But the troubled Web property is a…really troubled Web property, its News Corp. parent stressed today. And it needs to get its act together before it gets kicked off campus.

That’s the message that COO Chase Carey took pains to get across during his company’s earnings call this afternoon.

Revenue at Myspace was down $70 million compared to the same quarter a year ago, the company said, and “traffic numbers are still not going in the right direction, Carey said. Which means that its “current losses are not acceptable or sustainable.”

Okay. But Myspace has been in decline for some time, and Jon Miller and Mike Jones have been trying to fix it for more than a year. And last year at this time, we heard a similar assessment, only then Carey kept calling the site a “work in progress.” So how much more time do they have?

Carey: “We judge in quarters, not in years.”

My understanding is that when Miller took the job as News Corp.’s chief digital officer in the spring of 2009, he believed he had a real shot at fixing the social network, which had already cooled from red-hot to not at all.

But sources in and out of News Corp. tell me that Miller and his team are now merely hoping to patch the service long enough to find a buyer. Perhaps no one has told Carey, who seems to be conducting an anti-sales pitch.

——————-

EARLIER:

First look at Rupert Murdoch’s latest report card: News Corp. ended the September quarter with revenue of $7.4 billion and earnings of $0.27 a share (after factoring out a one-time tax gain). That’s almost exactly what the Street was looking for–expectations were $7.4 billion and $0.24 per share.

A quick run-through by unit:

• Cable: Up, because ad dollars are up and so are those affiliate fees that cable providers don’t want to pay but do.
• Movies: Down, because last year the company had an “Ice Age” movie in its results, and this year it’s fairly hit-less. It is making money selling reruns of “How I Met Your Mother,” though.
• Broadcast TV: Up, because local TV stations are doing better than last year, when they were still crippled by the recession.
• Satellite: Down, because costs were up.
• Publishing: Up, because newspapers are doing better than last year, when they were terrible. Ad revenue is up 13 percent worldwide. (This is where I note that News Corp. owns Dow Jones, which owns this site.)
• Random other stuff: Down, in large part because of Myspace and the rest of News Corp.’s digital unit, which is still trying to turn around.

I’ll come back to liveblog the conference call at 4:30 eastern, in the hopes that Murdoch says something interesting about politics, pay walls, the economy, Myspace, Apple and/or Google. He usually does!

LIVEBLOG:

BIG bummer: No Rupert on call today–because he’s traveling. (Some place with no phones? What’s up with that?)

CFO Dave DeVoe running through segment performance.

Cable: Some boasting about Fox News, FX, Big 10 Network, etc.

Movies: Nothing new here.

TV: TV stations up, but broadcast network losses up big “from higher cancellation costs.”

Satellite: [Apologies, had to duck out for a second.]

Newspapers: Again, ads up in all big newspapers.

Other/Digital: $70 million lower search and ad revenue at Myspace y/y.

Guidance: Leaving unchanged (though DeVoe notes that Myspace is still under plan).

COO Chase Carey:

Lots of focus on our retrans deals, and they are “critical” to our future. “We will be taking this business to a whole new level of profitability.”

Lots of growth ahead in International pay TV market.

Walk through of “key initiatives” throughout the company.

[Still sulking over Rupert-less call.]

Fox Film hasn’t had breakout hits, but no stinkers “in an industry known for them.”

We’ve got Jim Cameron locked up for Avatar 2 and 3, you know. And Modern Family is going to make us a pile of money in syndication.

Wish the World Series wasn’t such a bummer, and a short one. But NFL on Fox doing great.

WSJ still growing. Building digital business that “will take time to emerge.” “We feel very good” about subscription business in U.K.

“We’ve been clear that Myspace has been a problem.”

But relaunching “and we feel really good about” it. “Current losses are not acceptable or sustainable” and current management knows it, even though it’s not their fault.

But we know that we have to work very hard in coming months to get this thing sustainable.

[This is some of the most negative commentary I've heard yet from News Corp. on Myspace. Hard to sell an asset when you're describing it this way.]

