

Vevo founder warns Google: Sweeten deal or we'll go elsewhere - kapkapkap
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-doug-morris-vevo-google-20120710,0,3298354.story

======
idspispopd
I get that this site(HN) has a lot of google fans, to the point that often
completely illogical arguments are painfully maintained by characters that
would rather gush loyalty than have an honest discussion.

But to those that think youtube is holding all the cards here need to look at
what has undone so many other sites.

This is youtube's largest channel, and it's a large source of referral
traffic, especially social sites like facebook.

It's google's prerogative to keep this kind of referral traffic, not only to
maintain relevance, but also to be perceived as the first choice in online
video. If the average teenager begins to associate another site as the first
choice in video that would have follow on consequences as google would not be
able to control the user experience. (Or tout Google+) Users will hunt around
for the right video, they're not so loyal as to abstain from watching a music
video because it comes from vimeo etc.

Youtube has been effective at shutting outtheir competition with exclusivity
deals like these, a competitor could do the same to youtube - and this is a
pretty desirable catalog that appeals to a very active online demographic, it
would instantly make a competitor relevant, elevating them above the pool of
B-grade youtube competitors.

~~~
creamyhorror
Your argument about Youtube's relative power in this relationship is fine, but
your comment attacking HN "google fans" as arguing illogically and not willing
to carrying out honest discussion is uncalled for. If you want to make such
assertions, do it in response to a relevant comment, not as a random potshot.

~~~
idspispopd
Thank you for your opinion on my conduct.

However you should note that I did not make the argument that _all_ "google
fans" were of this type of illogical character, rather that _some_ do and have
already begun filing responses of this kind in this thread, making it futile
to reply to each, especially when this kind of fanboyism is immune to any
contradicting realities presented to them.

Finally my "potshot" makes up a relevant piece of my argument, more
specifically the argument that "being a fan of google doesn't invalidate vevos
importance or clout".

------
Zenst
Is it just me, but threatining to pull all "Justin Bieber" video's from
youtube as a threat is perhaps not the strongest point to win a argument. I'd
pay Google to do that.

Also reading the article, Vevo in effect created this situation and to
complain publicly does seem in bad taste as I see it as Vevo stole a
opertunity from Universal, created a new monoply with the help of Googles
youtube and then now that has been established are trying to bully more money
from them. This is ontop of the aspect that Vevo said they would control/do
the adverts and in that they are perhaps at fault for there own shortcommings
and blaming Google for it in a way that is mearly showboating.

But again a youtube without Justin Bieber is one I realy have no issues with
at all, were do I sign?

------
laserDinosaur
Makes sense to me. Maybe Google should lower the rates a little. I'm sure
Google would prefer to earn $10 with reduced fees from $15 than earn 0$ and
create a competitor.

------
confluence
I don't think they realise who has the real bargaining power in this
negotiation. VEVO needs YouTube - YouTube no longer needs VEVO.

Google will be more than happy to let them walk away and allow remixes and
user posted content to fill that hole (it's how YouTube started). VEVO will
just come crawling back.

YouTube has a monopoly on online video and they may just turn out to be one of
Google's most valuable acquisitions (along with DoubleClick/Android).

 _> Morris: If Justin Bieber and Adele are somewhere else, that will be where
people will go. If you don't have the content, no one will come_

YouTube has the people now (daily standing subscriber audience + network
effects) - the content comes to YouTube not the other way around. People
pay/share video revenue on YouTube by posting via Machinma/IGN just to get
exposure.

~~~
kleiba
Are you sure about that? If facebook got the rights for the music videos and
would integrate them tightly with the rest of their site, chances are that
youtube would start becoming irrelevant. You're right that right now youtube
has got the users, but facebook does, too, and they especially have the users
who are interested in music videos. That makes them especially attractive for
remixers etc. too.

~~~
untog
_Are you sure about that? If facebook got the rights for the music videos and
would integrate them tightly with the rest of their site, chances are that
youtube would start becoming irrelevant._

Not even slightly. Music videos are _a_ market, but YouTube has hundreds of
other reasons it is successful. It could lose music videos without breaking
it's stride.

~~~
kleiba
Yes. But I wonder if moving music videos to facebook would create a drain that
eventually all other videos would follow.

~~~
untog
I very much doubt it. 90% of YouTube users post under aliases, some of which
are an important part of their video identity. Posting to Facebook would ruin
that.

Simply put, Facebook is (in theory) for people you already know in real life.
YouTube most definitely is not, and is an entirely different beast. Facebook
is never going to have a 'VidCon' event.

