What does Google's $1.65 billion acquisition of YouTube really mean for the future of online video-related media and marketing? That question has been ricocheting around boardrooms, business offices and bar stools throughout the industry since the merger was announced last week. Two weeks ago, media maverick Mark Cuban blogged his point of view. Ad Age asked five highly respected authorities for their take on the landmark deal and its implications for the world of digital advertising. Labels: Jointblog
Among their thoughts:
* Rafat Ali, Publisher from PaidContent.org says 'Lawsuits will be filed... but the studios and TV networks will work something out because they want this audience.'To read more, click here (log-on may be required)
* Rob Petty, CEO from Roo Networks: 'The dollar value is exceptionally high but it's part of a bigger play that could potentially take on some of the world's biggest media companies.'
* Tim Hanlon, Senior VP-venture, Denuo: 'I'm not sure YouTube is the magic bullet that solves the advertising-in-video problem or issue.'
* Simon Andrews, Digital chief strategy officer, MindShare: 'Google's very good at algorithms, looking at a web page and putting an appropriate ad next to that. YouTube's video is tagged. So Google can use its algorithm, see how people tag these videos and serve an ad that makes sense.'
* John Battelle, Chairman and publisher of Federated Media and founder of Wired magazine: 'Google has made it clear it does not want to be a leader in the world of content creation, and [is] therefore an ideal partner for the very media companies who fear YouTube's potential to become both a copyright rathole and a potential content competitor in its own right.'
* Jeff Jarvis, Media veteran and BuzzMachine blogger: 'Google won't monetize just YouTube. It will monetize video anywhere it is played on the internet.'
posted by Chris Kennedy @ Monday, October 23, 2006,