Sitting in front of a spectacular view of San Francisco at his home this afternoon, former Square COO Keith Rabois looks spent.

He is just recovering from a bout of pneumonia, which would be bad enough, but it’s clear from his tense and unusually — for him — disheveled appearance that the sexual harassment claim made by a current male employee at the San Francisco payments startup has taken its toll on the typically hard-charging exec who is not known for suffering fools.

But, now, given a judgement he made to continue in a personal and physical relationship with that unnamed junior staffer after he was hired at Square, Rabois feels both foolish and also angry.

“At the end of the day, this is personally embarrassing to me, because when anyone’s life is exposed to a public forum, it creates quite a damaging situation,” said Rabois. “As we looked at it, it was going to become a distraction that was going to hurt the company.”

It appears as if he wanted to stay — he shrugs when directly asked about it, though he will not say so explicitly. But, Rabois finally agreed with Square’s top management, including CEO and founder Jack Dorsey, that is was better that he leave.

“It was very clear once this outrageous demand was made, instead of building great products, it would be all about that,” he said.

That said, after an internal investigation, the company is backing him in the expected filing of a lawsuit from the employee, who has threatened a panoply of explosive allegations against him and the company that Rabois said again are a “fiction.”

He declined to show me any texts or emails between the two, but did recount the relationship in a blog post on Tumblr earlier today.

Richard Curiale, outside counsel for Square and also Rabois, said that the company had been approached about two weeks ago by New York lawyer Steven Berger, claiming the company knew of and did nothing to stop sexual harassment by Rabois and demanding a multi-million dollar settlement.

Curiale said he found no evidence in his investigation so far of anything except a “welcome” relationship that ended. He had even agreed to make Rabois available for a deposition with Berger, but the offer was refused.

I have an email into Berger for comment, which has thus far been unanswered. But Square has said it will fight any lawsuit filed and is currently supporting Rabois.

“I have not as yet found any conduct that is illegal and therefore there is no adverse relationship between Keith and Square,” said Curiale. “We don’t pay for claims that have no merit to them, because it amounts to extortion.”

Perhaps so, but it also amounts to a very juicy story — the second such major blowup in Silicon Valley in a year. The other — now a lawsuit alleging gender discrimination and retaliation, and a countersuit — between the well-known venture capital firm, Kleiner Perkins, and former partner Ellen Pao, is ongoing.

The particulars of the Rabois situation, per his side of the story, which he claims is supported by much evidence, is of a social and physical relationship with a man he met several years ago.

While he would not call their relationship dating, it was close and personal, including taking this man out with him to social events.

The problem came when he recommended this man for a job at Square and he was hired. The company was much smaller then, about 30 people, but as it grew Rabois insists he had no direct oversight of the employee and also did not treat him differently from others he managed at the company.

Rabois claims he gave him advice, as he did other employees, but neither helped or hindered the man in his efforts to advance.

The man and Rabois were still seeing each other socially until December, when the relationship cooled.

And then came the lawsuit threat two weeks ago, which Rabois said “stunned” him.

Square says that it was not aware of the personal relationship until the threat of the lawsuit; the employee has never made any complaints about Rabois to management.

Spokesman Ricardo Reyes said that “what we have here at most is bad judgement and we will defend ourselves.”

In this Rabois agrees, as he fields emails of support from his wide range of friends and colleagues in tech, where he is well known as an entrepreneur and angel investor.

“I have several good ideas of what I want to do next,” he said.

Last week, I talked to Punit Soni, who runs games and mobile for Google+, to get an update on Google’s plan for social games. Since the conversation took place before Facebook’s filing, Soni has no direct responses to the numbers.

But he addresses in general how Google expects to challenge Facebook’s dominance in social gaming, and the big opportunity in front of them to do something different.

“There’s no point in being in this game if we are a ‘me-too,’” he said. “We want to be different.”

Yesterday, in Facebook’s IPO filing we learned that substantially all of the company’s payments revenue is coming from virtual goods from inside social games, and that one game publisher alone — Zynga — is contributing 12 percent of the company’s revenue, payments and advertising included.

At those rates, it’s easy to see why Google is emphasizing games and wooing developers to its platform.

It started off with a bang in August, when it launched games. In talking to reporters, Soni announced the company was sharing 95 percent of the revenue from virtual goods with developers, and was keeping only 5 percent for itself.

That was, and remains, much more generous than the 30 percent cut that Facebook takes.

Still, with only 36 games on its network, and far fewer users (however you want to calculate it), Soni was pretty honest about how far they still have to go. He was also extremely enthusiastic, and at times looked as if he wanted to leap out of his chair to get going on some of the projects Google had planned.

First, and foremost, he said they are working hard to get virality right; and second, they want to nail cross-platform, so that games worked seamlessly across the Web and mobile.

Viral channels are the most common way for people to learn about a game, and also one of the most controversial.

More than a year ago, Facebook was forced to dial back those channels, because users complained about receiving too many unwanted messages.

“We err on the side of caution,” Soni said. “We are slowly giving more options to do things.”

Soni said they also see a big opportunity to differentiate by offering a multiplatform approach, and letting developers build games that work across Google+, Google’s Chrome Web Store and mobile. Of course, it has an advantage because of the millions of Android users, whereas Facebook’s mobile efforts are still nascent.

Already, there are some examples of cross-platform play.

Today, you can play Rovio’s Angry Birds and Bubble Witch Saga across both Google+ and the Chrome App Store, and can pick up where you left off between the two.

“These are not Google+ games, but games that are on Google,” Soni stressed. “A lot more is coming on mobile.”

Google has also focused on getting a number of games as exclusives that launch a few weeks on Google+ before they show up on Facebook. To date, it has scored at least three titles — including a major title, Kabam’s Godfather — and there are more coming.

Asked why the game developers are willing to go exclusively on Google+, Soni said there’s some marketing that Google is willing to put toward it, but otherwise, “they are betting on us.”

He says it’s mostly the potential of the platform, and the fact that he’s receptive to feedback, that helps him understand exactly what developers need. Developers also acknowledge that supporting more platforms is helpful in reaching more players and diversifying their risk.

“If they say it’s because the platform is the best ever — no, it’s not true. But the plans we have and the sensitivity that we have for our users and developers, we will be very good sometime soon. … That’s why you are seeing exclusives.”

Soni wasn’t wiling to spill specific plans about what was launching next, but said a lot more is coming.

“We are a start-up platform. We are humble and know our flaws. As we grow, you’ll see new things. My work has barely started,” he said.

“Yellow Submarine” is just what it sounds like — an illustrated version of the band’s 1968 movie, which is both trippy and kid-friendly (so British!). The book was first published in 2004, but the new version features interactive goodies like song samples and bits from the animated movie.

It’s a bunch of fun and will work on both iPads and iPhones, but you’re really better off enjoying this one on the former.

If you wanted to be churlish, you could note that the free book also serves as a promotion for a compilation album based on songs featured in the book.

Less churlish: Worth noting, yet again, that a year-plus exclusive is unheard of in digital music. Apple says it has sold 10 million songs and 1.8 million albums during that time; still love to know what they paid for that privilege.

