Rev3 strategy

[poop]

It's become clear that Rev3's strategy these days is to (in one way or another) convince popular youtube web series to come over to Rev3.


Is that a good idea?


I personally don't think so as the former youtube crap they are putting on Rev3 these days caters to a very young (and very immature) audience....I'm talking like 12-16 year olds and alienates every other demographic whereas in the past the shows mostly consisted of content that could be enjoyable by most any age group.

Point is, the shift in direction has become very clear.

What are your thoughts on this?

[tokenuser]

I think you are over analysing the situation.
Watch what you want to watch.
Don't watch what you don't want to watch.

Your interests might not align with others, but I am positive the reverse is true as well.

[hellhound]

POOP... I kinda agree w/ ya but majorily dont...
In respect of adding new established shows, I agree w/ you about youtube views.
In pushing the mini-sodes (my own phrase), I think the combo.. of adding more ad revenue per ep, and thinking peeps watch on their phones/pads more than a PC leads their decisions.
Also to that is that the Rev3 HQ is in San Fran... =Tech Bubble.. = Every1 has a HD 1080 tv which is hooked to the net, Every1 has a Smartphone/pad w/ unlimited data.
And in some of the encodes..... we push Apple products (i've used some open source alternatives/codecs like VLC) to avoid encoding issues from the "pushed" .wp4 format.

a $250 Dell Pc could make a small wmv file... Dont tell me Rev3 doesnt have an Agenda if they cant afford the 30 min on a $250 PC to make a wmv. Even if only afew thousand D/L the wmv.. why not satisfy those users... unless trying to push a company/agenda?

[poop]

I think you are over analysing the situation.
Watch what you want to watch.
Don't watch what you don't want to watch.

Your interests might not align with others, but I am positive the reverse is true as well.


I think you're missing the point. Clearly I'm not sitting here forcing myself to watch a bunch of shows I don't want too just so I could come up with some "analysis".

What I do though is always watch the first episode or three of any new show on Rev3. Then I either continue watching or don't.

The conclusion I've come to on the youtube push and the demographic concern is just a simple byproduct of paying attention over the years.

From a business point of view is it better to have (for example) 1,000 people spread between 5 shows that cater to any demographic....or 1,000 people spread across 20 shows 15 of which only cater to a specific demographic? It would be silly to think that your original 1,000 people all fall within that specific age demographic so it must be hoping that even if you lose 500 viewers you will gain some of the base from youtube to make up for or exceed that 500. It seems like an awfully big shot in the dark with an unnecessarily high risk of losing a chunk of your established base for a (at best) 50/50 chance of gain.....even though I do understand the numbers game they are playing because the Youtube views for the given show are pretty huge.....I just don't think it's going to work out for them quite like they planned and in the end they could lose base numbers over a needless gamble. I don't think there's going to be some sort of en masse abandonment of the audience from youtube to come and watch the given show over here and then check out other shows over here (which would be the goal) just because there's now the Rev3 intro on it....ecspecially when one can still watch the given Rev3 show ON YOUTUBE in the first place! Minor detail. Point is....there's no incentive to get the youtube crowd to come over to Rev3 and check out other shows as long as it's still available on youtube. The internet is a fickle place.

OK...now I'm over thinking it. But the question is still valid.

I don't think it's a good idea....but I'm open to others opinions who may either agree or disagree.

I believe the solution is in finding those gems out there and developing those....you know....kind of like Rev3 used to do even though IMO they never really took it far enough or delved deep enough to make it a successful model. Not in taking the easy route and just throwing the Rev3 banner on a bunch of popular youtube shows for the kiddies and hoping for the best. That's called shotgun marketing last I checked....and it tends not to work out for established reasons.

[damnedeyez]

Also to that is that the Rev3 HQ is in San Fran... =Tech Bubble.. = Every1 has a HD 1080 tv which is hooked to the net, Every1 has a Smartphone/pad w/ unlimited data.
And in some of the encodes..... we push Apple products (i've used some open source alternatives/codecs like VLC) to avoid encoding issues from the "pushed" .wp4 format.

yeah, I noticed awhile ago (and reminded of it too often) that they seem to get lost in being a tech company in SF and can at times seem out of touch and too far ahead of things. Whether or not it's true, it certainly feels like they're aiming at the "latest and greatest" end of things, and leaving a number of people behind in the process.

Not to mention the switch to emulating youtube comment threads on videos is or already has killed the majority of traffic in the show forums that I've seen. Admittedly, I don't read most of them anymore, either.

[poop]

I understand your guys concerns about the "tech bubble" but that's something I personally like about Rev3.

I'm about as far away from SF as one can get but I still have a 1080p TV hooked to the net. I stopped paying for cable years ago and these days it's just iTunes and Hulu for me.

That's nothing new for a lot of people (regardless of SF) and isn't going to go away.

However....on that note.....there really isn't much sense in pushing out something in HD when it was originally shot using crappy webcams (think segments of TYT for example).

It's self defeating to the point of being stupid. If nothing else Rev3 should enforce source material standards.