Analysis for 'eMarketer'
Wednesday, October 14, 2015, 11:28 AM ET|
According to eMarketer’s latest forecast, by 2017, programmatic will account for 65%, or $7.43 billion, of total online video ad spending of $11.4 billion.
eMarketer has also increased it forecast of programmatic’s share of online video spending in 2015 and 2016. For 2015, eMarketer is now estimating 39%, or $2.91 billion, of online video advertising will be done programmatically (vs. the prior forecast of 28% or $2.18 billion). For 2016, eMarketer is now estimating 56%, or $5.37 billion, of online video advertising will be done programmatically (vs. the prior forecast of 40% or $3.84 billion).
Thursday, September 11, 2014, 11:15 AM ET|
According to a new eMarketer forecast, in 2014 YouTube will account for 18.9% of the U.S. online video ad market, down from 21.2% in 2013. Still, YouTube will see a healthy 39.2% year-over-year net video ad revenue increase, from $810 million in '13 to $1.13 billion in '14. eMarketer forecasts YouTube's U.S. video ad revenue to continue growing, by 34.2% in '15 to $1.51 billion and by a further 18.3% in '16 to $1.75 billion.
Tuesday, July 1, 2014, 10:03 AM ET|
eMarketer is forecasting that mobile video advertising will nearly quadruple in size from $1.44 billion in 2014 to $5.44 billion in 2018. The forecast is part of eMarketer's new "US Mobile Video Advertising 2014" report which eMarketer is offering for exclusive, complimentary download to VideoNuze readers.
At last week's VideoNuze Online Video Ad Summit, eMarketer's Principal Analyst David Hallerman previewed some of the data in his opening presentation. The session was video-recorded and will be available soon. In the meantime, Beet.tv interviewed David at the Ad Summit and I've embedded the video below.
Friday, December 10, 2010, 10:31 AM ET|Once again I'm pleased to offer VideoNuze's end-of-week feature highlighting and discussing 5-6 interesting online/mobile video industry news items that we weren't able to cover this week. Read them now or take them with you this weekend!
A report this morning from Rhythm New Media, a firm that develops mobile video apps for TV programs and runs its own mobile video ad network, provides fresh reasons to be bullish on mobile video. The report is based on an estimated 250 million video views/month that Rhythm has tracked in Q1 '10 on its mobile video platform. Two key stats that jumped out for me: an average 86.7% completion rate and a 1.7% click through rate for its 15-second pre-rolls. The latter is roughly consistent with data Will reported from Rhythm about 6 months ago. It is noteworthy that Rhythm's click through rates are holding steady as it scales up.
To get a sense of how Rhythm's mobile data stacks up against online video advertising data, I compared it to a report eMarketer and YuMe released based on Q4 '09 data, which showed a steady decline in click through and completion rates for pre-rolls. Rhythm's completion and click through rates are 24% and 56% higher than those in the eMarketer/YuMe report. While it's a bit of an apples vs. oranges comparison because YuMe's much larger network includes many different types of video content (vs. Rhythm's TV program only) and the ads YuMe surveyed were a mix of 15-second and 30-second spots (vs. Rhythm's 15-second only), the differences may be an early indicator of the contrast between mobile and online video.
Friday, August 14, 2009, 9:49 AM ET|
Daisy Whitney and I are pleased to present the 27th edition of the VideoNuze Report podcast, for August 14, 2009.
In this week's podcast, Daisy and I discuss "The Future of Internet Video," a new research report released this week by eMarketer. Coincidentally, we had each read the press release about the report and found ourselves disagreeing with its conclusions.
As Daisy explains, the report essentially asserts that for online video advertising to continue to grow, the viewing experience between the computer and TV must converge. The logic is that TV's "lean-back" viewing mode is a preferred context for advertisers, and therefore for advertising against online video to grow, the video must be accessible on TVs.
Daisy takes issue with this, arguing that while convergence is great, there are indeed times when watching on a computer is preferred by consumers. A "new norm" has emerged with the computer as a parallel viewing platform. Rather than looking at this as an obstacle, advertisers should embrace consumers' behavior, and capitalize on it.
