Sunday, 28 February 2010
Blinkx recently launched its own blog...
Saturday, 27 February 2010
Adobe CTO Kevin Lynch Demos Flash on Tablets and Smartphones (Including the Apple iPhone)
YouTube’s Ad Push Creeps Forward
How are Google’s efforts to turn YouTube from a money pit into a profit center coming along?
Google (GOOG) continues to insist that it will start making money from its Web video site soon. But for now, YouTube’s finances are a black box. From the outside, though, we can see indications that the site is at least becoming more serious about getting more ad dollars out of more videos...
from MediaMemo
HBO Go Is Nice, But It Won’t Help Cord Cutters
The new “HBO Go” site, which lets you watch some 600 hours of the pay cable service’s programming on the Web, looks nice.
And if you’re a Verizon (VZ) Fios TV subscriber and you pay for HBO, you’ll get access to it for free starting tomorrow. But if you don’t want to wait–and you’re both a Comcast (CMCSA) and HBO subscriber–you can go to Comcast’s Fancast.com and watch the same programming there. It’s all the same stuff...
from MediaMemo
More Money for Web Video? Sure: Clicker Raises Another $11 Million
How do you launch a Web video start-up without getting crushed by lawsuits and bandwidth bills? Launch a Web video search engine.
That’s the thesis behind Clicker, a would-be TV Guide for Web video, which has raised an $11 million B round led by JAFCO Ventures, with participation from earlier investors Benchmark Capital and Redpoint Ventures. The funding follows an $8 million round announced last fall that was actually raised in 2008...
from MediaMemo
Pre-Roll Video Ads Still Hated, Here to Stay
It's pretty much just the classic 30-second spot, lifted from broadcast TV and occasionally shortened to 15 seconds.
Yet when it comes to online video, in the end, that's where the action is. The ad unit has been maligned, foresworn, abused and dismissed. But like a cockroach, it survives, while many other online video ad units have faded into obscurity. Heck, I once promised that there would never be a pre-roll at Revision3, but I was eating my words within a year...
from Advertising Age
Will You Pay for Hulu on the iPad? It May Be Your Only Choice
Friday, 26 February 2010
Investor discontent grows...
Wednesday, 24 February 2010
Chandratillake pitches to the great vampire squid...
Tuesday, 23 February 2010
Friday, 19 February 2010
Is SeeSaw the future of online TV? Doubt it
Thursday, 18 February 2010
More on SeeSaw
The battle for the TV viewers of the future moved up a notch yesterday as more than 3,000 hours of BBC, Channel 4 and Five programming was made available on a new video-on demand website that marks the first concerted effort by broadcasters to pool their content online.
SeeSaw offers viewers a chance to catch up on shows broadcast in the past week by Channel 4 and Five, including Shameless, Hollyoaks and Neighbours, and content from the BBC archive, such as episodes of Hustle and Michael Palin's Around the World in 80 Days. It caters for the growing trend for watching TV programmes on the internet – BBC's iPlayer service received more than 115m requests last month.
US shows are expected to be added to SeeSaw's library later this year, when it is also expected to start charging for some programmes. At present, the website is free, though ads are screened at the start and sometimes in the middle of programmes.
John Keeling, the SeeSaw platform controller, said the site would benefit from the simplicity of its offering compared with rival websites that screen a range of video – "it just does telly" – and its ability to showcase a range of programmes. "You have thousands of hours of content and you can go and search it, but we also have an editorial team constantly presenting the dish of the day and offering choices."...
from The Guardian
----------
Comment: "John Keeling, the SeeSaw platform controller, said the site would benefit from the simplicity of its offering compared with rival websites that screen a range of video" is that a dig at Blinkx I wonder?
He really doesn't need to worry - due to their total absence of a B2C strategy nobody at all even knows who the hell Blinkx are...
What the hell is going on at Blinkx?
iVdopia Launches Video Ads on Android
iVdopia's Android SDK Premieres Sponsorship Ads and Social Media
SAN JOSE, Calif., Feb. 18 /PRNewswire/ -- iVdopia (www.ivdopia.com), the advanced mobile advertising platform and network, today announced the release of its Android SDK, which enables developers using Google's Android platform to include the most innovative and comprehensive video advertising formats within their applications. Following its successful iPhone campaigns for the likes of Coke Zero, Warner Brothers and Miller Lite, iVdopia is now introducing social features, sponsorship and "instant-play" video to Android mobile ads. iVdopia is also inviting the open-Android community to propose and suggest their own creative video ad formats, for incorporation into the next release of the iVdopia platform.
from PRNewsWire
---------------------
Comment: So yet another video player gets on the mobile bandwagon. And where are Blinkx? Blinkx are nowhere because the people running the company are CLUELESS MUPPETS. I've been banging on for more than a year now about the apps economy and social media, and now products and services from other companies are starting to appear that show I was right. And Blinkx? Blinkx haven't got a fucking clue!
A television revolution?: 3,000 hours of shows offered for free on new on demand website Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-12
Sunday, 14 February 2010
Oh dear oh dear oh dear...