“It was strictly a business decision,” said Kabam’s COO Chris Carvalho, quoting a line from The Godfather.

Carvalho said that in return for Google getting a 45-day exclusive, Google has agreed to drive traffic to the game through various marketing techniques. In addition, Google only takes a 5 percent cut of revenues from virtual goods sold inside the game, compared to Facebook’s 30 percent cut.

Together, those two incentives could make for a more profitable game, even if Google’s audience is much smaller.

“We’ve found our games monetize very well on the Google+ platform, and their team to be incredibly responsive and willing to get things done quickly and efficiently,” Carvalho said.

At last count, roughly 40 million people have joined Google+, and to date, it has a total of 28 games. In comparison, Facebook has more than 800 million users worldwide, and literally has too many games to count.

Getting heard above all those distractions on Facebook can be costly, so clearly Kabam feels it has a better chance to stand out on Google.

It will be important to see if other developers feel the same way and follow in Kabam’s footsteps. If so, Facebook may feel pressure to make games easier to find (other than the developer purchasing more ads), or even adjust its revenue cut, as some have suggested may occur with increased competition.

In all, Kabam has three other games on Google+: Dragons of Atlantis, Global Warfare and Edgeworld.

The Godfather will not be the first exclusive on Google+ Games. Rovio launched Angry Birds first on Google+, and still hasn’t officially launched yet on Facebook (probably due to the large costs, since Rovio is known for being outspoken about Apple’s 30 percent revenue cut on mobile devices).

Kabam has licensed rights to “The Godfather” movie from Paramount Digital Entertainment to build a big-budget social game for Facebook, based on the American Mafia classic.

Kabam, which is based in Redwood City, Ca., is known for making hardcore social games that appeal to gamers typically found using videogame consoles. That differs from Zynga, the leading social games company, which makes mainstream games for the largest audience possible.

The game, which launched today, is set in the Prohibition era of the 1930s, preceding the setting of the first film by about 10 years. Players and five crime families will battle for money, power and respect, with the goal of becoming the “Don” of a family.

The illustrations are cinematic, with extremely dark and menacing graphics, which is a dramatic shift from the cartoonish art and happy, smiling characters found in most Facebook games today.

Vanity Fair magazine put out its high-profile “New Establishment” list of the top 50 people, who are “an innovative new breed of buccaneering visionaries, engineering prodigies, and entrepreneurs, who quite often sport hoodies, floppy hair, and backpacks.”

The hoodie part would be referring to Facebook CEO and co-founder Mark Zuckerberg, who topped the list — which is in the just-released October issue — for the second year in a row.

The Vanity Fair list was packed with Silicon Valley luminaries.

The No. 2 spot went to the hopelessly conjoined twins at Google, CEO Larry Page and his co-founder Sergey Brin. Amazon’s Jeff Bezos was No. 3, followed by newly born CEO Tim Cook and top product guy Jonathan Ive of Apple at No. 4, with Twitter creator and Square founder Jack Dorsey at No. 5.

Interestingly, super-VCs Mark Andreessen and Ben Horowitz clocked in this year at No. 6.

The digitally fast-forward Lady Gaga was the top woman on the list at No. 9, in front of “Harry Potter” author J. K. Rowling at No. 16.

And, clocking in at No. 40? Why, me and my partner-in-crime at AllThingsD, Walt Mossberg. He is apparently a “kingmaker” of tech and I do “juicy exclusives.”

That actually is pretty accurate. More importantly, we were ranked higher than Justin Timberlake and Ashton Kutcher. In other words: Mission accomplished!

We also beat the Angry Birds dudes at No. 49, whom my two kids would nonetheless have voted tops over their mom any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

In addition, Vanity Fair broke off a list of 25 “Powers That Be,” which is made up of a lot of longtime “New Establishment” folks, as well as another list called the “Hall of Fame.”

“These are the people who have shaped the world we live in today — and continue to wield enormous influence,” said Vanity Fair, which translates into dustier moguls.

Topping the powers-that-be, of course, is Apple’s co-founder and Chairman Steve Jobs. And outgone Google CEO and now Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt is now enshrined in the hall of fame.

As Walt and I head to a good table at the Minetta Tavern to meet the cool peeps for a celebratory drink, here is the official press releases from Vanity Fair:

FACEBOOK FOUNDER MARK ZUCKERBERG TOPS VANITY FAIR’S NEW ESTABLISHMENT LIST FOR THE SECOND YEAR IN A ROW

Sergey Brin and Larry Page Take No. 2 Spot, Lady Gaga Jumps to the Top 10 of Tech-Dominant List

NEW YORK, N.Y. — “The Age of Information gives way to a burgeoning Age of Technology,” announces Graydon Carter, remarking on the “seismic shift in interest and influence” that has occurred in the 17 years that Vanity Fair has been ranking America’s power players. The magazine’s 2011 New Establishment list identifies the top 50 of an innovative new breed of buccaneering visionaries, engineering prodigies, and entrepreneurs, who quite often sport hoodies, floppy hair, and backpacks.

Mark Zuckerberg, founder of the inescapable social-networking site Facebook, maintains his perch at the top of Vanity Fair’s 17th annual New Establishment List ranking for the second year in a row. With a possible I.P.O. on the horizon by 2012, which could value the company anywhere between $50 and $100 billion, Facebook has enough clout to worry even the unshakable Google. Zuckerberg is still the youngest person ever to top the list.

Sergey Brin and Larry Page, co-founders of Google, are in the No. 2 spot this year, closing in on Zuckerberg as they jump up one spot, from No. 3 in 2010. Eric Schmidt, who appeared on the list last year with the duo, has since been pushed out of the C.E.O’s office, replaced by Page. Despite reports of an anti-trust investigation, Google has been setting its sites on Facebook by concentrating on strategic initiatives, such as engineering social-networking features.

Rounding out the top five are Jeff Bezos, of Amazon, at No. 3, Tim Cook and Jonathan Ive, of Apple, at No. 4, and Twitter and Square founder Jack Dorsey, at No. 5.

Lady Gaga makes an appearance for the second year in a row. Coming in at No. 9, she is the highest-ranking woman on the list, in front of J. K. Rowling at No. 16, Sheryl Sandberg, of Facebook, at No. 26, Angela Ahrendts with Christopher Bailey, of Burberry, at No. 30, Natalie Massenet at No. 32, and Kara Swisher with Walt Mossberg at No. 40. At 25 years old, Gaga is also the youngest person on the list — not a surprise for someone whose fans managed to crash Amazon’s servers in their desperation to download her third album.

Youthful energy is spread throughout this year’s list with 15 members under the age of 40, including Zuckerberg, Brin and Page, Dorsey, Lady Gaga, Andrew Mason, Sean Parker, Ryan Kavanaugh, Jeremy Stoppelman, Ashton Kutcher, Dennis Crowley, Daniel Ek, Mikael Hed and Niklas Hed, and Justin Timberlake.

There are 14 billionaires on the list: Zuckerberg, Brin and Page, Bezos, Mark Pincus, Michael Moritz, J. K. Rowling, Jim Breyer, Reid Hoffman, Herbert Allen III, Yuri Milner, Robin Li, Parker, and Peter Thiel.

