Streaming Media Industry Sourcebook Coming in February: Sign Up For Free

For those interested in the business, technology and content of online video, our annual Streaming Media Sourcebook will publish in February. It’s our biggest issue of the year, and it includes comprehensive year-in-review articles looking at the most notable developments in 2008, as well as a look forward at what’s likely to come in 2009. It also includes case studies and a slew of how-to and buyer’s guide features, including the following:

  • Choosing a Camcorder
  • Selecting the Right Nonlinear Video Editor
  • The 2009 Video Encoder Shoot-Out
  • Picking a Content Delivery Provider
  • How to Add Closed Captions to Online Video
  • How to Generate Automatic Speech Transcripts in Flash Video
  • Making Sense of the H.264 Licensing Labyrinth
  • The Live Mobile Video Landscape
  • and many more.

Also featured are a roster of case studies from each of the major verticals: entertainment, education, enterprise, government, and advertising. You can subscribe to the magazine for free, and if you’re interested in advertising, contact Joel Unickow.

Sponsored by

Pacnet Looking To Acquire Public CDNs In Asia: CDNetworks or ChinaCache In Play?

Images
In a story on Bloomberg this morning focusing on Pacnet delaying their public offering, CEO Bill Barney is also quoted talking about acquisitions in the content delivery market. He's quoted as saying, “We’ve been looking at acquisitions not only in Australia, but also in Japan, China and India. We call them players in the content delivery space and we’ve been quite active in the last few weeks.” The article also goes on to say that Pacnet’s acquisition targets include two listed companies, the names of which Pacnet would not identify.

While there are a bunch of companies offering content delivery services in Asia including Broadmedia, CDNetworks, ChinaCache, J-Stream, NTT Communications and PCCW amongst others, CDNetworks and ChinaCache are clearly the leaders in the APAC market when it comes to CDN related revenue and number of customers. In addition, the two are pureplay CDNs who's focus is primarily on delivering content, as opposed to some of the other companies who have many services outside of CDN. Although ChinaCahe is not listed on any exchange, I don't think that rules them out.

I expect we will start to see even more carriers start to make some moves before long to enter the CDN market, especially in Asia and India.

CNN, Netflix and NFL Using Level 3 For Content Delivery

Over the past few days I have been using tools to examine DNS and CNAME records for a lot of the major sites on the web to see which CDNs are delivering their content. While there have not been a lot of surprises, I did found out that Level 3 is delivering videos for Netflix and the NFL and delivering small objects for CNN.

I have been saying for some time now that Level 3 is getting some good traction with their CDN offering, yet many ask me if that is that is the case, why hasn't Level 3 announced a lot of these big customers? While they have announced a few, like the NHL, in many cases customers don't let CDNs use their name for press or marketing outreach. This is quite common amongst all CDN customers and not unique to Level 3.

But by using tools that examine DNS and CNAME records, it's not too hard to figure out which CDNs are delivering the content. That's exactly what I found out when I examined where content from Netflix and CNN is coming from. While it was always clear that Limelight delivers the vast majority of Netflix's content, Level 3 is also delivering some of their videos and Netflix's business is not exclusive to Limelight as I originally thought. And while Akamai is still delivering all of the videos that I saw coming from CNN.com, many of the small objects on CNN.com are being delivered by Level 3's caching network.

I've also learned that Level 3 is delivering the new NFL video on-demand service, "Game Rewind", which is really no surprise being that it is using Move Networks technology. While many may not know the connection there, Level 3 invested $6 million into Move Networks earlier in the year and as a result, gets a lot of Move's business. In addition to Game Rewind videos, Level 3 is also delivering the live stream for the NFL's Game Pass HD service; a subscription based offering that is only available to users outside the U.S. and Canada.

To gather most of the details, I used Fiddler, which runs as a “proxy” between your web browser and the network and listens to Port 80 (HTTP) or 443 (SSL). There are a bunch of other tools out there as well and if anyone knows of a Mac based tool, I'd love to know what it is.

