These are not yet commonplace, but with enough time and perseverance revenue models will mature for original content.

Steve

This entire discussion does raise another question… but we’ll leave that for another day.

And just to sign off, I will go back and watch the latest from Epic FU, Dr. Horrible, The Guild, Ask a Ninja, Epic Fu, Diggnation, Tekzilla, Indy Mogul, Know Your Meme and hopefully be proved wrong.

Cheers.

I’ll let you get back to signing all your deals.

Steve

Web series can be a smart move once you:

• build up some kind of audience and
• understand what consumers will watch and
• realize what media companies will license/syndicate and
• figure out what advertisers will sponsor.

We can do a web series and get a better ROI and make it more compelling/entertaining because we have a lot more data and feedback to analyze.

As an investor, though, I think starting off with the web series model is not bright, that’s all, so I put my money where my mouth is.

To call me short-sighted or hurl out any other personal or professional insult says more about you than me, frankly.

should read:

Viewers who like the web series format will tend to stick to TV where the budgets allow for the genre, when these are made for THE WEB, they tend to look cheap…

Two words: echo chamber.

To suggest that ad agencies need to “understand” this or that is pretty arrogant, if you ask me.

Viewers who like the web series format will tend to stick to TV where the budgets allow for the genre, when these are made for TV, they tend to look cheap… so your use of the word “cheaply-produced” is rather ironic and suggests that I ruffled your feathers.

Ultimately, we strive to create videos that stand shoulder-to-shoulder with its TV equivalent and are actually seen (75,000,000 since 2006 with $0 in marketing) and paid for through licensing fees (10-20 media companies that pay us to carry the programming).

We have 5,000 videos and 500 hours of programming, the quality and quantity has improved over time, but if you watch one of our

• travel videos, it looks and feels like something you would watch on the Travel Network,

• cooking segments, it is akin to something you watch on the Food Network.

• music interviews, it looks like something on the [old] MTV.

The format and length are altered to adjust for the Web’s consumption patterns, for sure, but while some create art/media/content for themselves, we create content that people actually consume and companies actually pay for.

We also don’t rely on ad agencies to “understand” something.

But, ultimately, no web series comes close to matching the production quality of its TV counterpart, so in the end, that type of online programming comes across as cheaply-produced, to use your term.

Anyway, while I’ve enjoyed this lovely exchange, I have some content to publish and deals to sign.

What troubles me about your posts is that you’re using the struggles of a brand new industry to justify your short-sighted position. I’ll be the first person to stand up and say that web series have to look beyond television models and demonstrate what makes the web different from television in order to evolve.

But to claim that series like Dr. Horrible, The Guild, Ask a Ninja, Epic Fu, Diggnation, Tekzilla, Indy Mogul, Know Your Meme, or any of the other widely watched and revenue-generating original productions are flawed from a conceptual standpoint is remarkably small-minded, imo. You may not like them or watch them, but millions of people do. Entertainment never bats 1000%, but that doesn’t mean you never try.

It is only a matter of time until the ad agencies you talk to understand the value of placement in original web series that can potentially run for years with a loyal audience. This is what works about television, by the way. It’s an educational process at this moment because we are only a few years into the modern evolution of online video. Read any history of cable television and you will be holding up a mirror to the development of online video. Shows that build brands and aggregate data about their viewing audience will be offering vastly more valuable data to potential advertisers than Nielsen has ever offered.

I think it’s unfair and unfounded to claim that cheaply-produced informational content is the only value proposition in online video. We are far too early in this process to take any stand that thwarts the growth of creative people looking for creative solutions. You de-value your own site this way.

Steve

Before I launch into another tirade ;) – we’re all on the same side of the fence here as professional content creators. Once in a while we have these kind of discussions internally and I stop everyone and say “listen, guys, it’s as if Trotsky and Lenin get into an argument, sure, it might appear that they have very different perspective, but for all intents and purposes, their viewpoints represent close shades of the rainbow”.

Not sure if that analogy makes sense, but you get the idea:

I might have studied finance and have a business background, but I am a creative type at heart, having penned two books, written screenplays at what not.

Don’t forget, it was my passion for storytelling and non-fiction that led me to create Discovery Networks/Scripps Entertainment-like programming… so first and foremost, do what you like and are passionate about because the payoff, if any, isn’t even in the horizon.

But, we just need to balance that with what the market dictates and with what consumers want. The consumer online isn’t just the viewer, it’s also media companies as well as marketers. Either extreme will fail.

In other words, doing a web series when you have an audience might be a smart tactical step, but starting a new media company by launching a web series first is suicidal (again, LonelyGirl15 would have NEVER been a hit if people knew that it was scripted – IMHO).

Ash