IDEA #9 – Pay-Per-Play Videos (PPPV): The YouTube Differentiator

Categories
Uncategorized

Pay-Per-Play Videos (PPPV)As I stated in my article for TechCrunch recently, there are 3 parties that need to be compensated when it comes to videos: 1) Content Owners; 2) Content Creators [users that might mash things up to create “original” creations] ;and 3) Publishers (MySpace users and bloggers, etc — people/companies that post a video on their website).

Revver compensates content creators and publishers (“sharers”), but only based on the ad revenue. Flixya is a website that compensates publishers. And as mentioned in the article above, YouTube will soon be compensating based on ad revenue.

But what about the content owners and creators that would like to charge for viewing of their videos — and/or the users that are willing to pay a premium to bypass advertising? iTunes and Google Video are allowing main-stream media to sell their videos per-play/download (i.e. episodes of The Office, Grey’s Anatomy, etc on iTunes for $1.99 each and CSI, Star Trek, etc on Google Video for $1.99 each).

YouTube was the big winner, but Guba, Revver, Metacafe and others are hoping to be the next big winner. I think giving the ability for all content owners/creators to charge for their work at whatever price they want, could be that differentiator.

My proposed company would take a % cut of the revenues from the content creator (thus if they charge $1.99 per view/download — maybe we’d do a 50/50 split and thus collect $0.99 and pay-out $1.00 to the content creator).

So how would users pay for this video content? Either they pay via the proposed business’ website — or they pay within the video itself (thus if I’m on a blog and a video is shared that requires payment, I can stay at the website and pay right through the video itself). So if I pay right through the video itself, there might be potential scammers out there that may replicate how the proposed business’ videos ordering system works — thus I think we’d use a “SiteKey” for each account, much like how Bank Of America does.

How “SiteKey” works — upon account setup, you choose an icon that appears at your account login; if the icon isn’t correct when this system asks you to login, then you know someone might be “phishing” you. I have no clue about the feasibility of this: but if the Flash video is being hosted by our business and displayed on some website, then we’d have a cookie with the user — allowing us to show their icon within the video. Otherwise, our login process might just ask for their username first, then show their icon — if it matches, then they’d enter their password to have the funds deducted from their account.

Funds are either through our own micropayment system; or similar to eBay, we tally their amounts and charge them at the end of the month — this is after a $5 minimum deposit into our system, which allows us to verify their payment information — credit card or PayPal.

Thoughts on this video idea? Do you think people would pay for various videos by content owners/creators (they already are through iTunes and Google Video).