Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
Rupert wrote: > > People will not watch shows on a computer. Do you know anybody who > watches anything on a computer? Other than the odd bored moment > surfing old TV shows on Youtube? ... > I firmly believe it's > just a matter of someone bringing internet video to the couch. I watch all my DVDs and my video subscriptions using Miro on my computer and my couch! When plugged in to my Bose wave radio, the video and audio is much better than my old CRT TV.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
I think a lot of people stopped posting so much for a while, and discussing things at length. I'm sure there wasn't any backing away from you. On 13 Nov 2007, at 19:09, Steve Watkins wrote: That wikipedia debate appeared to kill what little goodwill and tolerance people showed towards me in the past. I was used to getting few replies to my posts, but since then I get virtually none, and my posts havent changed in length. I talk too much in the flesh too, its a part of me, Im stuck with it, wheras everyone in this group will eventually escape it when, one day, for whatever reasons, I dont post here anymore. I dont think Im any sort of voice of reason. I have ideas about what a discussion should involve, what the boundaries & word count are, that do not appear to be the norm, which, along with various other social deformities, make me a general failure at being human, as my genital cobwebs will attest to. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Delongchamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Personally, this is the most exciting thing I've seen since the > Wikipedia Storm of '07. > > Heath, it's definitely a pattern I know and enjoy and Dennis, you may > be right that it has very little to do with "Videoblogging" but it is > very much "the videoblogging group." :) > > I always found it interesting to have an inside perspective of this > medium's moguls. I doubt there's a Yahoo Group in which Rupert > Murdoch contributes. > > As a side note to Andrew, I have to stand up for Steve here as he's > often the voice of reason in this group and in a past experience had > stood up for me and Wikipedia's core content policies when it was the > very unpopular thing to do. However there is something to be said for > for being concise in discussions. I once heard from a wise source: > Posts longer than 100 words are difficult to understand and are > frequently either ignored, misunderstood or misinterpreted. > > darn...151 words...now 156... > > On Nov 13, 2007 5:05 AM, Andrew Baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2007, at 4:43 PM, Steve Watkins wrote: > > > > > So whilst I admired the fact that rocketboom didn't seem to be > > > > > selling out in the > > > usual sense, for money, I became disturbed by some possible signs > > > that Mr Baron was > > > seeking to achieve a different sort of power. > > > > AH YES!!! Its all about power, mwahahahahaha! But what kind of > > Power did you say!? A DIFFERENT kind?? M I like the sound of > > this . . . . A NEW kind of Power! BETTER THAN MONEY!!! > > > > Speaking of power Steve, I dare you to not respond to a single thread > > on this list. Ill bet you can't do it in under 5000 words. > > > > Speaking of Jason, he's most known for: > > > > 1. Stealing the idea and the people from Gizmodo to make the > > identical knock off- Engagdget > > 2. Not paying employees fair wages. > > 3. Trying to steal Amanda from Rocketboom (only one day after news > > broke) > > 4. Trying to steal top posters from Digg for Netscape > > 2. Killing Netscape by making it into a Diggclone and then getting > > fired from AOL > > 3. Building a site called Mahalo which is suffering badly and no one > > likes. > > > > Not just based on these few examples which have been extremely > > destructive to the world, but also based on his regular, > > stereotypical activity of attacking people instead of their work, I > > just want to throw out that Jason's only means of being popular is > > exactly this: taking and causing conflict. > > > > Look no further than Ann Coulter. It works great for her. If they > > can't do it based on their own good ideas and they cant do it while > > collaborating with others, at least they can do it by shitting all > > over everyone. > > > > Usually a good post has a lot of conversation but doesn't cause > > others to speak out so negatively at the author. This is likely the > > reason why there have been SO MANY bad reactions to Jason's post: > > When one lives their life so selfishly while attacking and being > > brutal, its destructive to everyone around because it causes damage > > and rubs off on the rest off. > > > > My original answer to the original thread was likely not considered. > > The best way to grow your audience is not by spamming everyone. Its > > by improving your show. At this point Jason, you really shouldn't be > > asking any other questions until you get that one worked out. You got > > Veronica, she's great. You should be paying Veronica more, you need > > to invest in some better equipment and get some production help. How > > can you improve the show? > > > > We ask ourselves this question every single day and it continues to > > receive the most concern out of every thing we do. > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > >
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
> I dont think Im any sort of voice of reason. I have ideas about what a > discussion should involve, what the boundaries & word count are, that do not > appear to be the > norm, which, along with various other social deformities, make me a general > failure at > being human, as my genital cobwebs will attest to. steve, I hope you know we love you. any lack of response to your emails are probably more due to our lack of wordmanship. As to the poetry in your last paragraph attests, you should make videos for evilvlog where all the superstars go. no boundaries or expectations. jay -- http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790 Video: http://ryanishungry.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/jaydedman Photos: http://flickr.com/photos/jaydedman/ RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
Well, it was pretty awful and I too unsubscribed afterward. ...but there's just something about it that draws you in... as I'm sure many participants in this thread can attest to. but boy is it nice to be on the sidelines. which is why i'm going to shut up now. On Nov 13, 2007 1:51 PM, Rupert Howe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > I'm amazed that you like it Patrick, as we all went to town about you > in April. It was enough to make me unsubscribe, because I got so > caught up with it. > I don't get the enjoyment of it. > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Delongchamp" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Personally, this is the most exciting thing I've seen since the > > Wikipedia Storm of '07. > > > > Heath, it's definitely a pattern I know and enjoy and Dennis, you may > > be right that it has very little to do with "Videoblogging" but it is > > very much "the videoblogging group." :) > > > > I always found it interesting to have an inside perspective of this > > medium's moguls. I doubt there's a Yahoo Group in which Rupert > > Murdoch contributes. > > > > As a side note to Andrew, I have to stand up for Steve here as he's > > often the voice of reason in this group and in a past experience had > > stood up for me and Wikipedia's core content policies when it was the > > very unpopular thing to do. However there is something to be said for > > for being concise in discussions. I once heard from a wise source: > > Posts longer than 100 words are difficult to understand and are > > frequently either ignored, misunderstood or misinterpreted. > > > > darn...151 words...now 156... > > > > > On Nov 13, 2007 5:05 AM, Andrew Baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2007, at 4:43 PM, Steve Watkins wrote: > > > > > > > So whilst I admired the fact that rocketboom didn't seem to be > > > > > > > selling out in the > > > > usual sense, for money, I became disturbed by some possible signs > > > > that Mr Baron was > > > > seeking to achieve a different sort of power. > > > > > > AH YES!!! Its all about power, mwahahahahaha! But what kind of > > > Power did you say!? A DIFFERENT kind?? M I like the sound of > > > this . . . . A NEW kind of Power! BETTER THAN MONEY!!! > > > > > > Speaking of power Steve, I dare you to not respond to a single thread > > > on this list. Ill bet you can't do it in under 5000 words. > > > > > > Speaking of Jason, he's most known for: > > > > > > 1. Stealing the idea and the people from Gizmodo to make the > > > identical knock off- Engagdget > > > 2. Not paying employees fair wages. > > > 3. Trying to steal Amanda from Rocketboom (only one day after news > > > broke) > > > 4. Trying to steal top posters from Digg for Netscape > > > 2. Killing Netscape by making it into a Diggclone and then getting > > > fired from AOL > > > 3. Building a site called Mahalo which is suffering badly and no one > > > likes. > > > > > > Not just based on these few examples which have been extremely > > > destructive to the world, but also based on his regular, > > > stereotypical activity of attacking people instead of their work, I > > > just want to throw out that Jason's only means of being popular is > > > exactly this: taking and causing conflict. > > > > > > Look no further than Ann Coulter. It works great for her. If they > > > can't do it based on their own good ideas and they cant do it while > > > collaborating with others, at least they can do it by shitting all > > > over everyone. > > > > > > Usually a good post has a lot of conversation but doesn't cause > > > others to speak out so negatively at the author. This is likely the > > > reason why there have been SO MANY bad reactions to Jason's post: > > > When one lives their life so selfishly while attacking and being > > > brutal, its destructive to everyone around because it causes damage > > > and rubs off on the rest off. > > > > > > My original answer to the original thread was likely not considered. > > > The best way to grow your audience is not by spamming everyone. Its > > > by improving your show. At this point Jason, you really shouldn't be > > > asking any other questions until you get that one worked out. You got > > > Veronica, she's great. You should be paying Veronica more, you need > > > to invest in some better equipment and get some production help. How > > > can you improve the show? > > > > > > We ask ourselves this question every single day and it continues to > > > receive the most concern out of every thing we do. > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
Tuesday, November 13, 2007, 1:34:37 PM, Rupert wrote: > People will not watch shows on a computer. Do you know anybody who > watches anything on a computer? I think it might be useful to distinguish between watching on a computer, and watching on-line. I hardly ever watch anything on-line. There's something about the in-web-page experience that simply does not work for me. On the other hand, I watch quite a lot on my computer screen. There are a several reasons for this; here are a few I can think of right now: * The rest of my family would prefer to watch other stuff on the TV in the lounge. Likewise I am not at all interested in watching kids shows, soap operas and medical dramas. So we agree to differ, and I get the PC. * The stuff I want to watch is not available on regular TV. No, it's not *that* sort of stuff. Mostly what I am interested in is either independent internet video or old TV from the 1960s onwards - I have been having great fun watching *all* the available episodes of "Doctor Who" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_who ), for example. I'm currently part way through Tom Baker ... To show that I'm not a complete cheapskate I did buy a boxed set of "The Tomorrow People" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tomorrow_People ) * I have become mildly addicted to the extra "meta" information you can get when watching something in a PC media player. I get twitchy if I can't glance at a progress indicator to see how far through I am, and love the ability to pause and look up on the web something which occurs to me while watching. For these sorts of reasons, I'm not especially interested in a set top box. We don't even have cable, satellite, or digital TV, so we only get the regular five channels. -- Frank Carver http://www.makevideo.org.uk
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