Q&A:

Myspace: How much time do you give the relaunch to figure out if it’s successful. And what if it’s not?

Carey: We judge in quarters, not in years. Goal is to get to a place where top-line revenue is going in the right direction and “a clear path to profitability.”

We feel good about the relaunch. But “our traffic numbers are still not going in the right direction” and we have to stabilize that.

Fox TV content on digital platforms: It’s available on Hulu and Fox.com. How is that strategy going, and will you continue to be open?

Carey: Broadly: “This digital arena is still evolving.” We’re very focused on managing rights. Key issues: Windows, ad load, pricing. [Not answering at all, really.] “We think the digital arena is a very important one” particularly mobile, iPad, but “look, scarcity of our product is a real value.” But we’re learning as we go. “I do think it’s important that the digital platforms continue to develop dual revenue stream options.” That’s critical, and options are just beginning to evolve.

More on Myspace: There are a lot of operations in “other” besides Myspace: Mobile, Fox Audience Network, etc. What else could improve there?

Carey: Only two other businesses in there: Mobile, and outdoor networks, (and IGN). Not a lot of room for growth in those businesses.

So it’s really about Myspace?

Yes.

Avatar: What’s upside here?

Carey: Sequel to the most successful film ever? It should be pretty good! “Enormous events, without comparison or rival.”

[Please bring Rupert back!]

Please talk about terms of new Cameron deal?

Nope.

On retrans: Cablevision said they got better terms by holding out for a couple weeks. How do you react to that? If true, will we see more of these holdouts?

[Also a question about BSkyB I'm not that interested in.]

Carey: Mostly I saw Cablevision complaining that the government didn’t bail them out. But we feel pretty good about where we are. We didn’t think the government needed to get into it, and it would have been nice if the government would have been clear up front “it may not have gone off the air at all,” but whatever–”this was a matter to be dealt with between private parties.” [Ignore all those press releases we sent out!]

Can you talk about advertising trends and expectations?

DeVoe [I think]: They haven’t changed.

Cable margins: How long can you keep growing them?

Carey: We have room to drive a number of our channels, via more distribution, jacking up fees, advertising, etc.

What about getting more money from regional sports networks?

Carey: Won’t get into specifics.

[We want Rupe! We want Rupe!]

International channels seem to be doing well. Where is that growth coming from?

Carey: Part of it is the weak U.S. dollar. But overall, growth is “big and broad.”

Oh man. Even Chase Carey is yawning as he answers the question.

[Skipping accounting question.]

Back to network TV: Please talk about sports programming costs, etc. NFL, baseball, NASCAR. You spend a lot. Does retrans help support those costs? Or will you move some of that to cable?

Carey: I don’t think it makes sense to differentiate broadcast and cable much anymore. That’s the point of retrans–to make broadcast look like cable, with dual revenue stream.

On sports: It’s expensive, and draws big crowds. “It’s a unique strength in a world of DVRS” but “they come with big price tags.” We’d like to continue running it, but we have to do it at the right price.

Retrans does help, though–networks that are only ad-supported won’t be able to pay for these rights over time. Still, gotta be disciplined, etc.

Back to digital: What’s going on with Google TV? Are you thinking about different devices and different screens as a way to window, instead of calendar? I.e.: Make it available on PC but not on the big screen, etc.

Carey: I think within the house, the difference between screens won’t matter. I do think mobile is a discrete platform. [And some general chatter about tablets.]

But generally, “our content is incredibly valuable” and “we’re not going to throw it out there for everybody” unless we get compensated for it.

[Boring question about syndicated TV. Carey flipping through papers]

Hey, what about M&A deals, like Yahoo?

“Things like Yahoo are because the press needs things to write about.” [Zing! Also, hey, Jon Miller!] “We don’t need to make any acquisitions. But if there’s something out there, we should consider it, but we’ll do it in a very disciplined way” like we have in the past. Generally, we’d rather build than buy. “But if we see something we can acquire at a very attractive price that fits, we’ll take a look at it.” We’re not shopping.

[Skipping another cable channel question.]