Related:

Level 3 Opens Broadcast Encoding Centers: Ecosystem Offering Now In Play

Q&A With Jim Crowe, CEO of Level 3 About Their CDN Business

NFL Launches “Game Rewind”, Every Game On-Demand In HD With No Commercials

Nfl1

Updated 9/11/2011: NFL Now Offering Four Ways To Stream Games Online

Today, the NFL launched a new video on-demand service called Game Rewind that lets you watch every NFL game in HD quality, with no commercials. The service, which costs $19.99 for the season or $4.99 for a week pass, also provides DVR functionality and lets you watch up to four games at once. While it is not known exactly how quickly games are made available after they end, for now the NFL is saying within 24 hours, but it is expected times will be much shorter.

The NFL is using Move Networks for the service, which is the same technology partner used for the NFL's live video service called GamePass HD, available to those outside the U.S. As expected, the quality of video for Game Rewind is amazing and the NFL kept the interface clean and simple. While you can see a demo of the service at NFL.com/gamerewind, the interface I got through an actual account looks a little different. You have the option of just watching the game with no additional content, or including things like stats and chatting with others during the game or watch up to four games at once. Initial buffering times took about a second for me on my Mac, in Safari and I experienced no stuttering at all getting the 2.4MB stream.

Nfl2 While it's not ideal that the NFL would charge for games on-demand, at twenty bucks a year, it's very affordable and by providing HD quality and no commercials of any kind, I'd throw down twenty dollars for it. I'd prefer to see the NFL offer this kind of on-demand video with this kind of quality, for free, but with online video monetization models being what they are today, you can't fault them for charging viewers. With the NFL now providing this kind of video quality for two out of their three online video services, I hope the games they broadcast on Sunday night in conjunction with NBC start getting the HD treatment, or least encoded into a much higher video quality. 

Macbook Click on the image on the left to see what fullscreen looks like on my 15" MacBook. Keep in mind, the camera does not show how good the quality is, but it gives you an idea.


Related:

NFL Offers HD, Full-Screen Streaming, But Only Outside The U.S.

NFL's Live Streaming Leaves A Lot To Be Desired: Capping Users, Poor Video Quality

Is Adobe Paying The NFL To Use Flash?

For Many Akamai and On2 Investors, Emotions Clouding Their Judgement

For shareholders in any company, these days are trying times. I don't have to tell you that all stocks are down and the market has taken a beating. That being said, even when the market was doing better, I still got more hate mail from Akamai and On2 shareholders than any others, most of which are for emotional reasons as opposed to rational arguments.

Most of the mail comes from individual investors and not large firms and the person typically wants to argue over a post I made on my blog, without either reading what I actually wrote, or not wanting to admit things that are simply facts. And while I am the first to admit that I don't own stock in any public company and have never bought or sold a single share ever, even I know that investing in any company means you have to keep your emotions out of the decision making process.

In my blog post last week about Sun launching the new JavaFX platform, I got tons of e-mails from readers who said I was crazy not to realize how big of a deal JavaFX is and how it would take over video playback on all devices. When asked, most of those who sent me the e-mails said they were investors in On2. While I can understand how an investor in On2 would be excited for the JavaFX announcement since Sun licensed the On2 codecs, you still have to keep the deal in perspective. Sun is not going to make any major traction in the market anytime in the next year. What they released last week was version 1.0 with very limited functionality for video and they don't even expect to have development software available for mobile until half way through 2009. Developers have to build apps first, get content owners to use them, get them deployed and get viewers to start to consume them. This does not happen overnight, or even in twelve months. Yet, many of those On2 investors who sent me e-mail wanted to argue with me that I don't know anything about investing and that I must be working for Adobe or have an interest in seeing H.264 succeed.