Five member of the New Establishment are actively involved in space exploration, including Brin, Elon Musk, Bezos, Thiel, and Dennis Crowley. Eight of the New Establishment nominees can count themselves members of the ever growing Stanford Mafia; they include Brin, Page, Reed Hastings, Jim Breyer, Hoffman, Musk, Thiel, and John Hennessy.

The New Establishment, Vanity Fair’s annual ranking of the top leaders of our time, is made up of owners, creators, buyers, thinkers, and innovators — the movers and shakers in the worlds of technology, media, business, politics, entertainment, and fashion. These men and women are the taste-makers and trendsetters, opinion formers and agenda creators, not to mention empire builders. Entry into the ranks of Vanity Fair’s list is based on a number of factors: wealth, influence, and philanthropy, as well as such intangibles as vision and the x factor.

The October issue of Vanity Fair will be on newsstands in New York and L.A. on September 1, and nationally and on the iPad September 6.

THE VANITY FAIR NEW ESTABLISHMENT

1. Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook
2. Sergey Brin and Larry Page, Google
3. Jeff Bezos, Amazon
4. Tim Cook and Jonathan Ive, Apple
5. Jack Dorsey, Square, Twitter
6. Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz, Andreessen Horowitz
7. Reed Hastings, Netflix
8. John Lasseter, Pixar, Walt Disney Animation Studios
9. Lady Gaga, singer
10. Dan Doctoroff, Bloomberg L.P.
11. Dick Costolo, Twitter
12. Mark Pincus, Zynga
13. Jim Breyer, Accel Partners
14. Tim Burton, Johnny Depp, and Graham King, Movies
15. Michael Moritz, Sequoia Capital
16. J. K. Rowling, Harry Potter
17. Trey Parker and Matt Stone, South Park
18. Reid Hoffman, Greylock Partners, LinkedIn
19. Herb Allen III, Allen & Co.
20. Judd Apatow, Apatow Productions
21. Jay-Z, Roc Nation
22. Todd Phillips, Green Hat Films
23. Yuri Milner, DST Global
24. J. J. Abrams, writer, director, producer
25. Robin Li, Baidu
26. Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook
27. Andrew Mason, Groupon
28. Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, television
29. Mark Wahlberg and Stephen Levinson, Leverage
30. Angela Ahrendts and Christopher Bailey, Burberry
31. Elon Musk, Tesla Motors, Space X
32. Natalie Massenet, Net-a-Porter Group
33. Paul Graham, Y Combinator
34. Sean Parker, entrepreneur
35. Fred Wilson, Union Square Ventures, Flatiron Partners
36. Peter Thiel, Founders Fund, Clarium Capital Management
37. Peter Jackson, Wingnut Films
38. Ryan Kavanaugh, Relativity Media
39. Mike Allen, Politico
40. Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher, All Things D
41. John Hennessy, Stanford University
42. Jeremy Stoppelman, Yelp
43. Ashton Kutcher, actor, investor
44. Tyler Perry, director, producer, writer, actor
45. Dennis Crowley, Foursquare
46. Kevin Ryan, Gilt Groupe
47. Daniel Ek, Spotify
48. Henry Blodget, Business Insider
49. Mikael Hed, Niklas Hed, and Peter Vesterbacka, Rovio
50. Justin Timberlake, singer, actor

STEVE JOBS HOLDS THE TOP SPOT ON VANITY FAIR’S LIST OF THE POWERS THAT BE

Embattled News Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch in the Top 5

NEW YORK, N.Y. — This year Vanity Fair inaugurates a list of the Powers That Be. These are the people who have shaped the world we live in today — and continue to wield enormous influence. Many are longtime New Establishment members, and their destinies are intertwined with the members of this year’s New Establishment.

Steve Jobs, of Apple, holds the top spot on the list of the Powers That Be. Since Jobs took control of the company 14 years ago, the stock’s share price has risen more than 6,500 percent. At the height of the debt crisis in late July, Apple had more cash on hand than the U.S. government.

Bernard Arnault, of luxury-goods company LVMH, ranks in the No. 2 spot. As an overseer of countless enduring luxury brands, Arnault has left his mark on the industry. Last year he spent $2 billion to accumulate a 20 percent stake in family-controlled but publicly traded Hermès.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg is No.3 on this year’s list while News Corporation chairman Rupert Murdoch comes in at No. 4. The tumultuous News of the World scandals this year have shaken the media baron, but also shown his staying power in the face of just about anything. Brian Roberts and Steve Burke, of Comcast, NBCUniversal, who recently acquired the U.S. media rights to the Olympic Games through 2020, are No. 5.

Jill Abramson is the highest-ranking woman out of six on the list, at No. 9. She is followed by Angelina Jolie with Brad Pitt at No. 11, Sue Naegle with Richard Plepler and Michael Lombardo at No. 15, Anne Sweeney with George Bodenheimer at No. 22, Bonnie Hammer at No. 24, and Arianna Huffington with Tim Armstrong at No. 25.

Because some power is permanent, Vanity Fair nominates a number of regulars to the Hall of Fame this year. Warren Buffett, of Berkshire Hathaway, joins Barry Diller and Diane von Furstenberg, Tom Ford, actor Tom Hanks, and designer Karl Lagerfeld. Network impresario Oprah Winfrey, Jeffrey Katzenberg, of DreamWorks Animation, and talk-show host Charlie Rose all make the ranks as well.

The October issue of Vanity Fair will be on newsstands in New York and L.A. on September 1, and nationally and on the iPad September 6.

THE POWERS THAT BE

1. Steve Jobs, Apple
2. Bernard Arnault, LVMH
3. Michael Bloomberg, mayor, New York City
4. Rupert Murdoch, News Corporation
5. Brian Roberts and Steve Burke, Comcast, NBCUniversal
6. François-Henri Pinault, PPR
7. Bob Iger, Walt Disney Company
8. Jeffrey Bewkes, Time Warner
9. Jill Abramson, The New York Times
10. Steve Ballmer, Microsoft
11. Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, movies, philanthropy
12. Diego Della Valle, Tod’s
13. Roman Abramovich, investments
14. Mickey Drexler, J. Crew
15. Richard Plepler, Sue Naegle, and Michael Lombardo, HBO
16. Larry Gagosian, Gagosian Gallery
17. Harvey and Bob Weinstein, the Weinstein Company
18. Marc Jacobs, designer
19. Lorne Michaels, Saturday Night Live
20. David Zaslav, Discovery Communications
21. Jean Pigozzi, investments, art
22. George Bodenheimer and Anne Sweeney, Disney Media Networks
23. Vivi Nevo, NV Investments
24. Bonnie Hammer, NBCU Cable Entertainment and Cable Studios
25. Tim Armstrong and Arianna Huffington, AOL Huffington Post Media Group

HALL OF FAME

Edgar Bronfman Jr., Warner Music Group
Warren Buffett, Berkshire Hathaway
Ron Conway, angel investor
Philippe Dauman, Viacom
Barry Diller and Diane von Furstenberg, IAC, DVF
John Doerr, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers
Larry Ellison, Oracle Corporation
Tom Ford, designer/filmmaker
Ted Forstmann, IMG Worldwide
Tom Freston, Firefly3
Brian Grazer and Ron Howard, Imagine Entertainment
Tom Hanks, actor
Jeffrey Katzenberg, DreamWorks Animation
Vinod Khosla, Khosla Ventures
Karl Lagerfeld, Chanel
Ralph Lauren, Polo Ralph Lauren
John Malone, Liberty Media
Ron Meyer, Universal Studios
Leslie Moonves, CBS
Ronald Perelman, MacAndrews and Forbes
Miuccia Prada, Prada
Charlie Rose, talk-show host
Eric Schmidt, Google
Terry Semel, investor
Oprah Winfrey, OWN

(Full disclosure: Readers who look closely at the list will notice that all things ATD senior editor Peter Kafka is listed as a contributor. This is true! Also true: Peter wrote biographical entries for several people on the list, but has zero input on its composition. He tells us he had no idea that we were being considered for inclusion, and we believe him. He also says that had he been asked for his opinion, he would have voted for us, his bosses, to be included. We also believe that.)