Time for press Q&A:

How do you make broadcast look more like cable?

Carey: Retrans fees, like we’ve been talking about for the past couple years.

What about doing “premium video” (windowing movie release on TV?).

Carey: Looking at it.

What about further delaying movies to Netflix, Redbox beyond 28-day window (Warner talked about this today)?

Carey: We’re okay right now, but we’re looking at it. But as VOD grows, windows will change and evolve. But right now “we feel what windowing we’ve done has been good for us.”

Color on Apple TV 99-cent rental, please:

Carey: It’s pretty new. Only relevant for the past month or so. Too early to judge.

What’s your vision for European and British markets after you buy Sky? Will you buy Endemol?

Carey: Don’t really want to talk about it, too early.

Please talk about Times of London pay wall performance to date. Also, what are you thinking about your iPad newspaper in the U.S.?

Carey: Re U.K.: “We feel very good about it. Realistically, it’s very early….This is not something that’s a one or two quarter game.”

Same thing with the “whole digital arena” evolving, etc.

Hah. Refuses to talk about iPad newspaper. Which is not a newspaper!

Call finished, mercifully.

Here are the three data points that the search giant showed off during its earnings call this afternoon. All of them “begin with the letter B,” as product SVP Google Jonathan Rosenberg noted, and all of them come with caveats:

• $2.5 billion: Non-text display ad revenue run rate. That number includes ads from its DoubleClick unit as well as YouTube.
• 2 billion: YouTube monetized views per week.
• $1 billion: Mobile annualized revenue run rate.

All of those seem big–and they are! But they’re also deliberately fuzzy enough that it’s hard to tell exactly what they mean.

For instance: As Henry Blodget notes, those display-ad dollars are gross revenue, which means that Google only keeps a portion of them. And while that two billion YouTube views number is up from a billion a year ago, it’s proportionally the same: A year ago YouTube said it was monetizing a billion views a week while serving up a billion views a day; now the video site says two billion views a week and two billion a day.

Meanwhile Google officials, who routinely announce that YouTube is close to profitability, refused to tell analysts whether YouTube is actually profitable.

No matter! The point of b-as-in-big numbers was to impress Wall Street with Google’s ability to create new revenue streams beyond its core search ads. And the data, along with the company’s impressive Q3 performance, seems to have worked: Shares are up nine percent in after-hours trading.

——————

EARLIER

There’s the beat Wall Street was looking for. Google reports earnings of $7.67 a share and net revenues of $5.48 billion. The consensus was for $6.67 and $5.25 billion. GAAP EPS was $6.72.

Google (GOOG) has been plowing money into capital expenditures and people–it now has 23,300 employees, up from 21,800  months ago, a 6.8 percent increase–but it has been able to keep operating income quite healthy, anyway. Adjusted operating income was $2.93 billion, well above the $2.77 billion consensus.

GOOG is up considerably, now seven percent, in after-hours trading. Robot cars for all!

You can listen to (and watch) Google’s 4:30 pm ET earnings call by clicking on this YouTube link. I’ll add updates from the earnings call occasionally starting here:

As in recent quarters, CEO Eric Schmidt is sitting this one out.

CFO Patrick Pichette starts off. Aha! Teases that “we may have” Schmidt available for the first 30 minutes of Q&A before he gets on a GooglePlane.

300 of those new 1,500 employees came from acquisitions.

Discussion of “long-term” growth–”the next 5 to 10 years.” “Simply put, we’re on this growth agenda at full throttle…investing heavily in people and in product.”

There’s a “war for talent” in our industry, which is “out of synch” with the broader economy. Currently exploring how to attract and retain people. Winners and losers determined by this battle.

Re: Product investment, which you’ll hear about from product SVP Jonathan Rosenberg. He’s going to tell you about some numbers, but don’t expect to hear an update on these–they’re merely “proof points” about Google’s success.

Here’s Rosenberg, teasing new previously unreleased numbers.

Here they come. Starting with search and Google Instant:

Impact has been “very minimal” on revenue and “quite expensive” from a resource perspective.