My main disagreement is that eMarketer believes that a "lean-back" TV viewing mode is preferred by advertisers over the "lean-forward" computer viewing mode. While eMarketer argues the computer mode creates viewer distraction and incents clicking away from ads, I see it the other way around: when watching video on computers, ads cannot be skipped, calls to action can be easily implemented (e.g. "click here to receive....) and everything of course can be measured. Contrast this with the rampant ad-skipping that now occurs in DVR-enabled homes.
Listen in and draw your own conclusions.
Separately, I can't resist touching on the topic of "authenticity" of broadband video I wrote about earlier this week in "How I Got Punked by the Megawoosh Waterslide Video." I received lots of feedback on this post, with plenty of people 'fessing up that they got punked too, while others called me the "poster child for gullibility!" Either way, authenticity of broadband video is a fascinating topic.
Click here to listen to the podcast (13 minutes, 58 seconds)
Click here for previous podcasts
The VideoNuze Report is available in iTunes...subscribe today!
Friday, August 7, 2009, 9:34 AM ET|
Following are 4 items worth noting from the week of August 3rd:
1. Research, research, research - For some unknown reason, there was a flurry online video-related research and forecasts released this week. In no particular order:
eMarketer was out with a new forecast indicating 188 million online video viewers in the U.S. in 2013.
Veronis Suhler released its forecast of 2009-2013 communications industry spending, showing advertising shrinking as a percentage of total spending.
PWC's UK office released its 2009-2013 forecast, which also anticipates declines in advertising.
CBS's research head David Poltrack used detailed data to explain the company's online video strategy and buttress its argument that in a TV Everywhere world, it should be compensated for its content (slides are here, via PaidContent).
Ipsos found that Americans streamed a record amount of TV programs and movies, doubling their consumption from Sept '08 to July '09.
Yahoo and a group of research partners released data finding that 70% of online video consumption happens throughout the day and night, as opposed to traditional TV viewing which is concentrated in the prime-time window.
Last but not least, TDG released excerpts of its research on "over-the-top" video services, available for download at VideoNuze.
2. Unicorn Media launches, hires ex-Move Networks executive David Rice - It will be hard for some to believe there's room for yet another white label video publishing and management platform, but startup Unicorn Media is going to try elbowing its way into the crowded space, with a specific focus on large media companies. I spoke with Unicorn's executive team this week, led by Bill Rinehart, who was the founding CEO of Limelight.
Unicorn is positioning itself as the first "enterprise-grade" solution, staking out key differentiators such as enhanced analytics/reporting, faster/easier transcoding, improved APIs for content ingest/management and more flexible monetization/ad queuing. I have not yet seen a demo, but I'm intrigued by what I heard. The company has raised $5M to date from executives/angels and has a staff of 25. David Rice, formerly Move's VP of Marketing has come on board as Chief Strategy Officer. Given the team's industry expertise and relationships, this could be a company to watch.
3. Google acquires On2 Technologies and other encoding-related news - The blogosphere was in a flurry about Google's $106M acquisition of video compression provider On2 Technologies this week. Speculation flew about Google open-sourcing On2 new VP8 codec, which could potentially force a new standard to emerge as a challenge to H.264, today's leading codec. This is important stuff, though a little further down the stack than I usually focus, so I refer you to Dan Rayburn's analysis of the deal's implications, which is the best I've seen.
There was other news in the emerging cloud-based encoding/transcoding/delivery market this week, as Encoding.com announced a new premium service with tighter service level agreements (4 minute max wait time and 50 Gbyte/hour/customer throughput). Encoding.com's Gregg Heil and Jeff Malkin explained the company is using the new SLAs to move upmarket to service tier 1 and 2 media companies. Separate, Encoding.com's competitor mPoint's CEO Chiranjeev Bordoloi told me they're now on a $3M annualized revenue run rate as cloud-based alternatives continue to gain acceptance.4. Don't try this at home - On a lighter note, there's been no shortage of knuckle-head stunt videos we've all seen online, but this one is near the top of my personal favorite list. Do NOT try replicating this over the weekend!
