<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: YouTube and Google?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.michikono.com/2006/10/06/youtube-and-google/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.michikono.com/2006/10/06/youtube-and-google/</link>
	<description>Stuff only Michi cares to read</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2012 10:48:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: MichiKono.com &#187; GooTube Rumors to be Confirmed Tomorrow?</title>
		<link>http://www.michikono.com/2006/10/06/youtube-and-google/#comment-40</link>
		<dc:creator>MichiKono.com &#187; GooTube Rumors to be Confirmed Tomorrow?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Oct 2006 07:24:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michikono.com/blog/2006/10/06/youtube-and-google/#comment-40</guid>
		<description>[...] I didn&#8217;t touch on this point on my last post too much, but $1.6 billion is a steal for YouTube. First, imagine if MSN were to lock in a deal with Youtube for advertising. Not only would that help one of Google&#8217;s most feared rivals, but the opportunity costs are through the roof. Seeing as YouTube has an immense amount of traffic, an exclusive advertising deal could easily cost upwards of half a billion dollars. And that&#8217;s what a company would PAY just to show ads &#8212; the actual revenue generated is far greater. Additionally, if the next big medium for advertising on the web is through video, having a 60% market cap on net videos (Google has 10% now) would be a huge advantage. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I didn&#8217;t touch on this point on my last post too much, but $1.6 billion is a steal for YouTube. First, imagine if MSN were to lock in a deal with Youtube for advertising. Not only would that help one of Google&#8217;s most feared rivals, but the opportunity costs are through the roof. Seeing as YouTube has an immense amount of traffic, an exclusive advertising deal could easily cost upwards of half a billion dollars. And that&#8217;s what a company would PAY just to show ads &#8212; the actual revenue generated is far greater. Additionally, if the next big medium for advertising on the web is through video, having a 60% market cap on net videos (Google has 10% now) would be a huge advantage. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google-YouTube &#187; Personal Insights on Web 2.0, Blogging, and Business</title>
		<link>http://www.michikono.com/2006/10/06/youtube-and-google/#comment-39</link>
		<dc:creator>Google-YouTube &#187; Personal Insights on Web 2.0, Blogging, and Business</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Oct 2006 21:37:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michikono.com/blog/2006/10/06/youtube-and-google/#comment-39</guid>
		<description>[...] Since everyone else is sharing their thoughts on the Google-YouTube issue, thought I might as well too (even though I&#8217;m a little late to the conversation). The Wall Street Journal article added to the credibility of the possibility. $1.6 Billion dollars is a lot of money to pay for a company so susceptible to lawsuits. However, youtube does have a lot of traffic and a great brand name that many people know. Obviously, I&#8217;m sure Google is also thinking in terms of keeping it away from Microsoft or Yahoo! in addition to the audience that youtube draws (100 million videos streamed per day). So- is this a good business move for Google? I&#8217;m about 60% in favor of the deal from Google&#8217;s perspective (100% from Youtube&#8217;s perspective). Why not higher? Personally, I think the lawsuits are going to start to pile up VERY quickly if this acquisition occurs. Google has a market value of over $120 billion and about $10 billion in cash on hand, which is sure to bring the copyright lawyers in a hurry. We&#8217;ll se how this plays out&#8230;it&#8217;ll be interesting either way. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Since everyone else is sharing their thoughts on the Google-YouTube issue, thought I might as well too (even though I&#8217;m a little late to the conversation). The Wall Street Journal article added to the credibility of the possibility. $1.6 Billion dollars is a lot of money to pay for a company so susceptible to lawsuits. However, youtube does have a lot of traffic and a great brand name that many people know. Obviously, I&#8217;m sure Google is also thinking in terms of keeping it away from Microsoft or Yahoo! in addition to the audience that youtube draws (100 million videos streamed per day). So- is this a good business move for Google? I&#8217;m about 60% in favor of the deal from Google&#8217;s perspective (100% from Youtube&#8217;s perspective). Why not higher? Personally, I think the lawsuits are going to start to pile up VERY quickly if this acquisition occurs. Google has a market value of over $120 billion and about $10 billion in cash on hand, which is sure to bring the copyright lawyers in a hurry. We&#8217;ll se how this plays out&#8230;it&#8217;ll be interesting either way. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced (User agent is rejected)
Object Caching 362/366 objects using disk: basic

Served from: www.michikono.com @ 2012-02-09 16:04:58 -->
