Will music videos actually save the industry?

[mbradzick]

I just read an interesting interview with Jimmy Iovine, and he talked about an untapped revenue stream that could possibly come from online music vids. Makes sense...who doesn't go to YouTube to listen to music and watch a cheesy video in the process?

"
I've always felt, and this is just in general, that there's an oil well for the record industry in their music videos, and so does Doug Morris. Universal Music Group had 3 billion views on YouTube and we are so underpaid for those videos. Now, we'll set up an infrastructure, and Doug's in charge of this. We'll make a deal where we really see the value. We have the most perfect content for the Internet. People love to watch them and they watch them over and over again. If "Saturday Night Live" gets 100,000 views on the Internet, they throw a party. Soulja Boy, on his site alone, got 500 million! It's nuts. The Lady GaGa video has 25 million views.

This is all going to be turned back toward the labels. That value has to be achieved.
"

[iomegaman]

No.

The industry doesn't deserve to be saved...so they'll probably get a bail-out like the others who don't deserve a bail-out.

[Sid Viscous]

I don't know if he's right, but I do know that Iovine is a forward thinking guy and is involved in several things that may help the biz.

[Dean Roddey]

But, the reason why they get those hits is because they are free, and therein lies the rub. If you started (gasp) charging people to watch things on YouTube, it would probably hit the ground at high speed and make a large crater.

It's a great gig. YouTube gets to make money selling ads, and everyone around the world works their butts off to make Youtube's product for them for free. It's a brilliant idea, for YouTube.

[mbradzick]

Originally Posted by Dean Roddey

It's a brilliant idea, for YouTube.

You mean for Google? Who would have thought...the most profitable company since Microsoft makes more money off people uploading their own videos for free??

But seriously, think about it. If the majors demanded that ad rev be disbursed on a per-hit basis like all sites with ads, it could be very lucrative. It'll be like TV. The higher the ratings or hits, the more money doled out to the labels or publishers or owners of the copyright. I'm sure everyone's gonna jump in with counter-arguments as to why this won't work but from the outset it seems like it could.

[Dean Roddey]

I think it could 'work' if you convinced Youtube to do it, but why would they? They are already getting all that money. Unless the labels are willing to sue them to within an inch of their lives (which they would have every right to do, but might not want to for many reasons), why would YouTube give up that revenue?

And how much would you trust their hit counters if they were having to pay you based on hits? How could you begin to prove the hit rates they report?

[Pfraser]

Why don't bands/artists embed commercials into their music videos- ie before the music video. easy 100k or 25cents per hit.

[mbradzick]

Originally Posted by Pfraser

Why don't bands/artists embed commercials into their music videos- ie before the music video. easy 100k or 25cents per hit.

Hey another thing that's free are these think tanks like this forum and people like us rambling on with great ideas!

That's actually a great idea. The only doorstop I could think of is all the pirates uploading vids they made themselves and bypassing the labels. Will Coke pay every Joe Shmoe putting up a vid with ads in it?

Perhaps YouTube/Google could create a higher-quality section that will atract people to legitamate channels hosted by the labels, encode monitored-counteres, put up ads and then chanel money to the payees on a per-hit basis.

???

[Dean Roddey]

Though Youtube doesn't seem to 'be able' to prevent copyrighted music videos from getting posted (despite the fact that they somehow are able to completely prevent porn from being posted, which would tend to indicate that they purposefully ignore the copyright stuff), if people started embedding ads for themselves (or others for money) in the stuff they post, what do you want to bet that somehow Youtube would be able to regulate that also? They wouldn't probably be too hip on other people using them for a real advertising medium, because they make their money on the ad bucks (I assume) that they can charge because of all the eyes they have coming there.

[mbradzick]

Originally Posted by Dean Roddey

Though Youtube doesn't seem to 'be able' to prevent copyrighted music videos from getting posted (despite the fact that they somehow are able to completely prevent porn from being posted, which would tend to indicate that they purposefully ignore the copyright stuff), if people started embedding ads for themselves (or others for money) in the stuff they post, what do you want to bet that somehow Youtube would be able to regulate that also? They wouldn't probably be too hip on other people using them for a real advertising medium, because they make their money on the ad bucks (I assume) that they can charge because of all the eyes they have coming there.

You're right, and it makes sense. That's why they should partner up with the labels and networks to get good quality videos that put the ad rev where it belongs. I can't believe that the broadcast industry hasn't got a handle on this already.

Facebook requires you to upload a photo ID before your music will play. It's so simple. But, YouTube wasn't created with this in mind. I'm sure the creators had no idea it would turn into the biggest entertainment hub the world has ever seen.

[Kyle S]

people forgot how to make good videos just like they forgot how to make good music.

its been over 10 years since ive seen a video that made me stick around to watch.