But! “We launched it because we could.”

As search gets better, ads have to keep pace. Great momentum with AdWords.

New ad formats appear on more than 10 percent of query. Some formats show clickthrough rates as much as 10 percent on some, up 30 percent in others.

Big numbers, “which all begin with the letter B.”

$2.5 billion: Non-text display ad revenue run rate. That includes DoubleClick, YouTube.

2 billion: YouTube monetized views per week

$1 billion: Mobile annualized run rate

Mobile search queries up 5 times in the last few years.

Back to Pichette, to tamp down numbers.

In some cases, there is overlap with numbers. For instance, with AdMob, numbers counted in both display and mobile.

Time for Q&A, Schmidt is now on the line.

Schmidt says query growth is pushing click growth, and so are new ad formats. Ads are more compelling, etc.

Pichette notes that AdX numbers are included in the $2.5B display total.

Q: Please talk about YouTube. Of the two billion monetized views, what percent is that of total views? And are you profitable yet?

Pichette: Re: Profitability, “We have not made any comments on it.” [Except of course when they do, over and over.]

Rosenberg: Note that we’ve said we do two billion views per day–that will give you context.

Sorry, missed a Q.

Schmidt says growth of Android is “well past what I had ever hoped for.”

90,000 apps on Android “and growing very fast.”

Question about “proprietary benefits” of Android.

Schmidt: Android is the “largest single platform play” in mobile today.

We’re growing it by giving software away. How does that help us? Well, for starters, people who use Android search two times more than anyone else. Obvious benefit for us there, and search is more lucrative for us there as well, and that makes Android “hugely profitable.”

And we can add other value-added services to Android, but that’s not the focus right now.

Questions on cost: Cost per employee has declined. Can you continue that? And on mobile, will you stay with the “indirect monetization” Android strategy?

Pichette: Wouldn’t read anything into the cost-per-employee numbers. But we’re continuing to be frugal and generous.

Ad boss Nikesh Arora: We’re excited about the revenue model we have. We have no reason to change the model we have with Android.

Schmidt: And display will become a very big component of mobile.

Q: On display, can you break out YouTube and AdX numbers? And what do you think of competitive Android marketplaces?

Pichette: No breakout of numbers. [Duh.]

Schmidt: Goal of the app store is to make money for developers. Not a revenue goal for Google. More stores are a “win for everybody.”

Question about CPC on mobile devices. Rosenberg: They’re lower than desktop, because there aren’t many practical ways to consumate transaction. But on the iPad, activity looks a little bit more like it does on a PC, because there’s more room to enter credit card numbers, etc.

Q: Please discuss cannibalization between smartphone and PC–are iPad and tablet searches incremental or cannibalization? And can you give us color on international 26 percent growth?

Rosenberg: We don’t see cannibalization. We see mobile as complimentary to desktop. Different use patterns–mobile search is on weekends, during lunchtime, etc.

Arora: Generally, trend positive across the board. U.K. a bit weaker, but some of that is FX. Southern Europe way better than Northern. Asian markets robust.

Q: Competitors make $300 profit per handset sold over the lifetime of a device.You’re approaching this with a different model, but do you think that’s an upper limit on that number?

Schmidt: Our model is that handset makers and manufacturers make a lot of money from the phone, and we make money from advertising. So can’t compare the two, and premature for us to guess what we can do. “It should be highly lucrative” and a “very very strong revenue stream compared to a PC.”

Q: On social search. How do you “capture the signal” without access to the data feeds, as you have with Twitter.

Schmidt: “There are some ways we can do that” now, and we’re working on new ways.

Sorry, stepped out. Back now.

Q: TAC rate seems to be lowest since IPO. Sustainable? Growth has been driven by volume, not price. Sustainable, and/or will pricing increase going forward?

Pichette: MySpace deal is now over. That saved us a bunch of money. And mix of our partners will effect our TAC. That’s about it.

Rosenberg: Can’t answer volume/price question without “being forward-looking.” [Heh]

Q: Microsoft/Facebook deal was exclusive. But do you think you’ll see exclusive data deals? And what about Groupon, etc.? Can you compete there?

