
Disney acquires Maker Studios  - mcoliver
http://recode.net/2014/03/24/disney-buys-maker-studios-and-youtube-investors-cheer/
======
Centigonal
So we come full circle!

In 2006, we were talking about how Youtube was going to change how the news
was reported, how all the media we were exposed to would no longer trace back
to the same half-dozen companies. That started to happen a little bit, but it
started to make more sense for content producers to band together and form
networks, partially because of cross-promotion, but also because networks can
sidestep Youtube's content ID system (which actually allows IP-holders to take
down videos without confirming that they contain infringing content). Networks
start to turn into ventures in their own right, established media companies
like Time Warner start putting money into them, and now Disney has acquired
the most comprehensive and successful network. The decentralized media dream
dies again!

I wonder what Maker's future as part of an established company will look like.
I hope the acquisition doesn't reduce the level of creative freedom Maker's
talent has had in the past, because that seems to be what got them ahead of
the other networks.

~~~
tehwebguy
> but also because networks can sidestep Youtube's content ID system

Not since December, the content ID rules are the same for MCN claimed channels
now.

~~~
Flammy
Misleading, or at minimum not the full picture.

First: The December changes did make the majority of partners ("Affiliates")
have no copyright protection. However there are a few huge mitigating factors:
The newly established "Managed" partner status is exactly like the old
partnership, full content-ID protection, and how the networks have
reacted/changed.

Second: Many networks are now offering "Managed" status to many partners, if
not all. There are indeed some networks who offer managed status to all
partners.

Third: Google has yet to take (public) action against any networks for
copyright violations under the new managed system. Until they do networks will
continue to treat copyright as a joke and partnerships will remain a cash cow
and little partners will remain unsupported.

Source: I'm a YouTube content creator (90k subs, 12m views). Feel free to drop
by reddit.com/r/PartneredYoutube if you have any in depth questions, or ask
here.

~~~
tehwebguy
Huh, so basically it is the same but now opt-in on a channel level. I stand
corrected.

~~~
Flammy
Yeah basically. However if Google _does_ enforce copyright violations against
networks, we will actually see partnerships start to mean something again...
which would be a good change. Currently the majority of networks are little
more than scams: promising the world and not following though. Yes, even the
big guys.

There are many problems with this business: Copyright and Content-ID, network
recruiters (aka highschool kids paid for referrals), lack of visibility into
advertising revenue, etc.

------
InclinedPlane
This just makes me angry at google. I was wondering when the big boys would
become interested in web video, and it looks like it finally happened. It
doesn't matter that monetization is difficult, that costs are unreasonably low
right now, that production values are often lacking, etc. The fact is that web
video has a huge future, and the potential has barely been scratched.

Google/youtube themselves don't even realize the potential, so they've been
fucking around with minor feature changes and bullshit like google-plus
comment integration instead of treating youtube like a serious endeavor and
making big changes (like turning content creators into customers instead of
plebian users that get treated like shit at every turn).

------
marcusestes
This marks one of the first sizable exits for a company built almost wholly on
top of YouTube as a platform. A lot of people said that Google content
partnerships didn't leave enough air in the room to allow for this sort of
value creation. I hope this emboldens other firms to support companies working
in this space, a lot of wonderful things could still happen.

------
robbiet480
I wrote this [1] comment when Disney acquired LucasFilm:

This means that Disney now controls Marvel, Pixar, LucasArts, ABC, ESPN, A+E,
Disney Channel plus all their own original content and of course the parks and
merchandising rights for everything stated above.

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4719277](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4719277)

------
thrill
I found this writeup by Mark Suster, one of the investors, a good read:
[http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2014/03/24/how-i-got-
the-...](http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2014/03/24/how-i-got-the-monkey-
off-my-back-today-was-a-good-day/)

------
waterlesscloud
In related news, Warner Bros. is putting money into Machinima. They had funded
the Mortal Combat series on Machinima before, but it looks like they're buying
in big now.