Personally, this is the most exciting thing I've seen since the Wikipedia Storm of '07. Heath, it's definitely a pattern I know and enjoy and Dennis, you may be right that it has very little to do with "Videoblogging" but it is very much "the videoblogging group." :) I always found it interesting to have an inside perspective of this medium's moguls. I doubt there's a Yahoo Group in which Rupert Murdoch contributes. As a side note to Andrew, I have to stand up for Steve here as he's often the voice of reason in this group and in a past experience had stood up for me and Wikipedia's core content policies when it was the very unpopular thing to do. However there is something to be said for for being concise in discussions. I once heard from a wise source: Posts longer than 100 words are difficult to understand and are frequently either ignored, misunderstood or misinterpreted. darn...151 words...now 156... On Nov 13, 2007 5:05 AM, Andrew Baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2007, at 4:43 PM, Steve Watkins wrote: > > > So whilst I admired the fact that rocketboom didn't seem to be > > > selling out in the > > usual sense, for money, I became disturbed by some possible signs > > that Mr Baron was > > seeking to achieve a different sort of power. > > AH YES!!! Its all about power, mwahahahahaha! But what kind of > Power did you say!? A DIFFERENT kind?? M I like the sound of > this . . . . A NEW kind of Power! BETTER THAN MONEY!!! > > Speaking of power Steve, I dare you to not respond to a single thread > on this list. Ill bet you can't do it in under 5000 words. > > Speaking of Jason, he's most known for: > > 1. Stealing the idea and the people from Gizmodo to make the > identical knock off- Engagdget > 2. Not paying employees fair wages. > 3. Trying to steal Amanda from Rocketboom (only one day after news > broke) > 4. Trying to steal top posters from Digg for Netscape > 2. Killing Netscape by making it into a Diggclone and then getting > fired from AOL > 3. Building a site called Mahalo which is suffering badly and no one > likes. > > Not just based on these few examples which have been extremely > destructive to the world, but also based on his regular, > stereotypical activity of attacking people instead of their work, I > just want to throw out that Jason's only means of being popular is > exactly this: taking and causing conflict. > > Look no further than Ann Coulter. It works great for her. If they > can't do it based on their own good ideas and they cant do it while > collaborating with others, at least they can do it by shitting all > over everyone. > > Usually a good post has a lot of conversation but doesn't cause > others to speak out so negatively at the author. This is likely the > reason why there have been SO MANY bad reactions to Jason's post: > When one lives their life so selfishly while attacking and being > brutal, its destructive to everyone around because it causes damage > and rubs off on the rest off. > > My original answer to the original thread was likely not considered. > The best way to grow your audience is not by spamming everyone. Its > by improving your show. At this point Jason, you really shouldn't be > asking any other questions until you get that one worked out. You got > Veronica, she's great. You should be paying Veronica more, you need > to invest in some better equipment and get some production help. How > can you improve the show? > > We ask ourselves this question every single day and it continues to > receive the most concern out of every thing we do. > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > >
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
On Nov 13, 2007 9:03 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It's funny. > I was just saying to myself the other day how well this group has > been getting along and how we have really been sharing ideas. > Now it's back to this tit for tat stuff. > Oh well, conflict does build interest and this public display of > venom is entertaining. every four months or so we have a big blowup that ends up in a 100 message thread. It seems to let us all revisit the themes we keep going deeper into. Three years ago we were all just talking from what we hoped would happen, now we've helped make it real. we're all getting more experienced so I find the conversations more and more interesting. Jay -- http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790 Video: http://ryanishungry.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/jaydedman Photos: http://flickr.com/photos/jaydedman/ RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
When I hear the phrase "the industry" I reach for my Brook Hinton film/video/audio art www.brookhinton.com studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
In the good news bad news department: Good news: this thread has brought out some discussion Bad news: it ends up being about personal/business disagreements. In the FWIW Department: Beach Walks with Rox has a 60% male 40% female audience, over 95% of whom have completed some college. Our peeps are a curious mix of young techie guys and older retired couples. Many tell us they watch at home with the family as well as at work to chill out - even whole teams watch and discuss the daily topics sometime. We have beautiful scenery, thoughtful topics (environment, Hawaiiana, relationships, music, occasional tech, travel), and the most common response we get is that people feel better (clearer, less stressed, "head on square") after watching. We even have an adorable (if not "sexy") black lab, Lexi! We are confused why our audience hasn't grown bigger faster. Some things just don't make sense yet - as there is so much disruption going on. There is not a formula on the planet that is guaranteed to work. IMO, you gots to enjoy the process as at the end of the day, that's what you got. Aloha, Rox -- Roxanne Darling "o ke kai" means "of the sea" in hawaiian 808-384-5554 Video --> http://www.beachwalks.tv Company -- > http://www.barefeetstudios.com http://www.twitter.com/roxannedarling On Nov 13, 2007 6:51 AM, Eric Rice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Besides, how ever did we get along with major blockbuster motion > pictures and indie films? How did college radio kick ass in the abyss > of Clear Channel. > > Do numbers actually matter? > > ER > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Adam Quirk, Wreck & Salvage" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > So what we should really be asking is, "How do I get on TV?" > > > > BRB...loading pistol. > > > > I agree with most of this though. When I started doing this a few years > > ago, that question would have sounded like the antithesis of what > everyone > > was trying to accomplish, trying to break into a walled garden. Now it > > sounds more like a utilitarian question, like "How do I get my > enclosures to > > show up in iTunes?" That said, the television world has a lot to > lose by > > letting the huddled masses in under their tent. I doubt the TV+Netvideo > > marriage going to happen as soon as people think. > > > > AQ > > > > > On Nov 13, 2007 11:22 AM, Eric Rice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > One current project I haven't talked too much about has to do with > > > delivering audio and video content to set-top boxes, not those novelty > > > ones like slingboxes and such, but more of the XBOX, Playstation and > > > Wii (two of which have Opera-based browsing with Flash support, two > > > have hard drives and such). The audience is there. It's hard, but the > > > audience is there. Will we collectively be willing to do the hard work > > > to get the audience, or do we want the half-assed tech ethic of 'slap > > > that crap together and pray'. > > > > > > That said, I believe certain content has advantages over others. Do a > > > show about gaming, sex, cars or any of the 'religious' topics, and it > > > will help. I'd love to know what the Escapist's video 'Zero > > > Punctuation' gets as far as traffic because it's so painfully funny. > > > Want to make money and get a huge audience? Do a Justin Timberlake > > > fancast. There's a reason that MuggleCast and others are hits. Ironic, > > > really. > > > > > > I also will support (but not like) the idea that hot chicks and TV > > > training help. Look at some of the big shows. Then flip a coin. Of > > > course there will be exceptions, and we can deconstruct all day, but > > > when we do that, we're not quite normal, are we? When Amanda and > > > Rocketboom split, you could almost scientifically see the gaps in how > > > the content (and her) were perceived based on closeness to the > > > epicenter (we were s smart and intellectual on this list, and in > > > the distant blogosphere it was 'uh, what?' and in the mass space (USA > > > Today blog comments) it was flat out retarded. > > > > > > I'm still waiting for good hi-definition content come out of this > > > spacem, because I, like many fat bloated americans, enjoy sitting on > > > my ass in front of my home theater (this goes totally against the > > > indiepunkish ethos of 'well I don't owwn a television', etc) and > > > having my ears tantalized in 7.1 surround sound. > > > > > > There are three types of content I adore-- Video, video and sometimes > > > video. Sometimes it's on YouTube, sometimes it's buried in a forum > > > someplace, and other times, it comes from a TV studio or DVD (my god I > > > love Entourage, don't you?). > > > > > > We are the Content Creation Class-- we're kinda different than > > > everyone else (read: consumers). But damn, how does your audio podcast > > > compete with the non-interface of turning on satellite radio in the > > > car?
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
It's funny. I was just saying to myself the other day how well this group has been getting along and how we have really been sharing ideas. Now it's back to this tit for tat stuff. Oh well, conflict does build interest and this public display of venom is entertaining. I just hope it does some good for the industry. In the past these public feuds have derailed people from concentrating on their creative endeavors and it's just waisted energy. Speaking of "Feuds" and people from this group. NewTeeVee is going to have a Live Family Feud style gameshow tomorrow night with a few people you may have heard of. http://live.newteevee.com/gameshow Tim Tim Street Creator/Executive Producer French Maid TV The Viral Video of How Tos by French Maids http://frenchmaidtv.com Subscribe for FREE at: http://www.frenchmaidtv.com/itunes MY BLOG: http://1timstreet.blogspot.com/ On Nov 13, 2007, at 7:50 AM, Jason McCabe Calacanis wrote: > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Andrew Baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Speaking of Jason, he's most known for: > > Oh boy... I probably shouldn't even respond to something so libelous. > However, this is so false I've got to correct it. > > > 1. Stealing the idea and the people from Gizmodo to make the > > identical knock off- Engagdget > > False. > > I didn't steal the idea because the idea was Peter Rojas'. Nick Denton > back Peter's idea first in the form of Gizmodo, we (the weblogs, Inc > team) backed it second in the form of Engadget. > > For background, I offered Peter Rojas equity in Weblogs, Inc. and he > gladly left his ~$1,200 a month job with Nick Denton at Gizmodo. Nick > Denton promised Peter equity and never gave it him, we did. We > invested our own money into Engadget which quickly--thanks to Peter > and his team--grew to 3x the size of the incumbent Gizmodo. > > We sold Weblogs, Inc. (and without getting into exact details) Peter > became a millionaire over night. > > > 2. Not paying employees fair wages. > > False. > > What are you basing this on? We paid hundreds of folks at Weblogs, > Inc. per month well over six figures for years. We paid the best rates > in the blogging business (better than or as good as Denton depending > on the time). When AOL bought Weblogs, Inc. we hired around 20-30 > folks full-time. > > > > 3. Trying to steal Amanda from Rocketboom (only one day after news > > broke) > > False. > > How could we steal her if she left? She was a free agent and looking > for work. AOL really wanted to hire her so we made her an offer (a > very nice large offer). She took another large offer from ABC's. > > Are people not allowed to make offers? Would you rather talented folks > not get offers when they've achieved success? After working for you > should Amanda never work again? I'm confused. > > > 4. Trying to steal top posters from Digg for Netscape > > False. > > We offered the top posters from digg pay for work they had previously > not been paid for. We paid ~40 of them to work on Netscape/Propeller > doing things like putting in high-quality stories, taking our false > stories and spam, and cleaning up the mess that is social news > sometimes. It was a really good idea and Propeller is the second > largest social news site in the world. > > > 2. Killing Netscape by making it into a Diggclone and then getting > > fired from AOL > > False. > > Jon Miller the CEO of AOL was fired and I left in solidarity within 24 > hours. That's how I do I'm loyal. I started working with a fairly > well known venture capital firm with ten days of that. > > Netscape was being shutdown when folks at AOL asked me what I'd do > with it. I said I would build an editorialized version of digg where > the news was fact-checked. We did, it worked. The only reason they > moved it to it's own domain--from what I've been told--is that it is > more valuable with a new name (i.e. in terms of a sale) and that > redirecting Netscape's audience to AOL.com is highly profitable > because AOL.COM is the most profitable part of the empire (and social > news sites have a harder time making money). > > > 3. Building a site called Mahalo which is suffering badly and no one > > likes. > > The 1.5 million uniques who've come in the last 30 days (our fifth > month) might disagree with you. :-) > > In terms of Veronica you can be sure she has a much better deal than > the one she had at CNET. You can also be sure she has much more > resources behind her than ever. > > Good luck with that second show. > > all the best j > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