Failure to act quickly enough proved fatal to injunction application to stop trade mark infringement and passing off – Blinkx v Blinkbox, High Court
Since 2004, A had been operating the blinkx.com web site, which was an Internet service providing access to film, television and video content. In 2008, B started up its own site at blinkbox.com, which enabled users to choose, customise and share video and television content. When A discovered that B was attempting to register trade marks, it complained to B and said it was infringing A’s trade marks and passing off. A applied for an injunction to stop B.
The High Court refused to grant A’s injunction application. A had been aware since 2008 of B’s potentially conflicting similar service but had done nothing to stop it for a while. It was totally unjustified and unreasonable to delay in issuing legal proceedings. The Court dismissed A’s argument that it was appropriate to wait to issue proceedings until the extent of the confusion became clear. The Court said an injunction would severely affect B’s business as it would have to immediately change its name and lose advertising revenue, which may prove unnecessary if B won at the main court action. If A had acted more quickly, the Court may have granted the application but the delay was fatal to its request for an injunction.
-------
Comment: Slow off the mark? Blinkx? Surely not? The company that still hasn't released an iPhone app or a Facebook widget, slow off the mark?
What a bunch of totally useless, clueless muppets run this company. Jesus, trained monkeys could do better - and would be a damned sight cheaper!
Final letter to Dr Michael Lynch of Autonomy
Dr Michael Lynch,
CEO, Autonomy Corporation,
Cambridge Business Park
Cowley Rd
Cambridge
CB4 0WZ
14th February 2010
Dear Dr Lynch
I’m disappointed not to have had a reply from you to my letter of 2nd January. I can only imagine that you don’t have any arguments to rebut my criticisms of Blinkx management. That being the case, I think the time has come to seriously consider change at the top for Blinkx and the replacing of the current woeful management team with a new team which can deliver for shareholders.
Despite apparently good recent news – including a deal with Miniweb, the extension of the partnership with ITN, the BBC Democracy Live website – the share price remains stubbornly stuck at less than a third of the IPO price, and roughly 20% below the recent £5m (roughly $8m) placing. And this from the self-styled “world’s largest and most advanced video search engine”.
I think the reason why the markets are so negligent of Blinkx lies with the senior management of the company, and that is why I believe it is time for change.
For more than two years now Chandratillake has been proclaiming to any journalist who will listen what a bright future Blinxk has (although he hasn’t, as I’ve mentioned before, actually put his own money where his mouth is). And of course it is true that revenues seem to have been doubling about every six months - one would have thought that fact alone would cause the markets to sit up and take notice of Blinkx. Apparently not.
However, against that apparent achievement must be set the total fiasco of the Miva ‘bid’ (how much exactly was the company worth? The 125c Blinkx originally offered, or the 55c ‘advisory’ that Blinkx announced subsequently? If Miva was only worth 55c a share why offer 125c? If, on the other hand, Miva was really worth 125c a share, what was the offer of 55c supposed to achieve?), and the secrecy-bordering-on-paranoia of the Zango takeover. Both of these show, to my mind, an amateur, inexperienced approach both to deal-making and communication which certainly I wouldn’t expect from a world-class company.
As you will see from the enclosure, I have already had cause to write once to the FSA about what I consider to be a blatant misrepresentation by Chandratillake of Blinkx’s financial position, made to Martin Sorrell of WPP in public and on the record in January 2008 (I know that at least one other shareholder has also written to the FSA on the same matter). I’m afraid I intend to write again about the Zango acquisition. It may or may not be true that the purchase price was so small that Blinkx was not under an obligation to release an RNS about it. But judging from LinkedIn and other anecdotal information, Blinkx has been hiring very significant numbers of ex-Zango employees - perhaps as many as 50, doubling the Blinkx workforce. How can that not have a material impact on the company’s financial position, for good or ill?
The markets don’t like uncertainty, they don’t like obfuscation, they don’t like unpleasant surprises and they don’t like management which talks the talk but doesn’t walk the walk. It may well be that the next results will again show a doubling of revenue – but if those figures do, I wonder what nasty shock will accompany them? Another whopping forex loss? Another unexpected rise in costs? Some other unforeseen and unfortunate event to take the shine off what would otherwise be an excellent set of figures?
While we’re on that subject, Dr Lynch - a $9m forex loss and you claim this company is “extremely well managed”? If I were FD of a company, and I lost that company $9m in unhedged currency swaps, I’d expect to be shown the door pretty quickly - maybe along with the CEO who should have been overseeing me. But instead the FD keeps his job and the good ship Blinkx lurches on…
I’m afraid I am not prepared any longer to sit back and watch the value of my investment eroded by someone (Chandratillake) I consider to be a clueless muppet without the first idea of modern digital media. I don’t doubt for one second that Chandratillake knows a heck of a lot about video search, but he doesn’t seem to know about much else. Blinkx is missing out on not one but two technology revolutions – social media and the apps economy. Since I last wrote to you several video companies (TVCatchup, 1Cast and others) have announced that they will be releasing iPhone apps - Apple, as you may have seen, recently announced that they sold 8.7 million iPhones in the last quarter, double the figure of a year ago, and also announced the three billionth download from the apps store. iPhone purchasers tend to be young and affluent with high disposable incomes – in other words a perfect advertising audience which Blinkx is entirely missing out on.