MailChimp, the Atlanta-based email marketing service, has bought TinyLetter, which is well-known entrepreneur Phil Kaplan’s most recent start-up.

While MailChimp focuses on more commercial clients — including AllThingsD — who want to send email newsletters and manage subscriber lists, TinyLetter is aimed at individuals who want similar services.

In an interview this morning, Kaplan said he sold the nine-month-old company, which he self-funded, in order to take advantage of MailChimp’s infrastructure and scaling capabilities.

He will remain an adviser to MailChimp, which now has about 950,000 newsletters, with about two billion emails sent monthly. It has 100 employees.

In contrast, TinyLetter has about 30,000 newsletters and sends out about one million emails a month.

Kaplan would not disclose terms of the acquisition deal, even though I asked him nicely several times. But the TinyLetter brand will remain.

Andy Miller (pictured here), the high-profile VP of mobile advertising at Apple, is planning on leaving the company, according to sources close to the situation.

Sources said Miller — who sold Quattro Wireless, the mobile advertising company he co-founded in 2006, to Apple in early 2010 for $275 million — will become a general partner at Highland Capital, the Boston-based venture firm that had funded Quattro.

Apple will search for a replacement for Miller, whose staff was told of the impending departure today.

Since Miller got to Apple, he has reported directly to its CEO and co-founder Steve Jobs, who noted after the acquisition:

“We tried to buy a company named AdMob, but Google came in and snatched them from us. So we bought Quattro, and they are teaching us. We are making ads that are different than anything I’ve ever seen.”

But Apple’s ad aspirations have been a bit of a bumpy road, as the company has tried to fine-tune the offering, even as competition — from Google, Facebook and a range of start-ups — has increased in the fast-growing space.

Not surprisingly, Apple shut down Quattro in favor of its much ballyhooed iAd platform a year ago. Via iAd, Apple has promised to serve up interactive rich-media ads on iPhone and iPod touch apps.

Some marketers balked at Apple’s tight control over iAds and their high prices, but recently the company has tried to give Madison Avenue more flexibility.

That’s because, while still small, mobile advertising will be a huge market. As The Wall Street Journal recently reported: “Marketers spent just $743.1 million on mobile ads in the U.S. in 2010, up 79% from $416 million in 2009, according to research firm eMarketer.”

At Highland, Miller will be working on a range of digital investments from its Silicon Valley office, sources said, and not just in the mobile space.

He has a varied background: Miller worked for mobile content company m-Qube and also WatchPoint Media, an interactive television start-up.

I have contacted Apple PR for a comment, but have not yet heard back.

Here’s a handy helper for those following the fate of the Hulu premium online video service, whose noisy efforts to sell itself have gotten a lot of attention of late:

“In preliminary talks” = “hawking itself to one of a half dozen big moneybag tech companies who will visit with Hulu’s bankers and management to see its presentation at Morgan Stanley’s office in Century City in Los Angeles.”

Last Friday, for example, that meant a look-see for Microsoft execs, to show the software giant the story of how paying top dollar for the popular Hulu would be a great investment.

This week, sources said, Yahoo will get the expected gander at the books too, among the other companies targeted by Hulu as part of a sales process in its very early stages.

Among those companies on the short list, sources said, along with Microsoft and Yahoo are: Google, Verizon, AT&T and Amazon.

None of these should come as a surprise, since they all have a big interest in the digital distribution of content business.

Google is perhaps the most interesting and difficult of the group, due to both its massive YouTube unit and the even more massive interest by government regulators about its disturbing massiveness.

Amazon is the company that seems most suited as a Hulu buyer, since it already makes its business selling and distributing content. In addition, Hulu CEO Jason Kilar was a former exec — bringing a certain level of familiarity and presumably much less of the grumpy disgruntlement that he experienced with Hulu’s current media giant owners.

Microsoft seems like the longest shot and least enthusiastic, although it certainly could afford it.

As for Yahoo: Good lord, it needs something sexy to tell weary investors.

Not in the initial round, but other possible acquirers Hulu is targeting: Facebook, Netflix, Samsung and Liberty Media.

And definitely not among those kicking the tires: Disney, News Corp. and Comcast, the trio of partners who own Hulu, along with Providence Equity Partners.

The big question, of course, is whether media-focused Apple — a notorious buyer of almost nothing — would be interested in Hulu.

These blind dates with the best possible buyers will presumably give each insight into Hulu’s business and give Hulu information on what they are looking for.

Sources who have heard the pitch said Hulu is positioning itself as an inevitable competitor to cable, which seems an odd position to take, unless it can get regular access to the kind of top-drawer content that consumers want.

And that will be the most important issue for anyone buying Hulu: The time and terms of rights to the television and movie content on the site, which has been a critical part of its success.

Buyers I have interviewed said Hulu has to offer at least an 18-month license for its content and a pile of rights to hit shows to differentiate itself from competitors.

As Peter Kafka wrote, Hulu buyers would indeed get exclusive content, but with strings attached.

He also noted that the latest content licenses for Hulu’s owner/partners — Disney’s ABC and News Corp.’s Fox — have recently been completed, deals that will stay intact if Hulu is sold.

Unlike Netflix, which has had to pay top dollar for a small pile of premium content while deftly using a large archive of older content to attract subscribers, Hulu’s success has had a lot to do with more access to popular current shows offered by its media giant owners.

Those shows include TV hits such as “The Office” and “Glee.”

That access has become a point of contention with those owners, who have differed with Hulu management about what comes next for the mostly advertising-supported site, even though its slick product has been a clear hit with consumers.

Of course, some speculate that Hulu might not sell at all, just as it never went public as it had said it might do previously. In that case, it will be interesting to see what will become of Hulu once the music stops.

(And, if anyone would like to email me the Hulu presentation or notes on it, please do, so I can formulate a bid myself!)

But, until this deal churns slowly, leakily and loudly forward — let’s enjoy some apt Hulu content. As usual, the fun version of ABBA’s “Dancing Queen” by the kids from “Glee” was not available on the site.

Thus, I selected frequent “Glee” guest star Gwyneth Paltrow belting out Joan Jett’s “Do You Wanna Touch Me” on the show, as a good alternate metaphor for the sales process:

Think again.