Jason. do I read this correctly? Somebody left a $1,200 job for you? I'm hoping this wasn't a full time job because that is so poverty level. Bring him up to say $1,400 per month? --- Jason McCabe Calacanis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Andrew Baron > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Speaking of Jason, he's most known for: > > Oh boy... I probably shouldn't even respond to > something so libelous. > However, this is so false I've got to correct it. > > > > 1. Stealing the idea and the people from Gizmodo > to make the > > identical knock off- Engagdget > > False. > > I didn't steal the idea because the idea was Peter > Rojas'. Nick Denton > back Peter's idea first in the form of Gizmodo, we > (the weblogs, Inc > team) backed it second in the form of Engadget. > > For background, I offered Peter Rojas equity in > Weblogs, Inc. and he > gladly left his ~$1,200 a month job with Nick Denton > at Gizmodo. Nick > Denton promised Peter equity and never gave it him, > we did. We > invested our own money into Engadget which > quickly--thanks to Peter > and his team--grew to 3x the size of the incumbent > Gizmodo. > > We sold Weblogs, Inc. (and without getting into > exact details) Peter > became a millionaire over night. > > > > 2. Not paying employees fair wages. > > False. > > What are you basing this on? We paid hundreds of > folks at Weblogs, > Inc. per month well over six figures for years. We > paid the best rates > in the blogging business (better than or as good as > Denton depending > on the time). When AOL bought Weblogs, Inc. we hired > around 20-30 > folks full-time. > > > > 3. Trying to steal Amanda from Rocketboom (only > one day after news > > broke) > > False. > > How could we steal her if she left? She was a free > agent and looking > for work. AOL really wanted to hire her so we made > her an offer (a > very nice large offer). She took another large offer > from ABC's. > > Are people not allowed to make offers? Would you > rather talented folks > not get offers when they've achieved success? After > working for you > should Amanda never work again? I'm confused. > > > > 4. Trying to steal top posters from Digg for > Netscape > > False. > > We offered the top posters from digg pay for work > they had previously > not been paid for. We paid ~40 of them to work on > Netscape/Propeller > doing things like putting in high-quality stories, > taking our false > stories and spam, and cleaning up the mess that is > social news > sometimes. It was a really good idea and Propeller > is the second > largest social news site in the world. > > > > 2. Killing Netscape by making it into a Diggclone > and then getting > > fired from AOL > > False. > > Jon Miller the CEO of AOL was fired and I left in > solidarity within 24 > hours. That's how I do I'm loyal. I started > working with a fairly > well known venture capital firm with ten days of > that. > > Netscape was being shutdown when folks at AOL asked > me what I'd do > with it. I said I would build an editorialized > version of digg where > the news was fact-checked. We did, it worked. The > only reason they > moved it to it's own domain--from what I've been > told--is that it is > more valuable with a new name (i.e. in terms of a > sale) and that > redirecting Netscape's audience to AOL.com is highly > profitable > because AOL.COM is the most profitable part of the > empire (and social > news sites have a harder time making money). > > > 3. Building a site called Mahalo which is > suffering badly and no one > > likes. > > The 1.5 million uniques who've come in the last 30 > days (our fifth > month) might disagree with you. :-) > > In terms of Veronica you can be sure she has a much > better deal than > the one she had at CNET. You can also be sure she > has much more > resources behind her than ever. > > Good luck with that second show. > > all the best j > > Jimmy CraicHead TVVideo Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Craic and Cocktails www.jchtv.com Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/sports;_ylt=At9_qDKvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7ntAcJ
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
I am seeing the posts rolling in now about taking this off list as I am just about to publish the below. I'd like to go ahead and publish it, I think its relevant. It has to do with videoblogging, blogging, history of the space and people who are involved: On Nov 13, 2007, at 10:50 AM, Jason McCabe Calacanis wrote: > Oh boy... I probably shouldn't even respond to something so libelous. > However, this is so false I've got to correct it. > > > 1. Stealing the idea and the people from Gizmodo to make the > > identical knock off- Engagdget > > False. > > The point I was trying to make though, is that you didn't do anything innovative or new, you just take one thing and clone it exactly the same. This is fine Jason, Im just saying you do business by knocking- off others. This is not interesting to me and I have found in my life that people who do this are usually selfish at the expense of others. > > 2. Not paying employees fair wages. > > False. > But you write: "better than or as good as Denton" I rest my case. > > > > > 3. Trying to steal Amanda from Rocketboom (only one day after news > > broke) > > False. > > > Are people not allowed to make offers? Would you rather talented folks > not get offers when they've achieved success? After working for you > should Amanda never work again? I'm confused. Your confused because you don't seem to have any understanding of the social element. Its just really rude and not supportive, Jason. Its selfish because you always think you have so much more to offer and in that case you knew nothing at all about what was going on or who we were. Imagine that the news broke that you and your wife were having problems and then the next day, your business partner called her up for a date. Yea, I know, this is not about love affairs, but there is a social element involved and you have repeatedly shown disrespect for others who are participating and trying to get along in the same space. > > > 4. Trying to steal top posters from Digg for Netscape > > False. > I beg to differ. After a long history of cloning other peoples idea, I think its true that you not only tried to clone digg and failed miserably, but also had the audacity to goto Digg to try to sway away the top posters (for miserable salary no less). Again, you didn't understand the social, but by this time, it was the online social you didn't understand. What happened in the end? People revolted against you for trying to "rip of digg" (these are not my words), the site crashed and burned and now you are gone. Say what you will about quitting, its a great self-defense. I know people who have a history of saying they were fired when they quit and saying they quit when they were fired. I guess its just a coincidence that the project you had suggested turned to crap right at the same time. > > 3. Building a site called Mahalo which is suffering badly and no one > > likes. > > The 1.5 million unique who've come in the last 30 days (our fifth > month) might disagree with you. :-) > Out of 1.5 million, where are the positive reviews? I have never seen a single positive review of Mahalo. Ever. I know you must have a few Jason, can you point us to a really good review of Mahalo by someone who really understands the space? Just one good one - there must be one? > In terms of Veronica you can be sure she has a much better deal than > the one she had at CNET. You can also be sure she has much more > resources behind her than ever. > Great. More salary than Nick Denton pays, and better salary than CNET. Not exactly something to boast about. So why are you the one here doing the work? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
So what we should really be asking is, "How do I get on TV?" BRB...loading pistol. I agree with most of this though. When I started doing this a few years ago, that question would have sounded like the antithesis of what everyone was trying to accomplish, trying to break into a walled garden. Now it sounds more like a utilitarian question, like "How do I get my enclosures to show up in iTunes?" That said, the television world has a lot to lose by letting the huddled masses in under their tent. I doubt the TV+Netvideo marriage going to happen as soon as people think. AQ On Nov 13, 2007 11:22 AM, Eric Rice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One current project I haven't talked too much about has to do with > delivering audio and video content to set-top boxes, not those novelty > ones like slingboxes and such, but more of the XBOX, Playstation and > Wii (two of which have Opera-based browsing with Flash support, two > have hard drives and such). The audience is there. It's hard, but the > audience is there. Will we collectively be willing to do the hard work > to get the audience, or do we want the half-assed tech ethic of 'slap > that crap together and pray'. > > That said, I believe certain content has advantages over others. Do a > show about gaming, sex, cars or any of the 'religious' topics, and it > will help. I'd love to know what the Escapist's video 'Zero > Punctuation' gets as far as traffic because it's so painfully funny. > Want to make money and get a huge audience? Do a Justin Timberlake > fancast. There's a reason that MuggleCast and others are hits. Ironic, > really. > > I also will support (but not like) the idea that hot chicks and TV > training help. Look at some of the big shows. Then flip a coin. Of > course there will be exceptions, and we can deconstruct all day, but > when we do that, we're not quite normal, are we? When Amanda and > Rocketboom split, you could almost scientifically see the gaps in how > the content (and her) were perceived based on closeness to the > epicenter (we were s smart and intellectual on this list, and in > the distant blogosphere it was 'uh, what?' and in the mass space (USA > Today blog comments) it was flat out retarded. > > I'm still waiting for good hi-definition content come out of this > spacem, because I, like many fat bloated americans, enjoy sitting on > my ass in front of my home theater (this goes totally against the > indiepunkish ethos of 'well I don't owwn a television', etc) and > having my ears tantalized in 7.1 surround sound. > > There are three types of content I adore-- Video, video and sometimes > video. Sometimes it's on YouTube, sometimes it's buried in a forum > someplace, and other times, it comes from a TV studio or DVD (my god I > love Entourage, don't you?). > > We are the Content Creation Class-- we're kinda different than > everyone else (read: consumers). But damn, how does your audio podcast > compete with the non-interface of turning on satellite radio in the > car? Apples to Oranges, and our risk for elitism just *hates* that > kind of reality. :) > > ER > > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On 13 Nov 2007, at 11:38, Bill Cammack wrote: > > > I wondered how to drag all of those people, aimlessly streaming > > past me, into viewing an online show. > > > > --- > > > > Set top box. That's the only way you'll get people watching online > > shows. I don't know if you use the term 'set top box' in the US. I > > just mean a box that plugs into your TV. One that'd allow people to > > watch ordinary network shows on their widescreen tv and also surf > > internet TV. > > > > People will not watch shows on a computer. Do you know anybody who > > watches anything on a computer? Other than the odd bored moment > > surfing old TV shows on Youtube? My friends and family will watch my > > videoblog, mostly because I've forced them to by subscribing them via > > email, but they won't then go on to watch any of the vlogs I link to, > > or click on the URLs of people who comment. > > > > Computers are full of distractions, and are quite hard things to use > > if you want to concentrate on or relax to motion picture > > entertainment. The TV / Couch combo works. I firmly believe it's > > just a matter of someone bringing internet video to the couch. Until > > then, forget it. > > > > Rupert > > http://twittervlog.tv/ > > http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > -- Adam Quirk Wreck & Salvage 551.208.4644 Brooklyn, NY http://wreckandsalvage.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
RE: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
Hi. Sorry to say this, but I cant see how this conversation belongs on the list now. Its got little to do with videoblogging. _ From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason McCabe Calacanis Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 9:51 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)? --- In HYPERLINK "mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com"[EMAIL PROTECTED], Andrew Baron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Speaking of Jason, he's most known for: Oh boy... I probably shouldn't even respond to something so libelous. However, this is so false I've got to correct it. > 1. Stealing the idea and the people from Gizmodo to make the > identical knock off- Engagdget False. I didn't steal the idea because the idea was Peter Rojas'. Nick Denton back Peter's idea first in the form of Gizmodo, we (the weblogs, Inc team) backed it second in the form of Engadget. For background, I offered Peter Rojas equity in Weblogs, Inc. and he gladly left his ~$1,200 a month job with Nick Denton at Gizmodo. Nick Denton promised Peter equity and never gave it him, we did. We invested our own money into Engadget which quickly--thanks to Peter and his team--grew to 3x the size of the incumbent Gizmodo. We sold Weblogs, Inc. (and without getting into exact details) Peter became a millionaire over night. > 2. Not paying employees fair wages. False. What are you basing this on? We paid hundreds of folks at Weblogs, Inc. per month well over six figures for years. We paid the best rates in the blogging business (better than or as good as Denton depending on the time). When AOL bought Weblogs, Inc. we hired around 20-30 folks full-time. > 3. Trying to steal Amanda from Rocketboom (only one day after news > broke) False. How could we steal her if she left? She was a free agent and looking for work. AOL really wanted to hire her so we made her an offer (a very nice large offer). She took another large offer from ABC's. Are people not allowed to make offers? Would you rather talented folks not get offers when they've achieved success? After working for you should Amanda never work again? I'm confused. > 4. Trying to steal top posters from Digg for Netscape False. We offered the top posters from digg pay for work they had previously not been paid for. We paid ~40 of them to work on Netscape/Propeller doing things like putting in high-quality stories, taking our false stories and spam, and cleaning up the mess that is social news sometimes. It was a really good idea and Propeller is the second largest social news site in the world. > 2. Killing Netscape by making it into a Diggclone and then getting > fired from AOL False. Jon Miller the CEO of AOL was fired and I left in solidarity within 24 hours. That's how I do I'm loyal. I started working with a fairly well known venture capital firm with ten days of that. Netscape was being shutdown when folks at AOL asked me what I'd do with it. I said I would build an editorialized version of digg where the news was fact-checked. We did, it worked. The only reason they moved it to it's own domain--from what I've been told--is that it is more valuable with a new name (i.e. in terms of a sale) and that redirecting Netscape's audience to AOL.com is highly profitable because AOL.COM is the most profitable part of the empire (and social news sites have a harder time making money). > 3. Building a site called Mahalo which is suffering badly and no one > likes. The 1.5 million uniques who've come in the last 30 days (our fifth month) might disagree with you. :-) In terms of Veronica you can be sure she has a much better deal than the one she had at CNET. You can also be sure she has much more resources behind her than ever. Good luck with that second show. all the best j No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.31/1128 - Release Date: 11/13/2007 11:09 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.31/1128 - Release Date: 11/13/2007 11:09 AM [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