If I am wrong in my (very low) opinion of Chandratillake then where’s the evidence that I’m wrong? Where are the blockbuster, company-transforming deals that would persuade me he can sit at the top table of the global technology industry? Yahoo are ramping up their online TV effort – which one would have thought could use a good video search function and an index of 35m+ hours of professional longform video – and yet of Blinkx there is no sign. Apple announce the iPad – once again, a custom-designed media-consumption tablet which one would have thought would need good video search/content to help give it a killer USP – and yet once again of Blinxk there is no sign. Those are the sorts of deals Blinkx should be getting involved with, and yet those are precisely the sorts of deals Chandratillake seems incapable of cutting. Instead we get another bloody BobVila.com - although even they seem to have dried up recently. It may be that MIniweb and Canvas will be Blinkx’s (and Blinkx shareholders’) salvation, but I can’t think of a single good reason for not having fingers in as many pies as possible. Equally it may transpire that those initiatives are yet more damp squibs and disappointments for Blinkx shareholders.
I won’t waste my time or yours by writing to you again, Dr Lynch. My next communication will be an email to Chandratillake letting him know exactly what I think of the job he’s doing for shareholders – and I intend to BCC that email to more than 50 technology and media journalists. If Chandratillake won’t talk to shareholders let’s see if the press has any better luck – Chandratillake does, after all, seem to think that journalists and not shareholders are his natural audience anyway. I will also, as I mentioned, be writing to the FSA again, and also to the large institutional shareholders to see whether they are as sick as I am (and as sick as many others shareholders are) of waiting for this useless, utterly clueless management team to deliver.
Another negative review of Blinkx on Glassdoor I see recently, Dr Lynch? The words that stuck in my mind from it were ‘incompetent’, ‘paranoid’, and ‘arrogant’ – which sounds about right to me. You may dismiss such reviews, Dr Lynch, but there’s no smoke without fire. It’s time for a change.
Yours sincerely,
____________
xxxxx xxxxxxx
PS: Further to the point in my last letter about building products and then not leveraging them, I note that Blinkx seems to have a new ‘DealScout’ product, which looks to me to be very similar to SmartShopper. Does the company intend to actually roll this product out or partner for it, or just leave it to moulder on the shelf along with SmartShopper, Transaction Hijacking and Blinkx Music?
Saturday, 6 February 2010
Friday, 5 February 2010
Apple recruits key talent to lead drive into mobile ad sales
Wednesday, 3 February 2010
Final letter to Charles Lytle at Citibank
Mr Charles Lytle,
Citigroup Global Markets Limited,
Citigroup Centre,
33 Canada Sq.,
Canary Wharf,
London E14 5LB,
United Kingdom
Re: Blinkx
Dear Mr Lytle
I am, naturally, disappointed not to have received a reply to my letter of 19th January. I can only imagine that you are unable to rebut my criticisms of Blinkx management.
As a follow-up to that letter, a few last points.
Following the release yesterday of the latest figures from Autonomy, I notice that “Autonomy invested $4.3 million in a public offering of shares by blinkx plc”. In other words the Blinkx roadshow earlier this year was an abject failure, wasn’t it Mr Lytle? Institutional investors obviously weren’t impressed with Blinkx management, didn’t like the Blinkx story or didn’t like the way it was told, and as a consequence when Blinkx needed more money Autonomy felt compelled to underwrite the issue (whether to support the company itself or to support the dwindling reputation of Chandratillake among investors in the company, clearly I have no way of knowing) - and as a result was left with more than 50% of the share placing ($4.3m of a £5m placing). Did Autonomy want to end up owning those shares? I don’t know, but then again I don’t know why Blinkx wanted the money in the first place: God forbid that the poor bloody shareholders should ever be told anything – anyone would think they owned the company or something!
I do know however that the Blinkx share price is currently around 20% below the placing price – at roughly the same levels as two years ago. I wonder how Autonomy shareholders feel about that?
Three last points Mr Lytle.
Firstly, whilst Blinkx may, as you stated, be delivering to plan, was it part of the plan that the share price should lose more than two-thirds of its value in the three years following the IPO? Why does Blinxk management refuse to do anything, by word or by deed, to support the company’s share price?
Following on from that point, if Blinkx has such a bright future ahead of it, why hasn’t Chandratillake ever, so far as I am aware, bought shares in the open market to demonstrate confidence in the future of the company and his own future wealth? He’s more than happy to put my money where his not-inconsiderable mouth is, but I don’t notice him risking any of his own capital?
Lastly, but not least – if Blinkx is doing so well and growing so fast, why has nobody tried to buy it?