New York-based Group Commerce, which is coming out of stealth today, has the funding and the pedigree to be a viable contender.

Founded by former Google and DoubleClick executives David Rosenblatt, Jonty Kelt, and Andrew Glenn, has raised $8 million in capital.

Investors include: Spark Capital, Carmel Ventures, Lerer Media Ventures, and Bob Pittman, the founder of MTV Networks and now chairman of media and entertainment platforms at Clear Channel.

What’s more, it is coming out of the gate running with four major publishers added to its platform: DailyCandy, Meredith Corporation, Thrillist and The New York Times.

In an exclusive interview with eMoney, Rosenblatt and Kelt explain that unlike Groupon or LivingSocial, Group Commerce is not building its own consumer brand, and won’t be targeting deals directly at consumers. Rather, it’s banking on building a platform that other media companies can leverage.

Rosenblatt, who was the former CEO of DoubleClick, is the company’s chairman, Kelt is CEO, and Glenn is the company’s CTO. All three were at DoubleClick when it was acquired by Google for $3.1 billion

Ironically, they are now building a business that Google desperately wants to get into, but failed after an unsuccessful $6 billion bid to acquire Groupon.

Rosenblatt said:

“Of course, this is going to be a very big market, and there will be many more players than just two. Each participant will have a different approach. Google clearly has one, but we believe collectively that publishers have the strongest advantage. They have the audience and the brand loyalty, but they are missing the mechanics and industry expertise.”

The daily deals space is getting exceedingly crowded.

The market is expected to soar to as much as $3.9 billion in the next four years, and there’s roughly 200 players in the space, according to estimates by BIA/Kelsey.

Rosenblatt compared the market to the early days of online advertising when AOL and Yahoo dominated.

“In the early days of the display market, a big share of the market was dominated by two players, but overtime advertising was redistributed to where the audience was. Groupon and LivingSocial have done a great job creating a market, and they will continue to be very large, but there will be a similar redistribution in favor of publishers,” he said.

Beyond Groupon and LivingSocial, which are considered the market leaders, there’s other companies attacking several niches, ranging from furniture to baby apparel, travel and families. There’s also companies that say they offer exactly what Group Commerce is describing–a white label solution for publishers–including Seattle-based Tippr and ReachLocal, which recently acquired DealOn.

“There’s a huge number of Groupon clones,” Rosenblatt said. “The insight here is that none of those clones have established publishers, they don’t have brands or trusted relationships, or customer lists….We don’t have a b2c business, but that is the case with most of the other white label providers. They also don’t have teams and our breadth of services.”

He says the three components that you must have in order to be successful in the space are: A loyal audience; great content and deals; and a technology platform.

“The publishers we’ve worked with for many years [at DoubleClick] are in the process of transitioning to a new digital economy,” Rosenblatt said. “They have an audience and the ability to match the audience to deals that are contextually relevant. Our role is to offer the third part.”

Group Commerce is not just offering a technology platform, but also is sourcing the deals for its media partners, and finding a large audience and wide range of demographics for the merchants across publications.

Daily deals typically offer discounts at restaurants or other services for as much as 50 to 70 percent off. The customer pays for the voucher up front and then redeems it later. Typically, the merchant only gets half of that cash, while the other half goes to Groupon or another provider. For the merchant it’s a new form of advertising, replacing traditional methods, like Yellow Pages or newspaper ads.

Group Commerce would not disclose its revenue splits, but said it is paid with a portion of gross revenue of each deal, and that it’s a shared risk model. “If the deals don’t work, we don’t get paid,” Kelt said.

Kelt added that they believe their model will work because it combines the publisher’s knowledge of the audience with the merchants. For instance, DailyCandy’s audience is young and female, and a reader may be interested in an offer for a ladies night out at an upscale restaurant.

Although a potential customer does not have necessarily have to be a publisher, Kelt notes. It can be anyone with an audience, including a celebrity with a large following on Twitter.

Today, Group Commerce has 35 employees in New York, Chicago, Florida, San Francisco and Los Angeles. It’s planning to grow to 100 employees by the end of the year with the majority being sales people.

Apparently, it’s not only in Google’s pond where Facebook fishes for talent–the social networking giant has recruited Microsoft’s global advertising head Carolyn Everson as one of its top sales execs.

A Facebook spokesperson confirmed the hiring, after a query this afternoon by BoomTown. Everson will be VP of Global Sales at the Silicon Valley company, although is likely to be located in New York.

The move will surely cause some tensions with the software giant, which is both a prominent partner of and investor in Facebook, especially since Everson was only hired at Microsoft last June after a long search.

Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg addressed that issue in a statement:

“Microsoft was one of our earliest partners and is still one of our most valued. We have a long and strong relationship that includes search ads on our site, a social layer on Bing search results and a deep and popular integration with Xbox. They are a leader when it comes to unlocking the power of social for their already popular products and services. We look forward to continuing to expand our relationship with them.”

A Microsoft spokesman declined to comment.

Despite the possible awkwardness between Facebook and Microsoft–hey, we stole your top sales exec, but you rock!–the move to Facebook is a big opportunity for Everson.

But, according to sources, the former MTV Networks ad exec had become frustrated by the intense focus on pushing traffic to Microsoft’s Bing search service from its MSN portal at the expense of premium ad sales.

In addition, with the massive search and advertising partnership between Microsoft and Yahoo now in place, Everson was also not able to offer search advertising from Microsoft to marketers in packages. Yahoo is now in charge of that offering.

Everson will essentially be replacing longtime and well-regarded Facebook ad exec Mike Murphy, who left the Palo Alto, Calif., company last fall. She will report to former Googler David Fischer, VP of Advertising and Global Operations.

But it was COO Sheryl Sandberg, said sources, who was most focused on Everson. In fact, she just “friended” Everson on Facebook this week, as did another top ad exec, Tom Arrix.

Having a top exec who is amenable to and well known by Madison Avenue is key for Facebook as it ramps up its business, in anticipation of an IPO next year.

Despite being private, Facebook has recently been valued at between $50 and $60 billion by investors, who have been eagerly buying up shares of the company on secondary markets.

Under Murphy and Fischer, ad sales have been doing well already. Facebook’s share of online display advertising has more than quadrupled, from about three percent to almost 14 percent of the nearly $9 billion U.S. market, according to a recent survey.

In growing so quickly, Facebook has grabbed ad revenue–reportedly $2 billion last year–from old online powerhouses, especially Yahoo and AOL, and is also in a big fight with Google over premium ad sales.

Facebook’s surging usage and engagement are the reasons for the increased interest from advertisers, as well as its global growth in both market share and mindshare of consumers.

Thus, the search for a Murphy replacement was far-ranging, and included interest in a number of prominent ad execs from traditional media giants and also ad agencies.

The appointment is a big move for the dynamic Everson, who has mostly worked in the mainstream media for much of her career.

Everson came to Microsoft from a job as EVP of Strategy and Operations for the MTV Networks U.S. ad sales department.

Interestingly, she was also on the short list of candidates Yahoo was once perusing to fill the key U.S. ad sales job after Joanne Bradford departed for Demand Media.