Ive cross posted some more on this topic: "Why Mahalo is Fundementally Flawed" http://dembot.com/post/19305296 On Nov 13, 2007, at 10:10 AM, John Coffey wrote: > Wow, Andrew comes out bitch slapping! Let's book this > on Jerry Springer! > > > Speaking of Jason, he's most known for: > > > > 1. Stealing the idea and the people from Gizmodo to > > make the > > identical knock off- Engagdget > > 2. Not paying employees fair wages. > > 3. Trying to steal Amanda from Rocketboom (only one > > day after news > > broke) > > 4. Trying to steal top posters from Digg for > > Netscape > > 2. Killing Netscape by making it into a Diggclone > > and then getting > > fired from AOL > > 3. Building a site called Mahalo which is suffering > > badly and no one > > likes. > > > > Not just based on these few examples which have been > > extremely > > destructive to the world, but also based on his > > regular, > > stereotypical activity of attacking people instead > > of their work, I > > just want to throw out that Jason's only means of > > being popular is > > exactly this: taking and causing conflict. > > > > Look no further than Ann Coulter. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
- Original Message - From: "Rupert" (snip) > People will not watch shows on a computer. Do you know anybody who > watches anything on a computer? (snip) Yes .. ME .. I watch most of my TV on my computer. I have a TV tuner for my computer. Richard Amirault Boston, MA, USA http://n1jdu.org http://bostonfandom.org http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7hf9u2ZdlQ
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
Wow, Andrew comes out bitch slapping! Let's book this on Jerry Springer! > Speaking of Jason, he's most known for: > > 1. Stealing the idea and the people from Gizmodo to > make the > identical knock off- Engagdget > 2. Not paying employees fair wages. > 3. Trying to steal Amanda from Rocketboom (only one > day after news > broke) > 4. Trying to steal top posters from Digg for > Netscape > 2. Killing Netscape by making it into a Diggclone > and then getting > fired from AOL > 3. Building a site called Mahalo which is suffering > badly and no one > likes. > > Not just based on these few examples which have been > extremely > destructive to the world, but also based on his > regular, > stereotypical activity of attacking people instead > of their work, I > just want to throw out that Jason's only means of > being popular is > exactly this: taking and causing conflict. > > Look no further than Ann Coulter. It works great for > her. If they > can't do it based on their own good ideas and they > cant do it while > collaborating with others, at least they can do it > by shitting all > over everyone. > > Usually a good post has a lot of conversation but > doesn't cause > others to speak out so negatively at the author. > This is likely the > reason why there have been SO MANY bad reactions to > Jason's post: > When one lives their life so selfishly while > attacking and being > brutal, its destructive to everyone around because > it causes damage > and rubs off on the rest off. > > My original answer to the original thread was likely > not considered. > The best way to grow your audience is not by > spamming everyone. Its > by improving your show. At this point Jason, you > really shouldn't be > asking any other questions until you get that one > worked out. You got > Veronica, she's great. You should be paying Veronica > more, you need > to invest in some better equipment and get some > production help. How > can you improve the show? > > We ask ourselves this question every single day and > it continues to > receive the most concern out of every thing we do. > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been > removed] > > Jimmy CraicHead TVVideo Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Craic and Cocktails www.jchtv.com Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
I watched last week's HEROS on a computer and last night's HEROS on a TiVO. Tim Tim Street Creator/Executive Producer French Maid TV The Viral Video of How Tos by French Maids http://frenchmaidtv.com Subscribe for FREE at: http://www.frenchmaidtv.com/itunes MY BLOG: http://1timstreet.blogspot.com/ On Nov 13, 2007, at 6:29 AM, Kary Rogers wrote: > On Nov 13, 2007 7:34 AM, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > People will not watch shows on a computer. Do you know anybody who > > watches anything on a computer? > > > > Personally, I don't watch shows on a computer (except for online- > only shows, > then it's Miro), I prefer sitting on my couch and staring at the > TV. It's > how I grew up and it's a hard habit to change. I imagine that's the > case > for many of us. But I have several younger, college-aged friends > and they > often watch TV shows on their computer at NBC's or ABC's website. > This is > likely because they don't have a DVR but either way, I think the > younger > generation is more apt to feel comfortable doing this. > > -- > Kary Rogers > http://goodcommitment.tv > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
On Nov 13, 2007 7:34 AM, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >People will not watch shows on a computer. Do you know anybody who > watches anything on a computer? > Personally, I don't watch shows on a computer (except for online-only shows, then it's Miro), I prefer sitting on my couch and staring at the TV. It's how I grew up and it's a hard habit to change. I imagine that's the case for many of us. But I have several younger, college-aged friends and they often watch TV shows on their computer at NBC's or ABC's website. This is likely because they don't have a DVR but either way, I think the younger generation is more apt to feel comfortable doing this. -- Kary Rogers http://goodcommitment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
> On 13 Nov 2007, at 11:38, Bill Cammack wrote: > I wondered how to drag all of those people, aimlessly streaming past me, into viewing an online show. --- Set top box. That's the only way you'll get people watching online shows. I don't know if you use the term 'set top box' in the US. I just mean a box that plugs into your TV. One that'd allow people to watch ordinary network shows on their widescreen tv and also surf internet TV. People will not watch shows on a computer. Do you know anybody who watches anything on a computer? Other than the odd bored moment surfing old TV shows on Youtube? My friends and family will watch my videoblog, mostly because I've forced them to by subscribing them via email, but they won't then go on to watch any of the vlogs I link to, or click on the URLs of people who comment. Computers are full of distractions, and are quite hard things to use if you want to concentrate on or relax to motion picture entertainment. The TV / Couch combo works. I firmly believe it's just a matter of someone bringing internet video to the couch. Until then, forget it. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
BTW, Rocketboom is in it's 4th year now and for awhile I felt as though I was falling behind do to getting stuck in the lawsuit with Amanda (just ended 2 months ago), and not being able to get a network up and running like the other shows did such as Adam Curry's, Diggnation and Frederator. But now that that's all over and Rocketboom is 100% free, in retrospect, Im so glad that it didn't happen because these networks are doing it all wrong, I think. I would of likely been doing the same thing that they are doing too. Most people who know me know I haven't slept or vacationed in years because I keep running to get to the next step. We haven't relented, but we are no longer racing against the environment. Rocketboom is not a Web 2.0 business, its a media business and media will be around for a long time. WIth this in mind, and whereas the other networks have only one breadwinner and a lot of draggers, we have decided to go at our own pace in order to make sure that show #2 is just as important if not more important than #1. On Nov 12, 2007, at 4:43 PM, Steve Watkins wrote: > Whats really so bad about twit 57 anyway? I tried to listen to twit > once and couldnt take it, > but I just watched the video version of twit 57 all the way > through. Sure, there were some > moments where too many people talking at once wasnt good, but I > found the show > interesting. Unless the video version is edited, I didnt spot any > legendary row, just a mildly > spirited discussion, which was fairly revealing and thus interesting. > > And the Murdoch comments were nothing compared to the brief moment > at the end of > 2006 and start of 2007 where a few 'would be media moguls' stated > their aspirations in > even more ott fashion, only for those plans to wither away without > much fanfare or > explanation. > > I got rather passionate about such things at the time, disgusted by > the idea that a new > breed of gatekeepers were trying to bring themselves into > existence, because that seemed > like it would destroy some of the things that make blogging and > vlogging have such > potential. So whilst I admired the fact that rocketboom didnt seem > to be selling out in the > usual sense, for money, I became disturbed by some possible signs > that Mr Baron was > seeking to achieve a different sort of power. > > In a strange way Im sort of sad that nothing much has happened, I > was looking forward to > seeing what would occur. I imagine to witness the emergence of a > potential mogul of the > new media world, we need a far more ruthless character with an iron > will, and a plan that > is more detail than dream, to give it a go. None of the a- > list/controvertial/opinionated/whatever characters, or your > confrontations, live up to the > hype. > > Perhaps the new media dominator must also have a good sense of > timing, and will wait till > things grow, and a lot of people do the hard work, before making > their move. > > 2007, not what was expected, and as I said before I think the > wobbly economy could > make 2008 a year of shattered dreams, for those who couldnt keep > their dreams to a > realistic size. Long live the sustainable ones, with their feet on > the ground! > > Regarding Mahalo and promotion, I would like to know stuff about > promotion options that > are well beyond the reach of the individual or those with more > modest funding etc. Do you > ever consider advertising in traditional mass media? I know that > back in 2005 or whenever > the year was that some bvloggers got a lot of mainstream press, > some were surprised > how little difference a story in the NYT or wherever, would make to > their stats. And here in > the UK Ive not seen anything like the number of TV adverts for > dotcoms as I did during > the original bubble. But Im also not convinced that web-only > promotion works on a huge > scale all that often, seems very hit & miss, and I even wonder > whether the notion of mass > marketing will stand the test of time. What if everybody is on the > race to the bottom, the > only way is down, etc? Still taht would probably fit well with the > needs of plnet earth, the > end of 'god is growth' and a return to saner scales in all things? > > Cheers > > Steve Elbows > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jason McCabe Calacanis" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, John Coffey > wrote: > > > > > > I'm with you Richard. I suggest Jason have lunch with > > > Andrew Baron and relive the worst TWIT ever. > > > > I think you're referring to Rupert Murdoch?!? ;-) > > > > TWiT 57 is legendary now... Leo talks about "not pulling a 57" or > "let's not 57 this one.." > in > > the pre-interview. Very funny. > > > > j > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
