
Vevo could have been ‘an existential threat’ to YouTube, but YouTube won - gymshoes
https://www.recode.net/2018/5/24/17390756/vevo-youtube-video-apps-existential-threat
======
soneca
All that Vevo ever was for me was a _quality seal_ that guarantees that the
video from an artist is official, when searching for a song on YouTube - i.e.
it had good image and sound quality and it was indeed a video clip, not just
an upload of the song with the album cover or crappy collage as image.

Never thought about it as a company with ambitions to challenge YouTube.

~~~
leetcrew
i actually used to avoid vevo because it would usually give you the censored
version of popular songs.

~~~
Broken_Hippo
I came to type the same thing.

~~~
stcredzero
When you get big, you abandon the edge. That's just how it works.

------
niftich
Vevo was a partially thought-out venture, executed well but not well enough.
It was always hampered by the studios' stubborn direction: licensing
limitations that kept it out of lots of markets, not enough cross-promotion
through sponsorships, retail channels, or advertising, and intentional lack of
scope to avoid cannibalizing music sales. And they were hamstrung by the
legacy of their initial decision to syndicate to YouTube: most people probably
discovered the name 'Vevo' through seeing their watermark on music videos
posted to YouTube, but subsequently had little reason to explore what Vevo is
or does. Not that they missed anything: Vevo didn't do anything that YouTube
didn't already do.

They wanted the cake both ways: leverage YouTube's audience and discovery,
while running a not-at-all-captive, ad-supported competitor just for the sake
of perceived control and leverage. That's cute.

If it wasn't such a half-assed venture, Vevo could've become the single most
valuable subscription music streaming destination: a captive Spotify for daily
use, with music videos on demand. But studios couldn't commit to the serious
business decision of withdrawing their licensed content from other platforms
that have already built an audience. Instead, now they've abandoned their
ambition to have their own digital distribution solution, and have decided
that focusing on licensing and revenue sharing is their preferred outcome.

It's interesting to compare this to TV, where the major incumbents are still
interested in gating their content to their respective captive distribution
portals.

------
davidhyde
When is comes to technology, the music publishing industry is like the airline
business. It is more intent on protecting its current business model than
innovating for the future. All it is really capable of doing is copying
competitors and throwing its legal weight around a bit. Therefore it does not
attract future minded people. I am not surprised that Google was able to
manipulate them so well.

~~~
stcredzero
_When is comes to technology, the music publishing industry is like the
airline business. It is more intent on protecting its current business model
than innovating for the future. All it is really capable of doing is copying
competitors and throwing its legal weight around a bit. Therefore it does not
attract future minded people._

This can be generalized. Example: The rocket launch industry was once more
intent on protecting its current business model than innovating for the
future. Fortunately, what that does, is to create a market that is
dramatically misaligned with what the price could be from first principles.

On the other hand, network effects with proprietary tech might be the great
fatal flaw in capitalism that Karl Marx so desperately wanted to find. Once
the creative destruction stops, stagnation then oppression takes over. Once
capitalism no longer has sufficient advantage over the oppression of
centralized control, there is no reason not to fall into centralized control.
However, that result isn't utopian at all.

------
flyinglizard
I happened to have a chat with someone who knows what happened first hand -
between YouTube and the record labels oligopoly, they could hardly develop as
a company and not a mediator, sandwiched between giants on both content
production and content distribution.

------
heywire
I was always under the impression that Vevo was owned by YouTube/Google. I had
no idea they had plans on anything other than "official music videos" on
YouTube.

~~~
higginsc
Alphabet does have a minority equity stake in Vevo.

------
IanDrake
The biggest threat to YouTube is YouTube. Censorship is getting out of hand
and demonetizing/banning sucessful tubers is making people ask questions.

Questions like: Should I continue to invest in this platform or start moving
my viewers elsewhere?

Personally, if I had a following, I’d be getting my branded media site up and
running. I’d continue to post teaser content to YouTube, but host my full
content on servers I control.

~~~
on_and_off
The hard part is that Youtube is actually really great at playing videos.

I have always found the alternatives surprisingly subpar.

It should maybe not be a surprise, after all they had all the time they needed
in order to improve the experience.

~~~
agumonkey
There was a time where dailymotion had a shot but they missed it and failed
hard on this part.

Vimeo is probably the only one that felt good (even though the average
resolution being higher killed my poor old laptop)

~~~
on_and_off
Vimeo tends to really annoys me by forcing me to go to their website if I want
to see the video in high def.

This tends to make me make sure to just leave the website afterwards.

------
icc97
Vevo's post [0] about stopping their service is a priceless list of bullshit
bingo:

> At Vevo, our objective is to grow the commercial and promotional value of
> music videos, fostering deep connections between artists and fans.

