Vodafone apparently plans to launch a user-generated video service at CeBIT in March, which will let users upload their own videos from their handsets, then pay them every time somebody else watches it. That sounds like a great idea… though 3 UK beat them to the punch more than a year ago with its quite popular SeeMeTV service, which sounds like the, uh, basis of inspiration (to be kind) for this service.
Vodafone copying the idea isn’t such a big deal, really. But what’s sort of interesting here is that operators have a real chance to do something substantial in this space. When it comes to user-generated video, YouTube is clearly the 800-pound gorilla. But it’s going to screw up mobile for itself. Instead of pursuing an operator-agnostic strategy and figuring out how to make money from an open service, YouTube has grabbed the short-term money by getting into an exclusive deal with Verizon to deliver a limited version of its site to the operator’s customers. It’s actively blocking sites that make its videos available to mobile users, presumably to protect not just its Verizon deal, but whichever other operators it inks country-exclusive deals with. What it’s really doing is limiting its audience, and its reach in mobile. By cutting off the vast majority of mobile users, it’s going to eventually make itself irrelevant to them.
Here’s where operators can come in. The SeeMeTV model has already proven popular with users, and it’s a great idea for operators, since they’re essentially getting free content. But what they need to realize is that these services, on their own, aren’t going to do much as competitive advantages — that is, the number of users that decide from which operator to buy service because of them, is going to be very, very low. While people might like SeeMeTV, it’s not likely to come at the top of their “reasons to switch to 3 list”, and likewise for this new Vodafone service.
Given that, why not band together and create a common, shared platform for a user-generated video service? It would have two key benefits over YouTube: first, the payout element, and second, it’s made to be browsed from a mobile device. There’s little value in restricting these video services by operator; it’s just a new twist on the walled garden. But banding together would not only save infrastructure resources, it would widen the pool of content creators and viewers by taking on an audience YouTube shuns. Quite often, operators’ attempts to replace popular internet sites with their own services are misguided (and awful). But if YouTube is going to ignore mobile users, there’s no reason for operators to not get in there and take the user-generated video space for themselves and their customers.
Carlo,
Getting users to adopt social software doesn’t work as you describe it. Carriers can build the software to offer youtube clones or improvements all they like, but what gets users to adopt social applications is not “designable” in the big-company product sense. You’ll notice that not even one successful social site has been started by a company of more than 50 (and maybe even 20) people. Having done it, I can’t even tell you how it works. I could (and expect to) try to do it again and think I’ve got a decent shot at it, but it’s not a process that I could “plan” as larger companies require.
You’ll also notice that all the successful ones turn a different social urge into software than any that came before them. None of the copycats or close derivatives have made it.
Scott
In US, VH1 launched “Mobile Junk 20″ service on Sprint network last December.
http://www.vh1.com/mobile/games/MJ20/MJ20_howto.jhtml
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/061218/nym096.html?.v=49
Users can submit images/videos from mobile phone or PC, then view images/streaming videos on their handsets.
Scott, I’m not sure I understand your point, apart from setting a rather arbitrary limit as to who can succeed in social apps and services (though 3’s experiences with SeeMeTV and Kink Kommunity would be exceptions to what you say, and so would Orkut). YouTube, the clear market leader, is actively ignoring mobile users, creating an opportunity for services like SeeMeTV and Vodafone’s new service. I’m merely suggesting they have a good chance to increase their success by banding together.
In theory it sounds like this video platform across the major carriers could work, but in reality I don’t think that competitors will work together. There needs to be an outsider (probably a company with less than 20 people) to create the need and provide the solution at the same time.
Especially in America, service providers are at each others throughts and I have a feeling that there are too many feelings being hurt to work together. Does anyone know of a company in America that is aiming to start the mobile youtube killer?
While I agree that operators have an opportunity similar to the SeeMeTV solution, the problem will be cross carrier - ie, videos won’t be available from one operator to the next. If I upload the best video ever, only my friends/family on my carrier will be able to see it.
We have a solution in place right now that works across carriers. You can upload a video from your phone or from the web and we’ll transcode it and make it available on both mobiles and the web. We also allow users to upload photos, audio and make text posts.
Our solution is browser based and works great on most phones. We allow users to either stream the video or download and play it. We have temporarily removed these links on Cingular phones, but will bring it back soon.
Carriers need to reassess the situation and learn that exclusive content deals fragmnet already fragmented markets. The day that the carriers realise that they are not media companies and they should move to a Mobile ISP model when they provide access and bandwidth and that is all. Media companies should create media and carriers shold provide access.
Check what are we already did in this direction
http://www.peerboxmobile.com
and also there will be new more functional version out in about a week or less.