On Nov 12, 2007, at 4:43 PM, Steve Watkins wrote: > So whilst I admired the fact that rocketboom didn't seem to be > selling out in the > usual sense, for money, I became disturbed by some possible signs > that Mr Baron was > seeking to achieve a different sort of power. AH YES!!! Its all about power, mwahahahahaha! But what kind of Power did you say!? A DIFFERENT kind?? M I like the sound of this . . . . A NEW kind of Power! BETTER THAN MONEY!!! Speaking of power Steve, I dare you to not respond to a single thread on this list. Ill bet you can't do it in under 5000 words. Speaking of Jason, he's most known for: 1. Stealing the idea and the people from Gizmodo to make the identical knock off- Engagdget 2. Not paying employees fair wages. 3. Trying to steal Amanda from Rocketboom (only one day after news broke) 4. Trying to steal top posters from Digg for Netscape 2. Killing Netscape by making it into a Diggclone and then getting fired from AOL 3. Building a site called Mahalo which is suffering badly and no one likes. Not just based on these few examples which have been extremely destructive to the world, but also based on his regular, stereotypical activity of attacking people instead of their work, I just want to throw out that Jason's only means of being popular is exactly this: taking and causing conflict. Look no further than Ann Coulter. It works great for her. If they can't do it based on their own good ideas and they cant do it while collaborating with others, at least they can do it by shitting all over everyone. Usually a good post has a lot of conversation but doesn't cause others to speak out so negatively at the author. This is likely the reason why there have been SO MANY bad reactions to Jason's post: When one lives their life so selfishly while attacking and being brutal, its destructive to everyone around because it causes damage and rubs off on the rest off. My original answer to the original thread was likely not considered. The best way to grow your audience is not by spamming everyone. Its by improving your show. At this point Jason, you really shouldn't be asking any other questions until you get that one worked out. You got Veronica, she's great. You should be paying Veronica more, you need to invest in some better equipment and get some production help. How can you improve the show? We ask ourselves this question every single day and it continues to receive the most concern out of every thing we do. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
As usual, Mr. Taylor, you bring up the proper questions. Who in this space deals with Boomer women? Nobody. Yet. We Boomer chicks got time and money and talent ripe for pickin'. Automakers begin to get *that point. Katie Couric and "The View" type hosts don't suck me and my generation in. What will? Not tits, that's for sure :) My point about tits is that audiences have to evolve (thanks for using the word, Meiser) in order to appreciate how vulnerable they are to manipulation based on the breast and get beyond it. Getting beyond the animal impulse is a good thing and will set you free. Unfortunately, being free is devalued these days. I envision a Boomer community based around teaching / learning / sharing all the creative digital tools of the trade (audio / video) whereby the Boomers can get their strut on creatively and support one another in the process. Using tits to sell is like shooting fish in a barrel; where's the challenge in it? Off to work. Jan On 11/13/07, Jeffrey Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Saying sex sells is only a small part of a longstanding and more > comprehensive theory in advertising that creating a somewhat realistic > aspirational arrival point for an audience is what sells. This is why we > have women presenting on many of these shows that are good looking, but > more > within reach for male audiences than a runway model would be. The idea > that > these male viewers have somewhat of a "chance" keeps eyes on the screen, > or > at least encourages the eyes to return to the screen. When looking across > the advertising spectrum and into more general interest brands that run > across demographics, you see that this theory has manifested in more > diverse > ways than the proliferation of sexuality. There's nothing overtly or > covertly sexual in Apple's marketing of the iPod, for example, but there > is > something overtly sexy about how an iPod is marketed. > > I personally think it's a bit silly to keep repeating the > girl-tells-us-about-tech model over and over, lazily avoiding the > development of new audiences. I'd love to get some research on this, but I > hypothesize that these types of shows (Webb Alert, Geekbrief, etc. > Rocketboom is a bit different because there's more of a hipster demo > going > on there) are being watched by the same slowly-growing crowd. > > I am looking forward to seeing who's going to be brave enough to throw > away > or at least expand on the girl-on-a-screen model when it comes to tech > reporting on the web, creating a larger market than the present niche by > providing aspirational arrival points for more than just males, primarily > 18-25, maybe 35. These shows have mastered a niche, but have are not > bringing other niches to the table as building blocks to a larger and more > general audience. Entities that appeal to women, especially young women, > and > the heavy-spending and freetime-rich baby boomers as they retire at > increasing rates will do the best. Repeating the same model just because > it's been successful before will not do that. > > And for Jason I get your response and agree with much of what you say. > But > I think you also get that creating a context in which achieving what you > outlined in your response can live by explain exactly what you did in > response to me is very important, albeit easily forgotten tedious at > times. > > > > On 13/11/2007, danielmcvicar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Mike > > I was flip, but sex is what does sell, in advertising, etc. > > However, once it is sold, what are you bringign. Not just sex, but a > > service. You must > > give some nutrition with dessert, and once you bring people into the > > community, listen, > > get involved, and ultimately lead. > > > > This is a good discussion > > D > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com , > > "Mike Meiser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > And don't listen to Daniel McVicar. :) > > > > > > Sorry daniel. Sex sells is B.S. If you want a genuine audience... > > > an audience of makers, participators and creators... like maholo > > > fundamentally needs to survive... you're downplay the overt sexiness > > > of Veronica, and up-play her obvious street cred. Veronica should go > > > all out and be the geek and gaming girl she was born to be... not put > > > on the tight fitting shirt and dumb herself down. > > > > > > This is much like the youtube issue earlier. Youtube courts a lot of > > > non-genuine traffic... people there for the crowd and spectacle... > > > people who leave assinine comments and wouldn't watch your show if it > > > wasn't the most popular video of the day. > > > > > > This is VERY often seen amongst many top youtube people. 500,000 hits > > > on one video 11,000 on the next. > > > > > > In the racing world you're only as good as your last race... in the > > > youtube world your only really as big as your least viewed video. That > > > is more reflective of your real audience. > > > > > > In o
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
Saying sex sells is only a small part of a longstanding and more comprehensive theory in advertising that creating a somewhat realistic aspirational arrival point for an audience is what sells. This is why we have women presenting on many of these shows that are good looking, but more within reach for male audiences than a runway model would be. The idea that these male viewers have somewhat of a "chance" keeps eyes on the screen, or at least encourages the eyes to return to the screen. When looking across the advertising spectrum and into more general interest brands that run across demographics, you see that this theory has manifested in more diverse ways than the proliferation of sexuality. There's nothing overtly or covertly sexual in Apple's marketing of the iPod, for example, but there is something overtly sexy about how an iPod is marketed. I personally think it's a bit silly to keep repeating the girl-tells-us-about-tech model over and over, lazily avoiding the development of new audiences. I'd love to get some research on this, but I hypothesize that these types of shows (Webb Alert, Geekbrief, etc. Rocketboom is a bit different because there's more of a hipster demo going on there) are being watched by the same slowly-growing crowd. I am looking forward to seeing who's going to be brave enough to throw away or at least expand on the girl-on-a-screen model when it comes to tech reporting on the web, creating a larger market than the present niche by providing aspirational arrival points for more than just males, primarily 18-25, maybe 35. These shows have mastered a niche, but have are not bringing other niches to the table as building blocks to a larger and more general audience. Entities that appeal to women, especially young women, and the heavy-spending and freetime-rich baby boomers as they retire at increasing rates will do the best. Repeating the same model just because it's been successful before will not do that. And for Jason I get your response and agree with much of what you say. But I think you also get that creating a context in which achieving what you outlined in your response can live by explain exactly what you did in response to me is very important, albeit easily forgotten tedious at times. On 13/11/2007, danielmcvicar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi Mike > I was flip, but sex is what does sell, in advertising, etc. > However, once it is sold, what are you bringign. Not just sex, but a > service. You must > give some nutrition with dessert, and once you bring people into the > community, listen, > get involved, and ultimately lead. > > This is a good discussion > D > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com , > "Mike Meiser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > And don't listen to Daniel McVicar. :) > > > > Sorry daniel. Sex sells is B.S. If you want a genuine audience... > > an audience of makers, participators and creators... like maholo > > fundamentally needs to survive... you're downplay the overt sexiness > > of Veronica, and up-play her obvious street cred. Veronica should go > > all out and be the geek and gaming girl she was born to be... not put > > on the tight fitting shirt and dumb herself down. > > > > This is much like the youtube issue earlier. Youtube courts a lot of > > non-genuine traffic... people there for the crowd and spectacle... > > people who leave assinine comments and wouldn't watch your show if it > > wasn't the most popular video of the day. > > > > This is VERY often seen amongst many top youtube people. 500,000 hits > > on one video 11,000 on the next. > > > > In the racing world you're only as good as your last race... in the > > youtube world your only really as big as your least viewed video. That > > is more reflective of your real audience. > > > > In order for maholo to survive it must tap into that culture of > > creators, makers, participators... communicators. > > > > -Mike > > > > On 11/12/07, danielmcvicar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi Jason > > > Your view level is pretty good, your show looks very good. > > > > > > If you want more views, put it across the board on multiple servers > and hosts. You'd > be > > > surprised at how many you can get at Daily Motion. > > > > > > You may also experiment with short sweet and sexy promos. Across the > board. > > > > > > Sex is what attracts attention the most, the hook is something that > you have an > instinct > > > for. > > > > > > Then, as a daily show, you are a service, liek Rocketboom, more than a > brand like > French > > > Maid TV. Your audience will find a certain comfort in watching the > videos daily. > > > > > > What I enjoyed with The Late Nite Mash experiment was a surprise to > me...coming > from > > > audience counting media. It was the collaboration that I found online > and in the > > > community. > > > > > > All the best with your show. > > > > > > Daniel > > > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com , > "Jason McCabe Calacanis" wrote: > > > > > > > > We la
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
