> But do the consumers want Google video?

John -

One of my Gvids had been averaging 1,000 views per day for the past few months. However, since the introduction of Google's new video tab last week, that number is now pushing 4,000 views per day.

The fact that my viewings have nearly quadrupled is worth noting. And don't forget, a lot of that traffic is finding its way to my web site via my link at Google Video.

Sure, could simply be the novelty factor. But maybe it's not always about community?

-joe chapuis
www.WebVideoZone.com

• Posted by: joe chapuis
• August 14, 2006 11:32 AM

Maybe they just want to show their new video service..Just my 2 cent.

• Posted by: nawaki
• August 14, 2006 11:38 AM

i am not sure if its the "safe" alternative given the adult categories in google...

• Posted by: joe
• August 14, 2006 2:33 PM

I'd have to agree with you that Google will be the "safe" alternative, but only in name.

In substance, I think YouTube and the like will remain the preferred destination for those who choose to be on the periphery and shun the "mainstream" sites.

Google obviously has very bright people working hard on solving problems and they have done some very cool things...fueled by an uber market cap. Google has volume but has no community. Features can only take you so far; with no community, there's not a lot of loyalty.

Google should try to be more deft at building community when launching new offerings, lest they become a facsimile, another "me too".

• Posted by: Rob
• August 14, 2006 6:49 PM

You say that the popularity of YouTube showed Google that video is important, but the continued (and growing) e-commerce shows that online shopping is important.

With the advent of Checkout, and its ties to Froogle, why not continue boosting Froogle's traffic? They could have put both on the homepage... why didn't they?

• Posted by: Kevin
• August 14, 2006 8:35 PM

Yawn ! Is it only me who is bored at this 'big deal' being made out of this change that Google did !

• Posted by: Murali
• August 15, 2006 1:42 AM

Sheesh John. Relax. What would you do in their shoes? What's the most cost effective change you can execute?

• Posted by: Don Park
• August 15, 2006 2:19 AM

Google doesn't seem to know how to build communities very well. They have their Orkut, but noone knows about it. Google videos even link to MySpace "post to: MySpace - Blogger - LiveJournal - TypePad"

Google Video has almost 0 sense of community, whereas Youtube is all about it.

• Posted by: dumbfounder
• August 15, 2006 8:20 AM

This is actually to get more people searching and uploading on GVideo. People who go to Google for web search (they're unquestionably the best) and YouTube for videos may now check out Google Video and end up eventually not doing YouTube..?

• Posted by: Rakesh
• August 15, 2006 9:04 PM

Google has added Video to its hallowed first tier of search options on the home page

What I don't understand is why Google is manually adding anything to its hallowed first tier. I thought all the decisions at Google were made on the basis of what actually gets used by the users. You know.. all the decisions of what features to include or not include.. whether to create or drop a new service, etc. That whole "5% rule" thing. Google is an empircal, data-driven company, right?

So why isn't their front page automatically generated? Why isn't there a statistical-usage-based script that determines which Google services are getting used the most, and then automatically puts those services on the hallowed first tier?

Could it be that they're actually promoting a service, instead of letting themselves be ruled by user data? Could it be that, as Joe Chapuis found in his post above, that if you promote something, people will use it more...rather than letting something grow organically?

To me grokking the implication of that is the bigger deal. It seems a departure from standard Google algorithmic, data-driven practice.

• Posted by: JG
• August 15, 2006 11:45 PM

Will you please explain this to me?

I do not understand something. Why do so many people post their content on YouTube, P2P networks or on MySpace for free with little or no payback? How much can anyone really make if those sites sell ads around your content, not much I bet.

Without sound like an ad or spam...My friends created 9thX.com and why it is very different. “With 9thX.com, YOU GET PAID for the content you upload to our site. You can sell any content you have in Windows Media Player format (movies, clips and music) and you maintain rights to your content.” You only pay 9thX when you sell something. They archive and promote your content for free.

9thX.com’s positioning and business model fits better with the needs of anyone, the artist and the consumer. They just launched, and I know it will take some time...but it is only a matter of time.

I'm sure the giants, Youtube and Google will respond in time. I for one, could care less about ad based revenue. it reeks of Amway-ism. Not bad if you are at the top I guess.

• Posted by: Dean
• August 17, 2006 9:20 PM

I don't know about anyone else, but relegating Groups to the pop-up annoys me since I use that more than I use their video site...

-matt

• Posted by: mathew baldwin
• August 20, 2006 5:03 PM

I'm starting to post clips from my own documentary on google and plan to do so on youtube to promote dvd sales. the clips are very cool, but is there some way of promoting the clips you post on these sites?

• Posted by: joe
• September 4, 2006 5:57 PM