18 Comments

Summary:

Be prepared to pay up for watching live-casters like Chris Pirillo any day now, as Justin.tv is preparing to launch a pay-per-view service. The live streaming startup is rolling out its premium offering with a few of its broadcasters next month, according to a Beet.tv report, […]

Be prepared to pay up for watching live-casters like Chris Pirillo any day now, as Justin.tv is preparing to launch a pay-per-view service. The live streaming startup is rolling out its premium offering with a few of its broadcasters next month, according to a Beet.tv report, with plans to open up the offering to everyone in the second quarter of 2010. Justin.tv is modeling its revenue split after the iTunes Store, and the company’s VP of marketing told Beet.tv that the new offering will finally make it possible to make “digital dollars” instead of just dimes online.

Pay-per-view for live streaming isn’t exactly a new idea. Stickam launched a similar service almost 18 months ago, and Ustream has been talking about charging viewers for live video in the past as well. In fact, Justin.tv’s own CEO Michael Seibel toyed with the idea almost two years ago. Back then, he told the Silicon Alley Insider that the company was working on a combination of “pay-per-view, Craigslist and eBay.” You know, minus the hookers and ridiculous shipping fees.

Actually, it sounds like Justin.tv is now taking a more traditional pay-per-view approach. Broadcasters will be able to set their own fees, with single live shows starting at $1 each. There will also be an option to do subscription services, which could be especially interesting for regular broadcasters with an audience willing to pay. Justin.tv will handle all the billing and charge a flat 30 percent fee on any pay-per-view or subscription sales.

That’s slightly different than the pricing structure of Stickam’s Payperlive program, which it rolled out gradually beginning in July 2008. Stickam offers broadcasters a number of different service plans with scaling bandwidth allocations, revenue splits and monthly fees. The cheapest plan, which includes 100 GB of bandwidth, costs $19 per month, on top of which Stickam charges 25 percent per ticket sold. The so-called platinum plan costs $79 per month, but broadcasters keep 85 percent of their pay-per-view revenue.

Justin.tv has lately been in the headlines for its attempts to appease rights holders with copyright filters. Pay-per-view could actually help the company strike deals with sports leagues that don’t want to see their video transmitted for free, but we’ll have to wait and see whether Justin.tv’s audience will bite.

  1. [...] Plesser at Beet.tv last week and talked about some new products we’re launching. Mashable and NewTeeVee thought it was interesting, I suppose, and posted the news with my video interview embedded. Quite [...]

    Share
  2. Too much illegal content and legal liability – these guys are dying and sounding desperate – who cares?

    Share
  3. [...] Die Livestreaminganbieter sind bereits aktiv dabei dieses Model zu verfolgen. [...]

    Share
  4. [...] Die Livestreaminganbieter sind bereits aktiv dabei dieses Model zu verfolgen. [...]

    Share
  5. [...] new functionality will go live in early January, right around the same time that Justin.tv will begin offering its own pay-per-view service. But while Stickam will give the capability to all of its users next month, Justin.tv plans to [...]

    Share
  6. Bad idea, I know of many broadcasters on Justin.tv that are planning on going to the other free broadcasting channel if jtv does this and charges the viewers and dosen’t at least give the option for current broadcasters and signed up viewers on jtv already the option to choose if they want to pay or not. The new viewers that dont have a justin.tv account should have to pay to sign up the same for new broadcasters. No point in penalizing people that are already on there and have been for years by forcing them to pay for what most broadcasters would rather have be free for the viewers anyway!
    The only thing that will happen is, It would fail just like there option for people to be a paying pro member did.

    Share
  7. Hmm lets see, but I suspect the end result will be fail. I Understand what they are trying to do here but in the end, the herd will simply move. I am talking about those like me that have ditched cable and gone to watching content online. We will continue to move around to each free site until no free site is left then switch to a different medium. You can best bet close attention is being paid to similar plans by Hulu and others. The big question is in the end why am I going to pay for content when I can go get it for free from the major networks own websites.

    Share
  8. [...] itself against competitors like Justin.tv, which announced last month that it will soon be rolling out pay-per-view capabilities. Meanwhile, Stickam has been offering a pay-per-view service for about 18 months now, but just [...]

    Share
  9. [...] live streaming platforms have been pushing towards pay-per-view in recent months, with Justin.tv announcing paid streaming last month and Ustream joining the party only a few days ago. Stickam has been offering paid live [...]

    Share
  10. they should pay us for watching

    Share

Comments have been disabled for this post