yep robyn jason was the first person i thought of since he had justhired my friend veronica around the time i decided to go thru with the winnies i emailed him but did not get a response On Nov 12, 2007 8:01 PM, Robyn Tippins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One technique might be to sponsor the coolest videoblog awards ever... > ;) > > -- > Robyn Tippins > > Community Manager, MyBlogLog - Yahoo! > Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com > > > On Nov 12, 2007 7:55 PM, Mike Meiser <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > And don't listen to Daniel McVicar. :) > > > > Sorry daniel. Sex sells is B.S. If you want a genuine audience... > > an audience of makers, participators and creators... like maholo > > fundamentally needs to survive... you're downplay the overt sexiness > > of Veronica, and up-play her obvious street cred. Veronica should go > > all out and be the geek and gaming girl she was born to be... not put > > on the tight fitting shirt and dumb herself down. > > > > This is much like the youtube issue earlier. Youtube courts a lot of > > non-genuine traffic... people there for the crowd and spectacle... > > people who leave assinine comments and wouldn't watch your show if it > > wasn't the most popular video of the day. > > > > This is VERY often seen amongst many top youtube people. 500,000 hits > > on one video 11,000 on the next. > > > > In the racing world you're only as good as your last race... in the > > youtube world your only really as big as your least viewed video. That > > is more reflective of your real audience. > > > > In order for maholo to survive it must tap into that culture of > > creators, makers, participators... communicators. > > > > -Mike > > > > On 11/12/07, danielmcvicar <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > wrote: > > > Hi Jason > > > Your view level is pretty good, your show looks very good. > > > > > > If you want more views, put it across the board on multiple servers > and > > hosts. You'd be > > > surprised at how many you can get at Daily Motion. > > > > > > You may also experiment with short sweet and sexy promos. Across the > > board. > > > > > > Sex is what attracts attention the most, the hook is something that > you > > have an instinct > > > for. > > > > > > Then, as a daily show, you are a service, liek Rocketboom, more than a > > brand like French > > > Maid TV. Your audience will find a certain comfort in watching the > > videos daily. > > > > > > What I enjoyed with The Late Nite Mash experiment was a surprise to > > me...coming from > > > audience counting media. It was the collaboration that I found online > > and in the > > > community. > > > > > > All the best with your show. > > > > > > Daniel > > > > > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com > > > , > > > "Jason McCabe Calacanis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > We launched Mahalo Daily with Veronica Belmont last week as some of > > > > you might know. You can find the show at http://daily.mahalo.com and > > > > on iTunes. We're hosting it at Blip.Tv (for now) but considering > some > > > > other options since folks have been pinging us. > > > > > > > > I'm looking for some advice on what we can do--other than make the > > > > best show we can--to grow the view to 100k+ a day quickly. > > > > > > > > We did over 120k views in the first week (about 12-37k views for > each > > > > of the first four shows) which is much more than I thought we would. > > > > We've got our iTunes page running and we're syndicating the videos > to > > > > YouTube and Facebook. We've also started a Facebook, Ning, Flickr, > and > > > > Twitter groups/accounts to compliment the program. They are getting > > > > nice pickup. > > > > > > > > On a business level, I'm wondering if there is anyone out there who > > > > can bring in 100-250k views a day for show, perhaps in exchange for > > > > exclusive hosting rights/advertising rights or something (i.e. > Yahoo, > > > > AOL, YouTube, etc). > > > > > > > > Anyone have an distribution tips? > > > > Has anyone done deals like this? > > > > > > > > Mahalo for any help... > > > > > > > > best J > > > > > > > > i blogged about this here: > > > > > > > http://www.calacanis.com/2007/11/11/congrats-to-tyler-and-veronica-on-an- > > > amazing-first-week-for-mahalo/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
No, I think we're pretty much on the same page bill. In fact I think you've clarified the point. I should say that diversity is the key. Even though youtube doesn't for example deliver loyal audiences it does provide for the visibility to attract loyal audiences. Neither one end of the spectrum or the other is good. Reaching a diverse audience is good, because you need to be visible enough for your core audience to find you. In the same way sex sells. If that's all you have in this space you've got sh*t. Why... because increasingly a host is going to have to have a more and more shrewd personality... be more of a geek. Have more knowlege of the subject matter. This is not a knock at all, but when Amanda started working at rocketboom she new nothing about online culture. She was however a quick learner. She didn't have much street cred though, nor did she need it. Veronica on the other hand has tremendously geeky interests and cred. She's not just a pretty face. This is the trend... more cred, more shrewdness, more substance, more passion for the subject matter. Ultimately that will rule out over the whole pretty face routine. I mean, look at Leo Laporte. ;) But that's another tangent... the tech curmudgeon, the non-threatening host that makes everything safe for all the non-geeks... but that's a whole nother' email. It goes with the maturity of the space. I didn't finish that last email the way i had intended either. Sex is definitely not everything in this space, but of course a little sexiness never hurt anyone's numbers. -Mike On 11/12/07, Bill Cammack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Meiser" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > And don't listen to Daniel McVicar. :) > > > > Sorry daniel. Sex sells is B.S. If you want a genuine audience... > > an audience of makers, participators and creators... like maholo > > fundamentally needs to survive... you're downplay the overt sexiness > > of Veronica, and up-play her obvious street cred. Veronica should go > > all out and be the geek and gaming girl she was born to be... not put > > on the tight fitting shirt and dumb herself down. > > I agree, and disagree. :) > > First of all, *obviously* sex sells. It always has, and it always > will. In LIFE. Not just in video blogs. :) > > Maybe we should make a list of the 'top' video blogs with female leads > and the 'top' video blogs with male leads. > > The part where I agree with you is that you need for the chick to have > a personality, AND either be able to come up with cool dialogue > herself or have the ability to deliver what the ghost-writers make up > for her. > > Dan's not saying for anyone to "act like a bimbo" or "dumb anything > down". The fact remains that if you remove chicks as the hosts on > your shows, your views are going to plummet. > > In an ideal world, you can put anyone that looks like anything in > front of a camera and have people tune in on a regular basis. Until > then, attractive women will always be more in demand and receive more > attention than unattractive women or guys in general. > > Please feel free to prove me wrong. :) If you can, I'll admit that > you've changed my mind, publicly, in this same forum where I'm making > these assertions. :D > > -- > Bill Cammack > http://CammackMediaGroup.com > > > > > This is much like the youtube issue earlier. Youtube courts a lot of > > non-genuine traffic... people there for the crowd and spectacle... > > people who leave assinine comments and wouldn't watch your show if it > > wasn't the most popular video of the day. > > > > This is VERY often seen amongst many top youtube people. 500,000 hits > > on one video 11,000 on the next. > > > > In the racing world you're only as good as your last race... in the > > youtube world your only really as big as your least viewed video. That > > is more reflective of your real audience. > > > > In order for maholo to survive it must tap into that culture of > > creators, makers, participators... communicators. > > > > -Mike > > > > On 11/12/07, danielmcvicar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi Jason > > > Your view level is pretty good, your show looks very good. > > > > > > If you want more views, put it across the board on multiple > servers and hosts. You'd be > > > surprised at how many you can get at Daily Motion. > > > > > > You may also experiment with short sweet and sexy promos. Across > the board. > > > > > > Sex is what attracts attention the most, the hook is something > that you have an instinct > > > for. > > > > > > Then, as a daily show, you are a service, liek Rocketboom, more > than a brand like French > > > Maid TV. Your audience will find a certain comfort in watching > the videos daily. > > > > > > What I enjoyed with The Late Nite Mash experiment was a surprise > to me...coming from > > > audience counting media. It was the collaboration that I found > online and in the > > > community. > > > > > > All th
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
The problem is not that Clacanis should be paying for such advice. The problem is this industry is so little estabished that there's no one he can call to pay for such advice. Where's the "new media consultants" section in the yellow pages.. or even online. Most people who could be consultants aren't because they're doing it... most people who say they're consultants are therefor full of sh*t or they'd be doing it. The very fact that jason is here... is I think proof enough of his genuiness. After all if I wanted to get something done and I had several million dollars the last thing I'd be doing is sitting around with all of you... I'd go find myself an expert and hire them. Time is money, sex sells, and you can't buy good advice. Now go hire Lan Bui. He's wise. Wit, especially sharp wit is really the cornerstone of all that is righteous in this world. Why... because this space is so full of B.S. and irony. Peace, P.S. this will be my final comment ... no more for me on this subject for a while... it's a fun thread though. -Mike On 11/12/07, Jeffrey Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You've successfully launched and sold several media properties, Mr. > Calacanis. You've also got a company, Mahalo, that has a marketing budget. > In my opinion, folks in your league should pay for advice instead of getting > it for free. It's not like you're a Rocketboom or a Epic--FU/Jetset, > starting from the ground up on a shoestring, in the community with the rest > of us, and including us in the conversation by asking one or some of us join > you at Mahalo on a contractural or full-time basis to help you gain > subscribers. You are a not a regular participant on this list, and I've seen > nothing of value come from you since I've been subscribed. While it doesn't > break any rules for you to come ask this question, I find it rather > insulting for you to do so without offering a gig or valuable advice to one > or some of the people in this community. > > At best, you're getting free consulting that devalues the hard-earned > expertise of people here. At worst, you're using this medium as a gimmick to > start conversation about Mahalo Daily. Both are pretty gross. > > And here's my question to the group: > > When does community-based advice to peers end and when does free consulting > to professionals begin? Or, in other words, when do we start devaluing our > own experience and expertise by giving it away gratis to people who could > afford to pay for it? This is my biggest question as social media rises and > communities help more and more with building of companies. > > On 12/11/2007, bordercollieaustralianshepherd < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Jason > > > > Wow ... I just caught up with the whole thread ... damn you! Damn You > > Jason ... LOL > > > > Well I stand by my ideas, but must give you a big nod for self > > promoting in such a sly way ... > > > > Of all of the crap I threw your way ... and having learned this AIN"T > > your first BBQ ... I would work the "Thank You" angle. > > > > Thanks for letting me play > > > > Dave > > > > > > > > > > -- > Jeffrey Taylor > Mobile: +33625497654 > Fax: +33177722734 > Skype: thejeffreytaylor > Googlechat/Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
One technique might be to sponsor the coolest videoblog awards ever... ;) -- Robyn Tippins Community Manager, MyBlogLog - Yahoo! Sleepyblogger.com | Gamingandtech.com On Nov 12, 2007 7:55 PM, Mike Meiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And don't listen to Daniel McVicar. :) > > Sorry daniel. Sex sells is B.S. If you want a genuine audience... > an audience of makers, participators and creators... like maholo > fundamentally needs to survive... you're downplay the overt sexiness > of Veronica, and up-play her obvious street cred. Veronica should go > all out and be the geek and gaming girl she was born to be... not put > on the tight fitting shirt and dumb herself down. > > This is much like the youtube issue earlier. Youtube courts a lot of > non-genuine traffic... people there for the crowd and spectacle... > people who leave assinine comments and wouldn't watch your show if it > wasn't the most popular video of the day. > > This is VERY often seen amongst many top youtube people. 500,000 hits > on one video 11,000 on the next. > > In the racing world you're only as good as your last race... in the > youtube world your only really as big as your least viewed video. That > is more reflective of your real audience. > > In order for maholo to survive it must tap into that culture of > creators, makers, participators... communicators. > > -Mike > > On 11/12/07, danielmcvicar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Hi Jason > > Your view level is pretty good, your show looks very good. > > > > If you want more views, put it across the board on multiple servers and > hosts. You'd be > > surprised at how many you can get at Daily Motion. > > > > You may also experiment with short sweet and sexy promos. Across the > board. > > > > Sex is what attracts attention the most, the hook is something that you > have an instinct > > for. > > > > Then, as a daily show, you are a service, liek Rocketboom, more than a > brand like French > > Maid TV. Your audience will find a certain comfort in watching the > videos daily. > > > > What I enjoyed with The Late Nite Mash experiment was a surprise to > me...coming from > > audience counting media. It was the collaboration that I found online > and in the > > community. > > > > All the best with your show. > > > > Daniel > > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com , > "Jason McCabe Calacanis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > We launched Mahalo Daily with Veronica Belmont last week as some of > > > you might know. You can find the show at http://daily.mahalo.com and > > > on iTunes. We're hosting it at Blip.Tv (for now) but considering some > > > other options since folks have been pinging us. > > > > > > I'm looking for some advice on what we can do--other than make the > > > best show we can--to grow the view to 100k+ a day quickly. > > > > > > We did over 120k views in the first week (about 12-37k views for each > > > of the first four shows) which is much more than I thought we would. > > > We've got our iTunes page running and we're syndicating the videos to > > > YouTube and Facebook. We've also started a Facebook, Ning, Flickr, and > > > Twitter groups/accounts to compliment the program. They are getting > > > nice pickup. > > > > > > On a business level, I'm wondering if there is anyone out there who > > > can bring in 100-250k views a day for show, perhaps in exchange for > > > exclusive hosting rights/advertising rights or something (i.e. Yahoo, > > > AOL, YouTube, etc). > > > > > > Anyone have an distribution tips? > > > Has anyone done deals like this? > > > > > > Mahalo for any help... > > > > > > best J > > > > > > i blogged about this here: > > > > http://www.calacanis.com/2007/11/11/congrats-to-tyler-and-veronica-on-an- > > amazing-first-week-for-mahalo/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