Fast-forward to today, and the most successful Web video* doesn’t look anything like TV. It looks like Web video, and it’s usually made for very little money, featuring people who don’t get work doing anything else. (See: YouTube’s Partner Program, an increasingly important part of Google’s video site.)

Which is why it’s interesting to see what DBG is up to. The video ad network is finishing up production on a new series that’s sort of back-to-the-future: A 10-part dramatic serial, featuring real actors, cameras and even a script.

It’s called “The Confession,” and it will star Kiefer Sutherland, last seen on “24,” and John Hurt, who has been seen in lots and lots of stuff.

I’m unclear about the plot, but I’m pretty sure that it will be some sort of thriller. If you were putting Kiefer Sutherland in a Web serial, it would pretty much have to be a thriller, right? In any case, you’ll be able to see it in March, most likely via an initial exclusive run on Hulu.

DBG won’t cough up the financial details, but the company does tell me that its actors and crew are being paid real money and aren’t donating their time or exchanging it for revenue/equity/good karma.

And for now, at least, DBG is on the hook for all of that: Unlike almost all Web video that gets made today, the show was made without a sponsor’s buy-in. But the company is confident it will land advertisers soon.

We’ll get a better sense of whether the bet was a good one over the next few months, as the company releases teaser trailers. For now, it’s giving us a clip of Sutherland talking. Still, interesting:

Kiefer Sutherland on The Confession from Peter Kafka on Vimeo.

*We’re talking about stuff created for the Web. People are also quite content to watch “real” TV shows and movies on the Web, via sites and services like YouTube, Hulu and Netflix. And at some point–not yet, but eventually–those distinctions are going to get much blurrier.

Such steep discounts are a cornerstone of Amazon’s strategy to gain traction in a market in which iTunes remains the dominant player. At the same time, a debate has arisen among music labels about whether such discounts risk undermining the value of their products.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Good question, says EMI Music, the label that distributes the band’s music.

Apple has exclusive digital rights for the Beatles “into 2011,” says spokesman Dylan Jones, and he notes that the exclusivity doesn’t expire on the first of January. But he confirms that the exclusivity does indeed have an expiration date.

So when that date comes, we should expect to see the Beatles everywhere else you can get music online, right? Namely Amazon, and the subscription services that rent music by the month, like Spotify, Rhapsody and Microsoft’s Zune? Or Google, if and when it launches its music service?

“That’s a question, isn’t it,” Jones says, and doesn’t offer more.

Couple of theories here:

• The easiest explanation is that the Beatles music will follow the path of other digital exclusives, and become widely available after Apple gets its run.
• It’s also possible that Apple and the Beatles will renew their exclusive before it expires. That hasn’t happened before, but if Steve Jobs really, really wants to make it work, I guess he could.
• The most intriguing possibility: The Beatles leave iTunes once their deal ends–and don’t come back to digital again. Seems silly, but big traditional media loves “windowing” their content, and I suppose someone might convince the band this would be a clever way to go–show up, make a splash, walk away and then try it again down the road, like a band that’s always going on a farewell tour. Hope not!

BoomTown usually does not get all weepy over the departure of public relations folks at Internet companies, in that cynical I’ve-seen-’em-come-and-I’ve-seen-’em-go kind of way.

But the leaving of Brandee Barker (pictured here) from Facebook most certainly elicited a small single tear of sadness this morning, when she called into All Things Digital Global HQ to say she would no longer be tossing me her patented–and very endearing–hand-in-the-face “no comment” for the powerful social networking site.

After four long and tumultuous years, she leaves the company on Dec. 10.

(In a changing-of-the-guard theme, Barker follows longtime advertising sales exec Mike Murphy, who also recently resigned, out the door.)

In a statement, Facebook said:

“We can confirm Brandee is leaving Facebook to start a communications consulting business focused on early stage tech companies. We are grateful for her dedication and the company has benefited greatly from her contributions. We suspect Brandee’s future clients will also value her talents and experience and we wish her much success with her new venture.”

Indeed, although the geeks always get the credit, Facebook owes an awful lot to Barker, for helping its products and services stand out in a sea of competitors.

For certain, it was not as influential as it is today when Barker got there as its head of PR, just as the start-up was beginning to make itself known.

There were only seven million Facebook members when Barker joined, compared to 500 million today.

Still, the veteran communications exec was quickly aware of its power when 750,000 of those members protested against Facebook’s introduction of the initially controversial news feed.

“I had no idea when I took the job that it would be like that,” said Barker, who was employee No. 120 at Facebook, in an Interview with me this morning.

In fact, it has been like that ever since then, as she has navigated a series of triumphs and just as many mishaps for the company as it grew and grew.

One of her favorite moments, she told me, was the introduction of the Facebook platform at its inaugural F8 developers event several years ago.

“Mark [Zuckerberg] had a real vision and the craziness that followed it was an incredible experience,” said Barker, who was the one largely responsible for introducing the decidedly quirky co-founder and CEO of Facebook to the world.

For the most part, Barker shepherded him well, even as the fire hose of attention increased in media, consumer and regulatory pressure over issues ranging from the controversial founding of Facebook–Barker has a masters from Harvard University in Winklevii crisis management–to privacy snafus and more.

A lot of her ministrations were funny, though, as she remembered: “Another great moment was when I insisted Mark take a suitcase instead of a backpack to his first Davos in 2007, so I went out and bought him one.”

And let us not even get into the flip-flop controversies or when I snarkily called Zuckerberg “toddler CEO” to Lesley Stahl on “60 Minutes.”

Barker handled it all with grace and humor.

But as Facebook has grown to more than 1,500 employees and its business has boomed, Barker–who recently returned to the company after having a baby–decided that bigger was not better, at least for her.

“I had a pretty deep evaluation when I was away from the company that what I am good at and what I like is working with early-stage companies and their teams,” said Barker, who will start a communications consultancy. “At this point in my career, that’s what I want to do.”

Barker noted, in fact, that there were a lot of companies started by former early Facebook employees like her that might become clients, although she declined to be more specific.

In the end, another “no comment” for me from Barker!

I don’t mind, because here is my comment, on the record and for attribution: It’s a sad day for Facebook, and I’ll miss Brandee Barker very much.

Speaking of no comment, here is Barker in one of my favorite no comments, from behind a plant at a 2008 Silicon Valley luncheon for the German DLD conference:

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20101108/brandee-no-comment-barker-finally-comments-pr-honcho-leaving-facebook/feed/ 6 http://allthingsd.com/20100930/microsoft-lines-up-att-htc-and-lg-for-oct-11-windows-phone-7-launch/ http://allthingsd.com/20100930/microsoft-lines-up-att-htc-and-lg-for-oct-11-windows-phone-7-launch/#comments Thu, 30 Sep 2010 19:24:12 +0000 John Paczkowski http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/?p=49777 Microsoft has set a hard date for the launch of its new Windows Phone 7 operating system: October 11. “People familiar with the launch plans” tell The Wall Street Journal that the company will debut the OS at an event in New York that day and announce AT&T (T) as the exclusive carrier of the first smartphones to run it–one from HTC, another from LG and a third from Samsung.