A: Value of exclusive data is “swamped” by “vastness” of the Web. So no concern there.

Schmidt: Always a concern that large chunks of data are not accessible to search engines….long pause… up to the content owner to decide how much to expose. We believe the world is better off if more information is searchable. “We fundamentally believe that.”

Rosenberg: Daily deals are very exciting. “A lot of small companies doing a fabulous job there.” We participate a little bit via sitelinks. But no question “that’s a very exciting and hot space.”

Q: When will Google Instant be on the BlackBerry or iPhone? What’s Android activation rate? And why not let advertisers bid directly on mobile inventory?

Rosenberg: Instant availability on other platforms “relatively soon”–probably this fall.

Not updating Android activation numbers.

Q: Given that non-core search is more material, do you think you’ll keep allocating resources with your 70-10-10 model? And when do you anticipate mobile overtaking desktop?

Schmidt: On mobile vs. display: Even if we knew I don’t think we’d talk about it.

On core vs. emergent: We talk about this all the time. Depends. Android is very small, and growing fast, so they get all the resources they need. We end up still at 70-10-10, but that’s not really a formula for us.

Pichette: What really matters the most to us is as Eric says, “When you see a hockey stick, pour gasoline on that fire.”

Q: Big-picture data question: What does Google think about leveraging user data to better target ads (see Facebook, Yahoo, etc.)–particularly with search data and display?

Schmidt: “We have a pretty strong opinion that we’re not going to do very much of it.” We’re intensely serious about privacy.

So “we’re not going to do the kinds of things that we could do with it… without your explicit permission. And in many cases we probably won’t do it forever.”

A question on display, which I’ve missed but will have to return to.

Pichette wraps things up. Today’s data points “are not about giving you information” for coming quarters, but to give you confidence that we’re building long-term businesses.

Call ends.

Mark Mahaney’s cheat sheet will help you decipher the numbers:

That’s not much of a surprise, given the relentless marketing campaign by the makers of “The Social Network,” which opened wide last Friday. It has garnered terrific critical acclaim.

Still, BoomTown was quite surprised to see a mention of the film on one of my favorite celebrity sites, TMZ.com.

Of course, because it is gossip-saturated, TMZ featured it as one of its naughty regular features called “Who’d You Rather?”

As in…well, you get the point.

This time they pitted Facebook CEO and co-founder Mark Zuckerberg against the Winklevoss twins in a “Facebook Fight.”

“As part of the movie ‘The Social Network,’ twin brothers Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss claim their Harvard [University] classmate Mark Zuckerberg stole their idea and created what is now this little website called Facebook,” TMZ wrote.

Also surprising, as you can see from the screenshot above, given what hunks of dudeness the Winklevii clearly are, is that Zuckerberg seems to be attracting one-third of the votes compared with their two-thirds.

And since there are two of them, the billionaire social networking wunderkind could be considered tied with the brothers!

Sweet justice after the slamming the Winklevii have been giving Zuckerberg in the media of late, even though they had signed a confidentiality agreement after their first $65 million settlement with him?

The Winklevii are trying to have that overturned and are inexplicably going for more, of course, which should keep the themes of the movie resonating for a while.

That will also be true if “The Social Network” garners some award nominations, especially the Oscar.

Also interesting will be to see if the movie will perform well this weekend or will drop off. It’s so far proved popular in the big cities on the coasts and in Silicon Valley, but now it has to go wide to make some real dough.

But, for sure, it will be on television eventually. Today, the FX cable network said it had bought the broadcast premiere rights to the movie.

What does that money get you?

As I’ve discussed before–most recently, last week–it gets you more shows than the free version offers, and more devices, most notably Apple’s (AAPL) iPad. It won’t get you ad-free shows, though. Hulu officials say the company will use the platform as a chance to extend the reach of its advertisers and that they’ve already got Nissan and Bud Light signed on.