And don't listen to Daniel McVicar. :) Sorry daniel. Sex sells is B.S. If you want a genuine audience... an audience of makers, participators and creators... like maholo fundamentally needs to survive... you're downplay the overt sexiness of Veronica, and up-play her obvious street cred. Veronica should go all out and be the geek and gaming girl she was born to be... not put on the tight fitting shirt and dumb herself down. This is much like the youtube issue earlier. Youtube courts a lot of non-genuine traffic... people there for the crowd and spectacle... people who leave assinine comments and wouldn't watch your show if it wasn't the most popular video of the day. This is VERY often seen amongst many top youtube people. 500,000 hits on one video 11,000 on the next. In the racing world you're only as good as your last race... in the youtube world your only really as big as your least viewed video. That is more reflective of your real audience. In order for maholo to survive it must tap into that culture of creators, makers, participators... communicators. -Mike On 11/12/07, danielmcvicar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Jason > Your view level is pretty good, your show looks very good. > > If you want more views, put it across the board on multiple servers and > hosts. You'd be > surprised at how many you can get at Daily Motion. > > You may also experiment with short sweet and sexy promos. Across the board. > > Sex is what attracts attention the most, the hook is something that you have > an instinct > for. > > Then, as a daily show, you are a service, liek Rocketboom, more than a brand > like French > Maid TV. Your audience will find a certain comfort in watching the videos > daily. > > What I enjoyed with The Late Nite Mash experiment was a surprise to > me...coming from > audience counting media. It was the collaboration that I found online and in > the > community. > > All the best with your show. > > Daniel > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jason McCabe Calacanis" <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > We launched Mahalo Daily with Veronica Belmont last week as some of > > you might know. You can find the show at http://daily.mahalo.com and > > on iTunes. We're hosting it at Blip.Tv (for now) but considering some > > other options since folks have been pinging us. > > > > I'm looking for some advice on what we can do--other than make the > > best show we can--to grow the view to 100k+ a day quickly. > > > > We did over 120k views in the first week (about 12-37k views for each > > of the first four shows) which is much more than I thought we would. > > We've got our iTunes page running and we're syndicating the videos to > > YouTube and Facebook. We've also started a Facebook, Ning, Flickr, and > > Twitter groups/accounts to compliment the program. They are getting > > nice pickup. > > > > On a business level, I'm wondering if there is anyone out there who > > can bring in 100-250k views a day for show, perhaps in exchange for > > exclusive hosting rights/advertising rights or something (i.e. Yahoo, > > AOL, YouTube, etc). > > > > Anyone have an distribution tips? > > Has anyone done deals like this? > > > > Mahalo for any help... > > > > best J > > > > i blogged about this here: > > http://www.calacanis.com/2007/11/11/congrats-to-tyler-and-veronica-on-an- > amazing-first-week-for-mahalo/ > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
Ok, that was funny John and Richard. I'll give you that. There is some inherent irony in even participating in this thread... I don't know how i got so sucked in... it's not all bad though is it? We're not doing jason any real favors... not giving away any subversive keys to skip having to learn... the points all come down to the fact that the show has got to be honest, personal and they've got to work for it. What's so damn wrong with that kind of advice? I can say this... jason is not ABC... and I can pretty much guarentee Mahalo won't be some cheesey *ss version of CNET's other video podcasts. I'm pretty much sure that Jason's efforts will be positive for videoblogging the way they've been positive for blogging. In fact I still read many of the blogs on his old network. We can either push this change away, live in the past and have no say in the future... or we can embrace the change and have a hand in shapping a better future. -Mike On 11/12/07, John Coffey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm with you Richard. I suggest Jason have lunch with > Andrew Baron and relive the worst TWIT ever. > JCH > --- Richard Bluestein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > I'm going to puke. > > > > > > > Jimmy CraicHead TVVideo Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Craic and Cocktails > www.jchtv.com > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
I disagrey respectfully with Tim Street. Promos my butt. Let the content speak for itself. Don't push promos everywhere, syndicate the content everywhere. Making promos for 3 minute shows is backwards. Instead just put the whole thing on youtube... yeah you'll never make a dime through youtube, but screw it... use them like they use you. Brand yourstuff like crazy. Build your brand. This is exactly what shows like Ask A Nija and Wallstrip have done. Don't give youtube users cheap seconds... that would be treating youtube exactly the way all those lifestyle mags, newspapers, regional news affiliates and the rest treat the online world... he's some "show clips" from the NBC... wait... nope we don't want them on Youtube anymore... come to our site. It's B.S. Give them the whole show, make it ontime... make it a great experience... and just let them know who it's coming from, brand well. Then just hope when push comes to shove you've developed enough of a core following that they'll follow you to itunes, your domain, or subscribe to your RSS feed with a real open network aggregator like fireant, democracy, mefeedia, or dare I say iTunes.. though quite frankly itunes sucks for video. -Mike On 11/11/07, Tim Street <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I can't argue with Jan. > > You might also try starting a video podcast and create some promos for it and > post them everywhere you can. > Sent from my BlackBerry wireless handheld. > > -Original Message- > From: "Jan McLaughlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 18:34:48 > To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day > (quickly)? > > > I don't know Veronica from sunshine, but I'm guessing she's got a good rack. > > You don't need much more than that and some low-cut, tight blouses and a > bevy of good writers and guests to make the numbers you describe. > > Lots of writers out of work this week. > > Jan > [Who's kinda sorry for the flip if true response] > > On 11/11/07, Jason McCabe Calacanis <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:jason%40calacanis.com> com> wrote: > > > > --- In videoblogging@ <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com> > yahoogroups.com, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > This might not be the right place to ask those questions. Most (not > > > all) of the producers here are working organically and personally > > > with much smaller audiences and are creating uncommercial content. > > > > Got it. > > > > Thought that discussions about distribution channels might be in the > > mandate since I've seen them here before, but if not please do delete! > > > > > But here's my two cents: You want regular six figure viewing figures, > > > I'd say the only guaranteed way to do it from a standing start is to > > > get featured on Youtube every time. I would imagine, given your > > > > YouTube has come up a lot so I guess we should talk to them about > > distribution. I agree about the value of those viewers and the > > horrible behavior. In some ways I guess it's like getting on the front > > page of digg: you get some traffic but you also get abusive comments > > from the kiddie/anonymous coward contingent. > > > > > My feeling is that to get any value or meaningful response from your > > > viewers, you need to build audience and loyalty organically. All the > > > social network/social media groups you've set up are a good start. > > > > Agreed. We're getting a great response from Ning > > (http://mahalodaily. <http://mahalodaily.ning.com> ning.com), Facebook > (600 or so memebers), and > > Twitter. > > > > > But they're not a quick fix. Or a road to instant viewer riches. > > > > Agreed again. I think they are good at creating a space for your > > existing users to get together. > > > > > I advise you to look at EpicFu (formerly Jetset) - Zadi and Steve > > > have done it about as right as possible, I think. They've been > > > developing their show and their fans for a long time, and are now > > > getting 1m views per week. They cover a lot of ground, screen on > > > multiple networks as well as their own site and work very hard at > > > it. They have their own social network, which is integral to their > > > show. Seems to work well for them. > > > > Will do... those guys certainly know what they're doing and have been > > at it for
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
Jan, you're burtal. Mean. Brutal... but thanks for saying it. Someone had to. Just so you know... it's not always true btw... and it'll get better... after it gets worse. It'll probably have to become a complete cliche before we evolve beyond it. Then again, it's already a cheap cliche. Excuse me, I'm going to go hire a hit chick now and start a popular videoblog. Writers who!? -Mike On 11/11/07, Jan McLaughlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't know Veronica from sunshine, but I'm guessing she's got a good rack. > > You don't need much more than that and some low-cut, tight blouses and a > bevy of good writers and guests to make the numbers you describe. > > Lots of writers out of work this week. > > Jan > [Who's kinda sorry for the flip if true response] > > On 11/11/07, Jason McCabe Calacanis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > This might not be the right place to ask those questions. Most (not > > > all) of the producers here are working organically and personally > > > with much smaller audiences and are creating uncommercial content. > > > > Got it. > > > > Thought that discussions about distribution channels might be in the > > mandate since I've seen them here before, but if not please do delete! > > > > > But here's my two cents: You want regular six figure viewing figures, > > > I'd say the only guaranteed way to do it from a standing start is to > > > get featured on Youtube every time. I would imagine, given your > > > > YouTube has come up a lot so I guess we should talk to them about > > distribution. I agree about the value of those viewers and the > > horrible behavior. In some ways I guess it's like getting on the front > > page of digg: you get some traffic but you also get abusive comments > > from the kiddie/anonymous coward contingent. > > > > > My feeling is that to get any value or meaningful response from your > > > viewers, you need to build audience and loyalty organically. All the > > > social network/social media groups you've set up are a good start. > > > > Agreed. We're getting a great response from Ning > > (http://mahalodaily.ning.com), Facebook (600 or so memebers), and > > Twitter. > > > > > But they're not a quick fix. Or a road to instant viewer riches. > > > > Agreed again. I think they are good at creating a space for your > > existing users to get together. > > > > > I advise you to look at EpicFu (formerly Jetset) - Zadi and Steve > > > have done it about as right as possible, I think. They've been > > > developing their show and their fans for a long time, and are now > > > getting 1m views per week. They cover a lot of ground, screen on > > > multiple networks as well as their own site and work very hard at > > > it. They have their own social network, which is integral to their > > > show. Seems to work well for them. > > > > Will do... those guys certainly know what they're doing and have been > > at it for a long time. > > > > > I also advise you not pay any attention to my advice. I'm a > > > videoblogger. I'm happy with a two or three figure audience, not > > > six. I want to keep personal contact with my viewers. I have > > > nothing to sell and no intention of making it my business. None of > > > my opinions are based on any experience of building a promotional > > > show with a big audience. Good luck with it. > > > > Actually, I think your advice is sage... focus on the organic and > > stick to your knitting. The goals of our podcast and a personal podcat > > are certainly different, but the passion is the same. > > > > LinkedIn has like a dozen answers including a VERY funny one from Leo > > from TWiT. > > > > http://www.linkedin.com/answers?viewQuestion=&questionID=128692&askerID=24171 > > > > best j > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > -- > The Faux Press - better than real > http://feeds.feedburner.com/diaryofafauxjournalist - RSS > http://fauxpress.blogspot.com > http://wburg.tv > aim=janofsound > air=862.571.5334 > skype=janmclaughlin > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
In the long run, I think you will get to the same end quicker by asking a different question: What can you do to make the show better?