[http://variety.com/2014/digital/news/warner-bros-is-
buying-a...](http://variety.com/2014/digital/news/warner-bros-is-buying-a-
stake-in-struggling-youtube-net-machinima-heres-why-1201127883/)

------
wallflower
> We also won’t know for a while how Disney really intends to use Maker: Will
> they get hands on and start directly managing a company that by all accounts
> could use some more management help? Or keep the property at arm’s length?
> Somewhere in between?

The standard story I've heard about Disney is that projects will proceed,
maybe even speed up and seem to be on cruise control and then one day you hear
the project is done - everyone has been laid-off. A couple years later, a new
exec in the same division calls you up and wants you to come in and work on
the same exact project you were working on...

------
cmbaus
Here's an example of some of their content:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsS4uCRrN_Y](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsS4uCRrN_Y)

------
debt
Maker recently acquired Blip which likely attracted Disney's attention. It
seems a lot of their partners in RPM networks(owned by Maker) have high
turnover; many smaller channels with new talent. Blip seems like the desired
goal here. $500 million seems absurdly high, but I guess they must be worth
it.

Most of their channels seem really, really, insanely low-quality. They had a
few larger partners like Ray William Johnson, NicePeter, ShayCarl, etc. But
what are the long-term value of partnership with these channels? I know Ray
William Johnson bailed on Maker pretty publicly recently. Are these artists
going to make youtube videos indefinitely? Are they under contract to churn
out a specific number of videos per week?

I'm curious how it all works legally given the loose relationship most people
have with youtube.

~~~
mcintyre1994
If Disney wanted Blip and that's the reason for this price then not buying it
seems like an insane strategic mistake. I found this article [0] which says
Maker paid less than $10M for Blip.. and that Blip had funding of at least
$24M. Seems like Disney could have made that acquisition an order of magnitude
cheaper than this one - and Blip's investors would probably force the higher
offer.

[0] [http://allthingsd.com/20130906/maker-studios-finishes-
buying...](http://allthingsd.com/20130906/maker-studios-finishes-buying-blip-
and-looks-for-new-pile-of-money/)

------
dopamean
I dont know why I was so naive to think that all these youtube stars just
repped themselves and it was all very... home grown if you will.

~~~
noodle
The vast majority do rep themselves. Only the top talent are catered to by the
MCNs like Maker.

Then why would a small YouTube star want to join an MCN? The studios do still
tend to provide a support structure and tech stack to help you grow your
channel. Generally speaking, of course -- there are a lot of MCNs out there
and each one operates differently.

~~~
tehwebguy
It's weird seeing comments from anyone who knows the YouTube world on HN.

Did you reverse engineer annotations?

~~~
noodle
Yes, I worked on a reverse-engineered annotations project at some point in
time, among other things. The YT space is definitely under-represented here,
though I can't say I'm surprised. All the related startups are hybrid tech and
media companies who tend to do (public) business more like media companies
than tech companies.

I also attended Playlist Live last year (or the year before? I forget). Nice
to talk to you Kevin :)

~~~
tehwebguy
That's cool, I was peeking through your company's portfolio and saw the
Fullscreen stuff. When George showed me that I was pretty impressed, couldn't
figure out how it was done.

Awesome, same!

------
Geekette
Wow, I take it all outstanding legal issues with the erstwhile ceo Danny
Zappin and other cofounders were resolved then.

------
manofthehouse
Interesting development. Blip might be part of the reason. I can't see how
Disney would pay such a large amount for a company that sits on top of
YouTube. Margins are small, zero control, and they provide no real value.

If I were Disney or anyone else, I'd be looking at Rumble.com or Storyful.
They are managing similar volumes and content like Maker, but on their own
platforms (they distribute outside of the YouTube eco-system). That's where
the future is. Like Centigonal mentioned, these companies are actually
changing how news is reported.

------
MadManE
So sad. The stranglehold continues.