The Journal pins the hardware street date for the week of November 8, but I’m told it will likely be earlier. Sources in a position to know say Windows Phone 7 smartphones will be in stores on October 21. They also say that Microsoft (MSFT) has lined up another exclusive carrier overseas: Orange.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100930/microsoft-lines-up-att-htc-and-lg-for-oct-11-windows-phone-7-launch/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20100929/exclusive-facebook-and-skype-readying-wide-ranging-integration-partnership/ http://allthingsd.com/20100929/exclusive-facebook-and-skype-readying-wide-ranging-integration-partnership/#comments Wed, 29 Sep 2010 07:34:10 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=34389

You didn’t think Facebook would integrate with Google (GOOG) Voice, did you?

Actually, according to sources close to the situation, Facebook and Skype are poised to announce a significant and wide-ranging partnership that will include integration of SMS, voice chat and Facebook Connect.

The move by the pair–which have tested small contact importer integrations before–is a natural one for the social networking giant, which is aiming to be the central communications and messaging platform for its users, across a range of media.

Facebook’s goal, according to sources: To mesh communications and community more tightly together and add more tools to allow users to do so.

Since it was not going to create an Internet telephony service of its own–kind of like not creating a mobile operating system–Facebook has apparently turned to the Web’s Internet telephony leader.

Interestingly, Facebook has previously tested a video chat product.

Skype had 124 million people using it at least once a month and 560 million registered users, which will be bolstered by the 500 million Facebook users who will now be able to use it more seamlessly within Skype.

That will include allowing users to SMS and call Facebook friends from Skype, which will now deploy Facebook Connect.

And also do video chat using Facebook in Skype, which you can see below, in a very odd screenshot sent to me by a source–Walt Mossberg’s code name is not Daniel Matthews and I am not Allison Brown. (Click on the image to make it larger.)

This all will be available in Skype’s newest version, 5.0, which emerges from beta in a few weeks.

This is a big win for the Luxembourg-based Skype, which is currently readying a public offering.

While it now dominates the online calling space, it needs to be present where users are now moving, such as Facebook.

And for Facebook, this is also helpful to its international push, making it more appealing globally since Skype is much more popular outside the U.S.

It will be interesting to see if both cross-integrate into their popular mobile apps too.

Facebook has been doing a lot of integrations with other communications services, such as a massive upcoming one with Yahoo (YHOO) and also one with Microsoft (MSFT).

Skype is also increasing its partnerships. Today, for example, it will announce a deal with Avaya, which makes office phones and related software aimed at businesses.

The pair called it a “strategic unified communications and collaboration partnership,” and is centered on business and personal videoconferencing.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100929/exclusive-facebook-and-skype-readying-wide-ranging-integration-partnership/feed/ 26 http://allthingsd.com/20100421/att-iphone-exclusivity/ http://allthingsd.com/20100421/att-iphone-exclusivity/#comments Wed, 21 Apr 2010 20:06:35 +0000 John Paczkowski http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/?p=38886 Discussing AT&T’s latest quarterly results on a conference call this morning, CFO Richard Lindner casually mentioned that the company has in its pipeline some “new products and product refreshes we’re excited about.”

He didn’t name any of them, but it’s a safe bet that at least one of the devices to which he referred is Apple’s next-generation iPhone, perhaps the last for which AT&T will have an exclusive.

As much as the debut of that device bodes well for the AT&T (T), the carrier’s dependency on it as a profit driver is becoming a worrisome vulnerability.

Consider this: In its first quarter, AT&T activated 2.7 million Apple iPhones. A third of those, about 891,000, were purchased by new subscribers. Which means, as Bernstein Research analyst Craig Moffett observed today, that the iPhone drove about 174 percent of AT&T’s post-paid net additions (the company had about 512,000 post-paid net adds).

That’s an astonishing percentage. But what would AT&T’s post-paid numbers look like if the company loses iPhone exclusivity and Verizon (VZ) begins selling the device, as some believe it soon might?

My guess: They would be quite a bit smaller. And that’s the concern some analysts are voicing today. As Moffett wrote in a note to clients this morning, “The question of what AT&T will do if and when they lose iPhone exclusivity is hard to escape.” Indeed. By some estimates nearly a third of AT&T’s post-paid customers are sticking with the company primarily because of iPhone exclusivity.

But ultimately, what can AT&T do? Not much, unless it manages to score a similar exclusivity deal on another device that rivals the iPhone in popularity. Other than that? Gird itself for the inevitable blow, I suppose. Continue to improve its network, do its best to hold on to the iPhone owners it has and continue signing up new ones.

The truth is that AT&T has known all along that its exclusive relationship with Apple (AAPL) would change someday and has undoubtedly already factored this into its plans.

As Linder told Reuters today, “…at some point [Apple] will, as they have in other countries, make the decision to broaden [iPhone] distribution and move to a non-exclusive arrangement. When that occurs at some point, I fully expect we’ll continue to be a good partner with them, and continue to carry a full range of Apple devices.”

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100421/att-iphone-exclusivity/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20100304/exclusive-on-the-internet-no-one-knows-your-story-is-make-believe/ http://allthingsd.com/20100304/exclusive-on-the-internet-no-one-knows-your-story-is-make-believe/#comments Thu, 04 Mar 2010 20:46:40 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=16993 One upside of the Web is that everyone has a printing press. One downside: Everyone has a printing press.

Hence, today’s brief flurry of reports echoing Radar Online’s scoop that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts was “seriously considering stepping down” for “personal reasons.”

The story, which was published early this morning, is not true. And it was ignored until lunchtime on the East Coast, when the Drudge Report picked it up. At that point it became open game for a host of smaller sites, which picked it up with varying degrees of credulity.

Radar has since reversed the story, noting that it “has obtained new information that Justice Roberts will NOT resign. The justice will be staying on the bench.” The site has yet to update its headline, though, which is still trumpeting its “exclusive.”

Radar is a media gossip site/magazine that has gone through several permutations over the years. In its current incarnation, it’s an online-only property owned by American Media Inc., the people who bring you the National Enquirer, among other properties.

But while the Enquirer has a history of getting some big political stories right over the years, Radar doesn’t. It generally sticks to stuff like photos of the “Jersey Shore” dudes taking off their clothes. Probably a good strategy going forward.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100304/exclusive-on-the-internet-no-one-knows-your-story-is-make-believe/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20100302/is-apple-finally-worried-about-amazons-music-store/ http://allthingsd.com/20100302/is-apple-finally-worried-about-amazons-music-store/#comments Tue, 02 Mar 2010 23:14:10 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=16893 Amazon’s MP3 store hasn’t done much to weaken Apple’s grip on the digital music business. But that doesn’t mean Apple isn’t paying attention.

Big music label folks say Apple (AAPL) has long complained about their involvement with Amazon (AMZN). But recently, Billboard reports, those complaints have become more specific. The trade magazine says Apple is asking the labels not to push new releases via Amazon’s “Daily Deal” promotion, which offers new records at cut-rate prices.