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
You've successfully launched and sold several media properties, Mr. Calacanis. You've also got a company, Mahalo, that has a marketing budget. In my opinion, folks in your league should pay for advice instead of getting it for free. It's not like you're a Rocketboom or a Epic--FU/Jetset, starting from the ground up on a shoestring, in the community with the rest of us, and including us in the conversation by asking one or some of us join you at Mahalo on a contractural or full-time basis to help you gain subscribers. You are a not a regular participant on this list, and I've seen nothing of value come from you since I've been subscribed. While it doesn't break any rules for you to come ask this question, I find it rather insulting for you to do so without offering a gig or valuable advice to one or some of the people in this community. At best, you're getting free consulting that devalues the hard-earned expertise of people here. At worst, you're using this medium as a gimmick to start conversation about Mahalo Daily. Both are pretty gross. And here's my question to the group: When does community-based advice to peers end and when does free consulting to professionals begin? Or, in other words, when do we start devaluing our own experience and expertise by giving it away gratis to people who could afford to pay for it? This is my biggest question as social media rises and communities help more and more with building of companies. On 12/11/2007, bordercollieaustralianshepherd < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Jason > > Wow ... I just caught up with the whole thread ... damn you! Damn You > Jason ... LOL > > Well I stand by my ideas, but must give you a big nod for self > promoting in such a sly way ... > > Of all of the crap I threw your way ... and having learned this AIN"T > your first BBQ ... I would work the "Thank You" angle. > > Thanks for letting me play > > Dave > > > -- Jeffrey Taylor Mobile: +33625497654 Fax: +33177722734 Skype: thejeffreytaylor Googlechat/Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 9:52 am, danielmcvicar wrote: > OK, here's a summary of my advice. Jason, show us your tits. Yeah, lots of people will hit you if you show your chest without warning ... Now if you'll excuse me, I need to bleach that mental image from my mind :-o -- Brian Richardson - http://whatthecast.com - http://siliconchef.com - http://dragoncontv.com - http://www.3chip.com
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
Jason, don't you know this was a self promotion by Jason? He knows all to well what it takes to get 125k views per day. To quote Charles Barkley, he's "playing you like a cheap guitar" jjc danielmcvicar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Jason Your view level is pretty good, your show looks very good. If you want more views, put it across the board on multiple servers and hosts. You'd be surprised at how many you can get at Daily Motion. You may also experiment with short sweet and sexy promos. Across the board. Sex is what attracts attention the most, the hook is something that you have an instinct for. Then, as a daily show, you are a service, liek Rocketboom, more than a brand like French Maid TV. Your audience will find a certain comfort in watching the videos daily. What I enjoyed with The Late Nite Mash experiment was a surprise to me...coming from audience counting media. It was the collaboration that I found online and in the community. All the best with your show. Daniel --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jason McCabe Calacanis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We launched Mahalo Daily with Veronica Belmont last week as some of > you might know. You can find the show at http://daily.mahalo.com and > on iTunes. We're hosting it at Blip.Tv (for now) but considering some > other options since folks have been pinging us. > > I'm looking for some advice on what we can do--other than make the > best show we can--to grow the view to 100k+ a day quickly. > > We did over 120k views in the first week (about 12-37k views for each > of the first four shows) which is much more than I thought we would. > We've got our iTunes page running and we're syndicating the videos to > YouTube and Facebook. We've also started a Facebook, Ning, Flickr, and > Twitter groups/accounts to compliment the program. They are getting > nice pickup. > > On a business level, I'm wondering if there is anyone out there who > can bring in 100-250k views a day for show, perhaps in exchange for > exclusive hosting rights/advertising rights or something (i.e. Yahoo, > AOL, YouTube, etc). > > Anyone have an distribution tips? > Has anyone done deals like this? > > Mahalo for any help... > > best J > > i blogged about this here: > http://www.calacanis.com/2007/11/11/congrats-to-tyler-and-veronica-on-an- amazing-first-week-for-mahalo/ > Jimmy CraicHead TVVideo Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Craic and Cocktails www.jchtv.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
I'm with you Richard. I suggest Jason have lunch with Andrew Baron and relive the worst TWIT ever. JCH --- Richard Bluestein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm going to puke. > > Jimmy CraicHead TVVideo Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Craic and Cocktails www.jchtv.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
I can't argue with Jan. You might also try starting a video podcast and create some promos for it and post them everywhere you can. Sent from my BlackBerry wireless handheld. -Original Message- From: "Jan McLaughlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 18:34:48 To:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)? I don't know Veronica from sunshine, but I'm guessing she's got a good rack. You don't need much more than that and some low-cut, tight blouses and a bevy of good writers and guests to make the numbers you describe. Lots of writers out of work this week. Jan [Who's kinda sorry for the flip if true response] On 11/11/07, Jason McCabe Calacanis <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:jason%40calacanis.com> com> wrote: > > --- In videoblogging@ <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com> > yahoogroups.com, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This might not be the right place to ask those questions. Most (not > > all) of the producers here are working organically and personally > > with much smaller audiences and are creating uncommercial content. > > Got it. > > Thought that discussions about distribution channels might be in the > mandate since I've seen them here before, but if not please do delete! > > > But here's my two cents: You want regular six figure viewing figures, > > I'd say the only guaranteed way to do it from a standing start is to > > get featured on Youtube every time. I would imagine, given your > > YouTube has come up a lot so I guess we should talk to them about > distribution. I agree about the value of those viewers and the > horrible behavior. In some ways I guess it's like getting on the front > page of digg: you get some traffic but you also get abusive comments > from the kiddie/anonymous coward contingent. > > > My feeling is that to get any value or meaningful response from your > > viewers, you need to build audience and loyalty organically. All the > > social network/social media groups you've set up are a good start. > > Agreed. We're getting a great response from Ning > (http://mahalodaily. <http://mahalodaily.ning.com> ning.com), Facebook (600 > or so memebers), and > Twitter. > > > But they're not a quick fix. Or a road to instant viewer riches. > > Agreed again. I think they are good at creating a space for your > existing users to get together. > > > I advise you to look at EpicFu (formerly Jetset) - Zadi and Steve > > have done it about as right as possible, I think. They've been > > developing their show and their fans for a long time, and are now > > getting 1m views per week. They cover a lot of ground, screen on > > multiple networks as well as their own site and work very hard at > > it. They have their own social network, which is integral to their > > show. Seems to work well for them. > > Will do... those guys certainly know what they're doing and have been > at it for a long time. > > > I also advise you not pay any attention to my advice. I'm a > > videoblogger. I'm happy with a two or three figure audience, not > > six. I want to keep personal contact with my viewers. I have > > nothing to sell and no intention of making it my business. None of > > my opinions are based on any experience of building a promotional > > show with a big audience. Good luck with it. > > Actually, I think your advice is sage... focus on the organic and > stick to your knitting. The goals of our podcast and a personal podcat > are certainly different, but the passion is the same. > > LinkedIn has like a dozen answers including a VERY funny one from Leo > from TWiT. > > http://www.linkedin > <http://www.linkedin.com/answers?viewQuestion=&questionID=128692&askerID=24171> > .com/answers?viewQuestion=&questionID=128692&askerID=24171 > > best j > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > -- The Faux Press - better than real http://feeds. <http://feeds.feedburner.com/diaryofafauxjournalist> feedburner.com/diaryofafauxjournalist - RSS http://fauxpress. <http://fauxpress.blogspot.com> blogspot.com http://wburg. <http://wburg.tv> tv aim=janofsound air=862.571.5334 skype=janmclaughlin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Advice on how to get to 100-250k views a day (quickly)?
I don't know Veronica from sunshine, but I'm guessing she's got a good rack. You don't need much more than that and some low-cut, tight blouses and a bevy of good writers and guests to make the numbers you describe. Lots of writers out of work this week. Jan [Who's kinda sorry for the flip if true response] On 11/11/07, Jason McCabe Calacanis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This might not be the right place to ask those questions. Most (not > > all) of the producers here are working organically and personally > > with much smaller audiences and are creating uncommercial content. > > Got it. > > Thought that discussions about distribution channels might be in the > mandate since I've seen them here before, but if not please do delete! > > > But here's my two cents: You want regular six figure viewing figures, > > I'd say the only guaranteed way to do it from a standing start is to > > get featured on Youtube every time. I would imagine, given your > > YouTube has come up a lot so I guess we should talk to them about > distribution. I agree about the value of those viewers and the > horrible behavior. In some ways I guess it's like getting on the front > page of digg: you get some traffic but you also get abusive comments > from the kiddie/anonymous coward contingent. > > > My feeling is that to get any value or meaningful response from your > > viewers, you need to build audience and loyalty organically. All the > > social network/social media groups you've set up are a good start. > > Agreed. We're getting a great response from Ning > (http://mahalodaily.ning.com), Facebook (600 or so memebers), and > Twitter. > > > But they're not a quick fix. Or a road to instant viewer riches. > > Agreed again. I think they are good at creating a space for your > existing users to get together. > > > I advise you to look at EpicFu (formerly Jetset) - Zadi and Steve > > have done it about as right as possible, I think. They've been > > developing their show and their fans for a long time, and are now > > getting 1m views per week. They cover a lot of ground, screen on > > multiple networks as well as their own site and work very hard at > > it. They have their own social network, which is integral to their > > show. Seems to work well for them. > > Will do... those guys certainly know what they're doing and have been > at it for a long time. > > > I also advise you not pay any attention to my advice. I'm a > > videoblogger. I'm happy with a two or three figure audience, not > > six. I want to keep personal contact with my viewers. I have > > nothing to sell and no intention of making it my business. None of > > my opinions are based on any experience of building a promotional > > show with a big audience. Good luck with it. > > Actually, I think your advice is sage... focus on the organic and > stick to your knitting. The goals of our podcast and a personal podcat > are certainly different, but the passion is the same. > > LinkedIn has like a dozen answers including a VERY funny one from Leo > from TWiT. > > http://www.linkedin.com/answers?viewQuestion=&questionID=128692&askerID=24171 > > best j > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > -- The Faux Press - better than real http://feeds.feedburner.com/diaryofafauxjournalist - RSS http://fauxpress.blogspot.com http://wburg.tv aim=janofsound air=862.571.5334 skype=janmclaughlin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
