within their pages during the views. That is their business model after all. 99% of their revenues come via Ad Words.
ITV is in serious money problems, it quite possible could do just that :P
To hear them miss out on an opportunity is a big shame, but more to the core of this is the fact that there seems to be some bickering between YT and ITV, and that the latter has missed the boat on what is going to be a very important means of revenue for all media companies in the very near future.
Patrick has outlined the obvious reasons why so much attention is being put on web advertising. If ITV’s broadcast advertising revenue is falling, then they need to get up to speed on web advertising and use opportunities like this to get back some cash that they are sorely missing.
I don’t want ITV to fall behind. I fear if they do (in any of the recent developments of on-demand or IPTV), what all people want – top quality TV – will be a thing of the past, and so will ITV.
Oh, and good luck Susan!
Richard
Business Video
http://www.businessvideoproduction.co.uk
Films produced by Twenty First Century Media
http://www.twentyfirstcenturymedia.com
lol katrina xxxxxxx.
Much Love I Love You Girl and I give a shot out to Pine Bluff AR on the map