I don't need to know anything about investing to know how long it takes for something to be adopted in the market. How quickly do you really think it will take Sun to grab any large share of the market away from Adobe? That will not happen anytime soon and that's reality, like it or not. And while it is very easy to dismiss my post by saying, "Dan must work for Adobe", that's a lame argument. Whenever I write a post that is considered positive about Adobe, people say I must be working for them. If I write something positive about Microsoft, some are quick to say I must work for them. Rather than some investors wanting to actually admit and that they are allowing their emotions to cloud their judgment about how a company is really doing, it's easier for them to come up with a lame, and false, statement that the author must be getting paid by someone to write something that is positive one way or another.

If I were an On2 investor, I would look to the past. When Adobe licensed the On2 codec for Flash, many On2 investors wanted to make crazy statements about how big of a deal that would be for On2 and the revenue that would come from it. Considering how much Flash video is on the net and the rate at which Flash video was adopted, is any On2 investor happy with the deal Adobe got? I'd doubt it. On2 has made very little from the Adobe deal, but that is not stopping some from saying the Sun deal will be completely different. Can Sun get as much adoption as Flash has? No way.

I'm not knocking On2 as a company or their investors. Hell, I would not want to be an investor in any company with the way the market operates and the kind of headache it must cause for those who own shares. But at the same time, you have to remove your emotions out of the picture so you can make informed decision based on data, logic and what is really taking place in the market.

Aside from lots of e-mails from individual On2 shareholders, I also get a lot, if not more e-mails from Akamai shareholders. Many of them want to argue over points that make me wonder if they just want to argue for the sake of arguing? When I wrote the post last week on Akamai and how they were cutting pricing, I got lots of e-mails where people wanted to argue with me on lots of aspects of their business. That being said, not a single person was or could argue that Akamai is not growing revenue as fast as they use to, is seeing pricing pressure in the market, has seen a slowdown of traffic growth on their network and had to layoff 110 employees. Instead, folks wrote in with lots of angry e-mails about how Akamai is going to crush Limelight in the patent case and how Limelight is building a business on stolen technology.

For starters, the post didn't have anything to do with the patent case and I've never said that I think Limelight will win the patent case. In fact, I don't see why the judge would reverse the ruling and I think at some point, Limelight would have to pay some kind of damages, but it is really the rate that will be debated. But even if that happens, why would Akamai investors care so much about it? Lets say Limelight has to pay $50 million in damages and shows that they are no longer infringing on the patent. Now what happens? Nothing major. Akamai gets $50 million dollars, which does not put them in any kind of new revenue bracket and Limelight now only has $127 million in the bank instead of $177. It does not put Limelight out of business and if customers have not left Limelight over the past two years during the lawsuit, what makes you think they would leave down the road after a Limelight payment? It's an emotional win for Akamai shareholders, but it has no real impact on how Akamai is going to get back to growing their business.

But the best thing I always get from many individual Akamai shareholders is that I must be working for Limelight or trying to "pump" their stock. Again, what an easy argument for them to make, except for the fact it's not true. When I write something positive about Level 3, people write in and say I must be working for them. When I write something positive about Limelight, they must be paying me. And when I did two posts about Akamai's application delivery product, some said they probably paid me to write that. By all accounts, apparently I work for just about every CDN company in the market. Too bad they are all wrong and that I have never been paid by any CDN ever, except for Mirror Image which I stopped working for over a year ago and have never written about them on the blog.

If investors want to debate, great, lets have a discussion on how or why one company is going to grow over another. The comments section is always open on my posts. But bringing emotions into the picture and wanting one company to do well over another just because you have stock in them is not the reasoning behind why they must do well in the short or long term.