> To be most effective in achieving those goals, we will phase out elements of
> our owned and operated platforms.

> Going forward, Vevo will remain focused on engaging the biggest audiences
> and pursuing growth opportunities.

[0]: [https://hq.vevo.com/vevo-announces-changes-to-its-owned-
and-...](https://hq.vevo.com/vevo-announces-changes-to-its-owned-and-operated-
platforms/)

~~~
mistermann
Why does that page look so absolutely perfect on mobile? Perfect blacks, ultra
crisp fonts.

~~~
kowdermeister
It takes a good designer and a premium font:
[https://www.fonts.com/font/linotype/avenir-
next](https://www.fonts.com/font/linotype/avenir-next)

(not that there are no quality free fonts)

~~~
ubernostrum
I tend not to think of fonts that come with the operating system as "premium"
:)

(Avenir + Avenir Next have been bundled in various Apple operating systems,
and are the default font choices in a few of Keynote's built-in themes)

~~~
kowdermeister
Since it's not on windows, linux or android, you should buy it which makes it
premium despite the Mac luxury :)

------
gaius
I had no idea that Vevo wasn’t just a subsection of YouTube anyway, the
equivalent of Twitter’s blue tick

~~~
ProAm
They were formed out of a lawsuit (or thread of lawsuit). The music companies
were going to sue YouTube/Google for copyright, so Google basically said,
we'll provide you the infrastructure to play your Vevo songs free of charge as
long as you dont sue out pants off. Worked out in the best interest for both
party's

------
njharman
No, a reaction cobbled together to try and maintain control of a no longer
releevabt business model was never a threat to anyone other than investors
whose money music publishing industry is wasting.

It could only ever fail cause its real customer is music publishers and not
music consumers.

~~~
danso
How is it "no longer relevant business model"? Youtube Music would not exist
if Vevo ended up being a separate destination that all the main music
publishers endorsed.

Of the top 100 most viewed YouTube videos, only 6 are _not_ music videos.

~~~
HyperTalk2
I've always doubted that the view counts on Vevo videos are real.

~~~
lucasmullens
They might not be "views", just "listens" from people leaving on autoplay for
hours.

------
mhkool
The newest threat to Youtube is Youtube itself. Many content makers are
complaining about the AI of Youtube that misunderstands text and videos and
forces content makers to take down their own videos. I have also seen channels
go down and the owners complaining since they cannot communicate with a real
person and have no explanation why their channel is taken down.

------
hansthehorse
I've always thought the music industry would be hitting this point in their
life 20 years ago if not for the constant format changes. How many people
replaced their collection over and over through the vinyl, 8 track, cassette
and cd transformations. Now in it's final format change to downloading the
replacement of collections is over and the industry is in trouble as it can't
adjust to the lower gross. Depending on a single source for video, in this
case Youtube, is going to be a mistake in the long run. Too much power in too
few hands.

------
vbo
Vevo chose Youtube as a distribution channel. That was both the right and
wrong move for them, but in the end it worked out pretty well for consumers,
with the wider-scoped/user-driven concept winning over the media site.

------
godzillabrennus
Has YouTube won? Don’t they lose money?

It seems like Netflix has won. Hulu is catching up. YouTube is working hard on
a distant third place.

~~~
bitmapbrother
According to YouTube they now have 1.8 billion logged in users each month. So
I guess you could call that winning.

[https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/3/17317274/youtube-1-8-billi...](https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/3/17317274/youtube-1-8-billion-
logged-in-monthly-users-brandcast-2018)

As for their profitability:

[https://medium.com/@intenex/where-are-you-getting-hard-
data-...](https://medium.com/@intenex/where-are-you-getting-hard-data-that-
youtube-isnt-profitable-a00aed0672ac)

~~~
themodelplumber
Just speaking personally, I probably watch at least an hour of YouTube video
daily, but I'm feeling less inclined to spend time on YouTube lately, due to
all the ads and creator community hijinks. I've even considered hosting my own
videos at sites like IA from now on. So while the big numbers look good, I'm
personally more concerned about YouTube's future.

------
Gelob
I wonder if this means on the backend the post production houses will just
send the masters to YouTube instead of over to Vevo, only for vevo to upload
them to YouTube. Would be much cheaper if vevo didn't ingest every video.

------
partycoder
This is another clickbait variant: postmortem clickbaits.

e.g: "My startup failed", "Why I quit <company>", etc...

I am passing on this one since my common sense tells me VEVO and YouTube are
vastly different services.

------
pishpash
I thought this was talking about Vimeo.

------
dbuder
Youtube's " 15,000-strong salesforce"

and non existent customer/producer support

