Blog Post

YouTube Ad Overlays Response – Some Users, Rivals Complain; Others Cautiously Optimistic

After YouTube officially introduced InVideo advertising overlays yesterday (example), come the predictable user complaints and threats to quit the site. A blog post on the topic written by the YouTube team attracted over 200 mostly negative responses to news that clips can now include clickable animated overlays in the bottom 20 percent of a clip. Though some comments are supportive, a sample shows many users seeking pre- or post-roll ads instead of overlays. More response…

Matt Harding, star of the popular Where The Hell Is Matt? video (nearly eight million views): “As a viewer, I don’t like this at all. As someone who makes videos, I would object to allowing them to put an ad on the screen. Put it on the margins, above the player but not on the screen itself” (via CNET News.com).

Brent Weinstein, CEO of web ad video firm 60Frames Entertainment: “Ultimately, the consumers will decide and they’re going to have to see it beyond the first day and the first few weeks. In many cases, the reaction is negative before they have a chance to truly digest the experience” (via Hollywood Reporter).

Videoegg, the WPP-backed video network rival, gives over a third of its homepage to gloating (rattled?): “Welcome, Google. Seriously. We invented the video overlay ad about a year ago. We are delighted that the market is finally catching on to a vital new approach to video advertising” (via IDG).

Scott Karp, Publishing 2.0 blogger: “The InVideo ad format is undoubtedly less annoying than pre-roll videos

4 Responses to “YouTube Ad Overlays Response – Some Users, Rivals Complain; Others Cautiously Optimistic”

  1. From the blog on youtube, to Matt Hardings comments – it amazes me that these people don't understand that these sites can't continue hosting people's videos with out finding ways to make money too – if google can not get youtube profitable it won't be around forever, and I think that is worse for the community then seeing some ad's. In the case of Matt – who has nearly 8,000,000 views on youtube, if each of these videos was 3 minutes long on average – it could have cost youtube anywhere from $24,000 to $60,000 in hosting fee's just from this one content producer (my guess is somewhere between 1/10 cent to 1/4 cent per minute – don't know the real numbers) – maybe if your willing to pay those hosting fees for Youtube Matt, then ad's won't need to appear in your videos…

  2. What Youtube are now experimenting with was inevitible. At what expense could it have kept running without any monetization model anyway? The users of Youtube will eventually realize this and have to accept the fact that the ads are there in their best interests which that is to keep receiving video content for free. It takes an immense amount of money to keep an engine such as Youtube running. Google itself was a classic exampe of this when it first came to market. The greatest product ever to land on the Internet which eventually needed some sort of advertising model to stay alive: Google Adwords and Adsense.

    It is also interesting to note that there is another Internet company offering a similar solution, but more. Hyper MP Group have been working on a complete video presentation and advertising system that uses overlay ads from all exisiting advertising servers on the Internet. I think this is a better solution since it treats all videos and all advertising as the same. More impressive than other solutions out there. See for yourself. http://www.hypermpgroup.com/index-3.html.

  3. Videoegg: "We invented the video overlay ad about a year ago"
    Don't you love the narrow-mindedness of Web 2.0 world.
    Overlays are a natural evolution for online video, and a tried and true technique in broadcast.
    Here's my soundbite:
    "I invented humility"