Friday, April 11, 2008, 9:47 AM ET|
Today's post is from TDG's Mugs Buckley, who discusses the confusing state of video advertising projections.
The Reality of Web Video Advertising Just Doesn't Seem to Add Up
by: Mugs Buckley, Contributing Analyst, The Diffusion Group
I used to think I was pretty good at math, but after trying to make sense of recent forecasts regarding web video advertising, I'm beginning to doubt my skills. Let it be known that I'm a big believer in the growth potential of the Internet video ad business; I'm simply struggling to follow the numbers that have been reported. Since no single analysis offers an "apples-to-apples" industry comparison, I thought I'd offer up some of the available forecasts and offer a few thoughts.
So here's where I'm stuck.
The estimates and forecasts for only video ads are all over the place. For example:
- eMarketer estimates that US marketers spent $775M in 2007 and will spend $1.3B in 2008 for online video streaming and in-page ads.
- Jupiter Research predicts that 2008 online video ads in the US will yield $768M.
- comScore reported that online viewers consumed 9.8B videos in January 2008 (down from December 2007's 10.1B) of which 3.4B were Google/YouTube videos.
- In a November 2007 Financial Times article, a leading media buyer for Starcom Media Group (who is well aware of her buys and rates) predicted that the 2007 market for "The Big Four" broadcast networks was likely to generate around $120M.
So here's where it gets a bit confusing.
- If we use the 3.4B monthly view Google/YouTube view estimate for January and run that out for a 12-month period, add some growth for fun, we come up with about 45B views for all of 2008.
- YouTube charges $15 CPMs for their in-video overlay ads (down from the initial $20 CPMs used during beta testing).
- If 100% of the 45B Google/YouTube videos were sold at $15 CPMs, that would yield revenue of $675M. But that assumes 100% inventory sold, which won't happen for a variety for reasons (in particular because YouTube only sells overly ads on their contracted partner deals, not user-generated content).
- According to Bear Stearns, YouTube is set to generate $22.6M in revenue for video ads, about 3.3% of the possible $675M at 100% inventory sold.
Hmmm. So if YouTube (at 34% of all web video consumed) could generate $22.6M in revenue in 2008, and the Big Four were running about $120M in 2007, how does one arrive at these impressive near-billion dollar predictions? Where else is this revenue coming from?
Let's not rule out operator error - I'll quickly admit that I may have misinterpreted how these numbers were derived and what they represent. That being said, however, there doesn't seem to be a rational way to reconcile these disparate estimates. Can anyone out there help to square these numbers? Is it simply a matter of under- or over-reporting? Are the measurement systems currently in place so poor and mutually exclusive in methodology that they necessarily offer conflicting estimates?
Something just isn't adding up. Yes, this may seem to be a bit nit-picky on my part; the rambling of an analyst with too much time on her hands. Then again, without accurate revenue and usage estimates, it is impossible to know the real value of any form of advertising, much less an emerging model such as web-based video advertising.
Please let us know what you think!
Video Research Around the Web
- Number Of TV Channels Received By U.S. Households Falls Dramatically Mediapost
- Average U.S. Broadband Consumer's Monthly Data Use Surged 27% in 2019 to 340 GB Multichannel News
- Half of U.S. Consumers Say Disney Plus Is ‘As Good As’ Netflix Variety
- Disney+ Sees Sharply Rising Purchase Intent, Other Streamers Virtually Flat Mediapost
- TiVo Research: Smart TVs Deliver the Fastest Search and Discovery Multichannel News
- Disney Plus mobile app downloads hit nearly 41M, study says CNET
- Ad Execs Plan to Spend More on ESPN, HGTV Multichannel News
- Peak TV Update: Scripted Originals Top 500 in 2019, FX Says The Hollywood Reporter