Hulu and its joint venture owners–News Corp.’s (NWS) Fox, GE’s (GE) NBC, and Disney’s (DIS) ABC–have been working for most of the spring to get this worked out, but for now, it’s still an invite-only trial. Last week, I heard the trial might be limited to just 10,000 people, but I’ve yet to hear an official number from Hulu.

But! Hulu is allowing users with subscriptions to download a Hulu app for the iPhone, iPad, etc., to give the thing a test drive with a limited selection of shows.

Is it worth it? It should be interesting to see what consumers say. The pitch to gadget-centric folks: Check out all the hardware you can use! In addition to the iPad, Hulu Plus will work on the iPhone and iPod touch. Also included: Internet-connected TVs, Blu-ray players and game machines from Samsung, Sony (SNE) and Microsoft (MSFT).

The pitch to TV nuts: Look at all the shows you can see! But here the pitch is a bit more nuanced, because Hulu and its owners have had to hammer out, show by show, what they’re going to offer you. So it’s not an all-you-can-eat proposition, it’s an eat-a-lot proposition. Most notably, the service is light on content from cable networks, even those owned by the Hulu’s partners. Thus, no “Justified” from FX or “Top Chef” from Bravo.

That shouldn’t be a surprise, by the way: One of the main problems the original Hulu created was an increased tension between its owners and cable companies like Comcast (CMCSA), which fretted that Hulu was providing consumers with a reason to cut their cable subscriptions. Since FX, Bravo et al are getting paid by Comcast and the like for access to their shows, it will be tricky for Hulu to bundle those into its own service as well.

Is that a deal killer? I’ve found that with music subscription services, the absence of a single song I want rankles me in a slightly irrational way: Who cares if I can listen to millions of songs on demand for $9.99 a month? I want to listen to “99 Problems” right now, and I can’t! It’s easy to see Hulu Plus subscribers taking a similar view if they can’t find a favorite show when they want it.

But let’s wait and see what’s there first. Hulu says it has 120 seasons and 2,000 episodes available. Dig through and let me know if any absences are particularly problematic for you.

Press release, for those of you who like that kind of thing:

Hulu Launches Preview of Subscription Service Hulu Plus™

First subscription service to bring current TV programming from top broadcast networks ABC, FOX and NBC to 4 screens–computers, TVs, mobile phones and tablets–in HD Quality

Hulu Plus will complement the free, ad-supported Hulu service allowing consumers to enjoy more wherever, more whenever, than ever

LOS ANGELES—June 29, 2010–Hulu™ today launched a preview of Hulu Plus™, the first ad-supported subscription service to offer full current season runs of hit TV programs from ABC, FOX and NBC across multiple Web-connected devices, in HD, for only $9.99 a month. Now, TV lovers can watch full current seasons of shows such as Glee, Family Guy, Grey’s Anatomy, Modern Family, 30 Rock and The Office and full series runs or multiple back seasons of shows like The X-Files, Arrested Development, Desperate Housewives and Law and Order: SVU on PCs and Macs as well as on Apple’s iPad and iPhone, and select 2010 Samsung Blu-ray players, Blu-ray Home Theater systems, and TVs through Samsung Apps, in up to 720p high-definition resolution. Hulu Plus will also be coming soon to the PlayStation®3 (PS3™) computer entertainment system.

“We’re thrilled to begin sharing this revolutionary new service with subscribers” said Jason Kilar, Hulu CEO. “Hulu Plus is the first subscription service that offers consumers a wide array of today’s top current TV series on all four screens, in HD. With Hulu Plus, now your favorite TV shows love you back.”

View the Hulu Plus demo video for an overview of the full service.

More Content–Over 100 Content Providers, Hundreds of Shows, Thousands of Episodes
Hulu Plus builds on the extensive content offering of the ad-supported, free Hulu service and brings together one of the deepest offerings of TV shows, both current and classic, to subscribers in the U.S. Every episode of more than 45 current hit programs from ABC, FOX and NBC will be available all season long, from Modern Family and Grey’s Anatomy to Glee and Family Guy to The Office and 30 Rock. In addition, TV lovers will be able to enjoy full series runs and numerous back seasons of dozens of classic shows like The X-Files, Law and Order: SVU, Arrested Development, Saturday Night Live, Miami Vice, Ugly Betty, Quantum Leap, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, Roswell and Ally McBeal.