Velocix Launches New CDN Offering For ISPs With Support From Adobe and Microsoft

Metrow
Velocix has launched a new product named Velocix Metro that enables ISPs to deploy servers within their access network, providing them with their own content delivery network for video and other rich media content. (press release)

While Verizon was the first to announce they would deploy Velocix servers to deliver content to their last mile customers with FiOS, this announcement now takes that offering and makes it available as a product to any ISP looking to cut their costs, manage traffic more effectively and generate a new business model.
Besides being a unique offering in the market where a CDN is looking to license their distribution technology to other providers, Velocix also announced that Metro comes pre-bundled with server software from Adobe and Microsoft to support Flash, Windows Media and Silverlight and is working with Sun as the preferred equipment provider.

For Velocix and ISPs, this is a very different approach to the market and one to watch very closely. Most ISPs let CDN providers come into their network and deploy caching boxes to allow the ISP to pass traffic directly to the CDN which helps to reduce their transit costs. This new approach by Velocix lets ISPs build what is essentially their own private CDN enabling them to control costs and potentially add additional revenue if the ISP has good peering and wants to deliver content to users outside of their last end mile. Something Verizon is not doing today but is expected to utilize down the road due to their extensive peering arrangements. In addition to the cost savings, Velocix Metro enabled ISP's receive a revenue share based on traffic delivered via their networks from Velocix.

While this won't put any of the CDNs out of business anytime soon, it is something they have to closely watch. As the press release says, "Traditional CDN providers charge video broadcasters for premium delivery services but ignore the fundamental role that ISPs play in the end-to end delivery process. Rather than including ISPs in the value chain, CDN providers simply pump video traffic into their networks, leaving the ISPs to bear the cost of distribution on to their subscribers". As more video gets delivered at higher bitrates, the burden to ISPs is only going to increase and many will be put in a tight situation trying to manage the costs on their network. We are already starting to see this happen with the major players, but think about how this affects the smaller ISPs to even a larger degree.

For now, the Velocix Metro solution is completely managed by Velocix and over time, Velocix plans to allow the ISP to take full control of the solution and turn the management of the boxes over to the ISP directly. While the fact that Velocix manages the boxes worried me at first, it does make sense for Velocix to get it up and running with the ISP and do the majority of the work before the ISP resumes control.

There are a lot of really interesting things that could come from this solution and the more I think about how Verizon might use it down the road, it leads to some very interesting possibilities that could have a big impact on how video bits are delivered and how some of the current issues that ISPs have with video may be solved.

Look for my follow up post this week on how the Verizon and Velocix deal might evolve into something that's very important for the rest of the industry.

Level 3 To Cut 450 Jobs, CDN Group Still Growing: Should Do $45-50 Million

Level 3 announced today that it would be laying off 450 employees in North America or about 8% of their total workforce. While that's not good news for the company as a whole, the company has confirmed that the CDN group is not being affected and none of the cuts are coming from the content delivery markets group.

While I expect a lot of the 115 open jobs listed on Level 3's website to disappear, Level 3 is currently looking to fill various positions in the CDN group. In particular, they have three sales engineer positions they are looking to hire for right away in SF/San Jose, LA/Tustin and NY. If interested, contact Brian Gero at Level 3.

As we put the final touches on our Frost & Sullivan report entitled World Video Content Delivery Networks Market, which breaks out CDN video revenue and market share, Level 3 will do between $45-50 million in total CDN revenue this year. While most of that revenue comes from small object delivery video downloads and not video streaming, Level 3 is showing some good progress with their streaming offering. $50 million in revenue for 2008 won't make any impact on Level 3's total company revenue, but it would rank them at number four in the industry based on total CDN revenue behind Akamai, Limelight and CDNetworks.

That being said, Level 3's content delivery group can easily be affected if the rest of Level 3's businesses can't increase revenue, cut costs and reduce their debt. The job cuts today is intended to help reduce their costs but it is to be seen if that will be enough even in the short-term.

Recent Level 3 Posts:

Level 3 Opens Broadcast Encoding Centers: Ecosystem Offering Now In Play

Q&A With Jim Crowe, CEO of Level 3 About Their CDN Business