Warning! There’s some salty music-label-executive language in this excerpt:

In exchange for a Daily Deal promotion on a new album, Amazon has been asking labels to provide it with a one-day exclusive before street date and such digital marketing support as a banner ad on an artist’s MySpace page and messages on label and artist Web sites and social network feeds.

“When that happened,” [a major-label head of sales] says, “iTunes said, ‘Enough of that shit.’”

Sources say that iTunes representatives have been urging labels to rethink their participation in the Amazon promotion and that they have backed up those warnings by withdrawing marketing support for certain releases featured as Daily Deals.

In response, label executives at Capitol, Capitol Nashville and Jive recently opted against participating in Daily Deal promotions they had been considering for Corinne Bailey Rae’s “The Sea,” Lady Antebellum’s “Need You Now” and Ke$ha’s “Animal,” sources say.

Billboard notes that the labels are still working with Amazon on Daily Deal promotions. But it says they are pulling back on prereleases and exclusives for big records and pushing smaller artists that Apple isn’t likely to shower with promotional support.

Today’s Deal: $3.99 for Sony artist Raheem Devaughn’s new album, which doesn’t appear in iTunes “New and Noteworthy” section.

I’ve asked Amazon, Apple and all four of the big labels–Universal, Sony (SNE), EMI and Warner (WMG)–for comment, but I’m not holding my breath.

But assuming that Billboard is right here–and reporter Ed Christman has been covering music retail forever–it’s interesting to note that Apple is pushing back a bit more forcefully at Amazon. (Industry trade Hits DailyDouble reported something very similar in January).

If I’m Jeff Bezos, I’d take that as a compliment. And then I’d go back to worrying about Steve Jobs’s entry into the e-book market.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100302/is-apple-finally-worried-about-amazons-music-store/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20100209/gmail-goes-social-with-google-buzz/ http://allthingsd.com/20100209/gmail-goes-social-with-google-buzz/#comments Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:00:57 +0000 John Paczkowski http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/?p=34563

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100209/gmail-goes-social-with-google-buzz/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20100129/verizon-ipad-and-iphone-no-map-for-that-yet/ http://allthingsd.com/20100129/verizon-ipad-and-iphone-no-map-for-that-yet/#comments Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:00:49 +0000 John Paczkowski http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/?p=33867 One of the big surprises to come out of Wednesday’s iPad unveiling was news that the 3G version of the device will, at least initially, only be available with AT&T (T) in the U.S.

That was an announcement few were expecting. In the weeks leading up to the event, it was widely believed that Apple’s (AAPL) tablet device, if it was going to support mobile broadband, would support it on Verizon’s network and that the announcement of that carrier deal would herald the arrival of the oft-pined-for Verizon (VZ) iPhone.

Didn’t happen. And now folks are pondering just what this might mean for Apple’s carrier relationships in the U.S. As I’ve noted before, it’s inevitable that the iPhone will cease to be an AT&T exclusive, and this will certainly be true of the tablet as well.

But perhaps not quite as soon as expected. AT&T’s iPad exclusive suggests that Apple’s relationship with the carrier is still quite strong.

You’ll recall that when Apple reported earnings earlier this week, COO Tim Cook leaped to AT&T’s defense when asked about the carrier’s network issues. AT&T’s iPad exclusive would seem to lend further credence to Cook’s remarks that Apple has been happy with the company as a carrier partner and is confident of its plans to vastly improve its network.

As Bernstein analyst Toni Sacconaghi observed in a note to clients Thursday, “We note that Apple’s tone towards AT&T has shifted since last June when Apple took some verbal swipes at [the carrier] during its WWDC presentation; COO Tim Cook was complimentary of AT&T on Apple’s recent earnings call, and appeared less committed about having multiple carriers in every country. We worry that this more amicable stance towards AT&T and the lack of a CDMA iPad could suggest that a deal with Verizon on the iPhone is still being negotiated and potentially is further away than some investors might hope.”

Perhaps. Though it may only be as far away as completion of Verizon’s long-term-evolution 4G network. Why bother building a CDMA iPad and iPhone for Verizon now? Wouldn’t it be easier to wait for the rollout of the far superior LTE network, which reportedly isn’t all that far off?

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100129/verizon-ipad-and-iphone-no-map-for-that-yet/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20091203/why-comcast-will-stay-hands-off-hulu-for-now/ http://allthingsd.com/20091203/why-comcast-will-stay-hands-off-hulu-for-now/#comments Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:16:31 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=13517 Hulu and its broadcast TV owners have been pretty clear about their interest in creating a premium/subscription offering for the free site. Conventional wisdom is that we’ll see something early next year.

Does Comcast (CMCSA) have other plans? COO Steve Burke made it seem so this morning, when he told analysts that a “Hulu Premium” was “certainly not in the cards.”

An odd comment to make given that 1) Team Hulu’s premium plans didn’t slow down once news of the GE (GE)/Comcast deal broke, and 2) Comcast won’t own NBC, and thus its stake in Hulu, for another year or so.

Burke did go out of his way to say that he liked NBCU’s strategy of putting its broadcast shows up for free via Hulu, while keeping cable programming, which it sells to people like Comcast (CMCSA), more or less off of the Web.*

Of course he does! That’s the rationale behind the company’s “On Demand Online” plan, whereby cable programming is offered on the Web only to cable subscribers.

I asked Burke to clear this up during a media Q&A call this morning and he gave me an extended nonanswer/walk-back that amounted to something like actually, you know, we don’t actually own NBC, so we don’t have anything to do with Hulu, which we think is great, by the way. And then he kicked the question to NBC CEO Jeff Zucker, who offered up a nonanswer of his own about not wanting to discuss roadmaps, etc.

My hunch here: Burke would like a mulligan on this one. And Hulu’s short-term plans haven’t changed at all.

But down the road, things may very well get interesting: For starters, note that NBC’s exclusive Web licensing deal with Hulu (which is actually only sort of exclusive, but more on that later) expires in the spring of 2011, which could be within a few months of the close of the Comcast deal. And recall that Comcast was one the parties hollering loudly at Disney (DIS) not to sign on with Hulu earlier this year.

Still, I’d be surprised if Comcast makes a major overhaul with Hulu as soon as it gets a chance. The company is going to spend the next year promising politicians and voters that it’s not going to use its clout to cut off anyone’s access to anything. So to pull back on a wildly popular Web site would make for difficult optics, as they say.

At first, that is.

Related note: I can sadly confirm that Comcast does indeed intend to rebrand its awkwardly named “On Demand Online” service, which is supposed to roll out nationwide within weeks, with the infinitely worse “Xfinity” moniker.

As in “Fancast Xfinity TV” and “Xfinity.com,” as Broadcasting & Cable first reported last night.

Ugh. All I can say is that I used to refer to the whole thing as “Web TV You’ll Need to Pay to See” and got guff from the folks in Philly, who thought that was misleading. But it’s accurate, and it is way, way better than the new option.

*Sort of: NBC keeps most of its cable offerings off of Hulu, but not off of the Web. You can’t see last night’s episode of “Top Chef” (Goodbye, Jen!) on the joint-venture site, but you can see it on NBC-owned Bravo’s site.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20091203/why-comcast-will-stay-hands-off-hulu-for-now/feed/ 0