The Hulu Plus library aggregates content from more than 100 providers across broadcast networks, major studios and independent content creators. For content owners, Hulu Plus offers a compelling new way to distribute and monetize their programs across multiple screens.

For a full list of content providers and shows available, view the Hulu Plus Content page.

Access Anywhere–Across Four Screens on Multiple Devices
Subscribers to Hulu Plus will be able to watch their favorite shows not only on their PCs and Macs but also on select mobile phones, televisions (through gaming consoles and other boxes connected to the TV, or directly through Internet-connected TVs), Blu-ray players, and tablets, including Apple’s iPad and iPhone. Hulu’s preview launch device partners include the Apple iPad, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, and third-generation iPod Touch; select Samsung connected TVs, Blu-ray players, and Blu-ray home theater systems; and PS3 coming soon.

In the coming months, Hulu Plus will also be available on additional Sony Electronics Internet-connected entertainment devices including select BRAVIA® TVs and Blu-ray Disc™ players, as well as select TVs and Blu-ray players from VIZIO. In early 2011, Hulu Plus will launch on the Xbox 360. Hulu will continue to evaluate opportunities to extend Hulu Plus to other hardware devices and platforms as well.

For more information on supported devices and system requirements for Hulu Plus, please refer to the
Hulu Plus Device Partner page.

High Quality Viewing Experience–Streaming in HD
Hulu continues to push the quality of the online video viewing experience forward. Hulu Plus will bring many programs to users in 720p high definition to take advantage of the high-resolution screens on HD-capable devices. On select devices, adaptive bitrate streaming will ensure the highest quality video streams for the viewer’s bandwidth.

Advertising
Hulu Plus enables Hulu, for the first time, to extend its innovative and targeted ad platform across four screens, reaching Internet-connected users wherever they are. For the preview launch of Hulu Plus, Hulu is partnering with leading marketers Nissan and Bud Light who are expanding their reach with Hulu’s engaged and connected audience. Hulu expects to include additional advertisers for the broad consumer launch of Hulu Plus.

Pricing & Availability
Hulu Plus is available to U.S. consumers for $9.99 per month. Hulu Plus is currently available as a preview during which subscriptions are offered by invitation only to enable Hulu to ensure the highest quality experience for each user and to responsibly scale the service over time. To request an invite, visit www.hulu.com/plus.

Even without an invite, during this preview period consumers are welcome to download a free Hulu Plus application to the iPad, iPhone 3GS and 4, and third-generation iPod Touch, and other supported devices to test the experience with a limited selection of free episodes and clips. Hulu Plus is expected to be made widely available to the public in the coming months.

But just to make sure I wasn’t missing anything, I asked the folks at Clicker, the online video guide, to tally up what kinds of video options the iPad offers for now. And I got the same answer: Plenty of full shows if you pay, very little if you don’t.

Paid:
Netflix app (requires subscription plan starting at $8.99 per month):
10,000 TV episodes
6,000 movies

iTunes (sold via individual downloads):
25,000 TV episodes
3,000 movies
3,000 music videos

Free:
ABC:
Approximately 200 full TV episodes via app. None via Safari browser.

CBS:
One full TV episode and clips

NBC:
No full TV episodes. Some broken up into low-quality clips on mobile site.

Fox:
No full TV episodes.

Cable networks (FX, AMC, USA, etc.):
No full TV episodes

Clicker would also like us to note to that it has access to another 175,000 clips that will work on the iPad, from sources ranging from ESPN to CNN to Next New Networks. Noted! But if you’re waiting to watch complete episodes of programs like “30 Rock” or “The Daily Show” for free on your iPad, you’re going to be disappointed for quite some time.

And to be clear: This is a business development issue for the networks, not a technical one. They certainly know how to convert their videos from Adobe’s (ADBE) Flash standard to the HTML5 standard Apple (AAPL) is championing–they’re just not sure they want to. We’ll get to the internal debates some of the networks are having on this topic down the line.

This week: We got all-access passes to Skype for an interview with Julia Hartz, co-founder and president of Eventbrite, the four-year-old Web-based ticketing service aiming to unseat the big guys.

Using the Eventbrite Web interface, organizers can set up ticket sales and publicize their events using social media tools. It’s a labor of love, too, as Julia shares the big office with co-founder and husband Kevin.

Who: Julia Hartz

What: President and co-founder

Why: Hartz said Eventbrite has cracked the code on merging business and the social graph. It enables event organizers to publish events online and sell tickets, then publish the events to Facebook. And if your event is free, so are Eventbrite services. Julia says it is democratizing the ticketing industry, but it can’t all be free. Eventbrite saw $100 million in ticket sales in 2009.

Where: eventbrite.com (Web site); @eventbrite (Twitter); San Francisco, Calif. (analog place)

Who else: Eventbrite services put it in competition with most of the ticket-selling world, especially Ticketmaster, which is now owned by Live Nation (LYV). But Hartz said most of the people using Eventbrite for the first time are switching from using spreadsheets.

Five Stats You Won’t Find in Her Facebook Profile

Worst Job Ever: I was an intern on the set of “Friends.” It was this awful experience taking place in this wondrous environment. There was a serious level of paranoia there. And basically, my job was to hold a phone and anytime it rang, I had to go find that person on the set. My second worst job was as a barista at The Ugly Mug in Santa Cruz. I would drink like three mochas and eat some pastries during my shift and then be depressed for the rest of the day.

Her Big Event of 2010: I’m really looking forward to Chirp, the upcoming Twitter conference. That and maybe F8, the Facebook conference.

Gadget of the Moment: My new iPad…just kidding. I guess just my Apple (AAPL) iPhone. We’re kind of a gadget family. Our two-year-old has a Pleo, because we can’t get a puppy in our place.

Wants to Be When She Grows Up: I want to be a great mom.

Fails At: Being a working mom and running the start-up. I feel like I’m never doing 100 percent in either. I feel 80 percent in everything. Kevin would say I fail at taking big risks–stuff like skydiving or petting a spider at the children’s museum.

Bio in 140 Characters

Hartz grew up in Santa Cruz. She went to Pepperdine for a degree in being a TV exec. She was at MTV, FX, then left for the start-up world.

The Five Questions

You started Eventbrite in 2006–why this and why then?

Well, I’ll just be honest; it had a lot to do with logistics. I’d just moved up here and Kevin and I had just gotten engaged. I was about to go to Current TV and didn’t know if that was the right move. We got to talking about all the events we heard about after the fact, and all the event “postcards” we got on our car windshields. There was little to no innovation in the events market. Unless you were using Ticketmaster, you really had no access to tools and technology that could help you as a smaller events planner. Also, Kevin was very close to PayPal, so we were looking at what we could do based on the PayPal API. The transaction is where it began.

So, you and Kevin have sort of made Eventbrite your baby. How does being a start-up couple change things?

Well, in working with somebody you know quite well, we sort of divide and conquer. We sort of have our own areas of the business that we strive to excel in, and we try to support each other. We received some really great advice early on from Michael and Xochi Birch, who co-founded Bebo. When we asked them how they worked together, they said divide and conquer–don’t work on anything together. That’s sorta what we do. And we do really well on a day-to-day basis. But if you get us behind the same spreadsheet, we’ll definitely be fighting for the mouse.

What sorts of mistakes have you guys made doing this?

I think we’ve been pretty good on avoiding most big mistakes, but I do think we’ve been too focused on making decisions around customer reactions…that sounds a little weird. Let me give you an example. So, we were a free service early on, then we were freemium. The problem was that our basic service was so robust that our premium service was only a little better. We were toying with the idea of going all paid for too long. When we finally bit the bullet and did it, we had very little decrease in use. We think it’s because event organizers don’t have to make an additional choice now about which service to use. The cost just scales with the ticket price. We just took too long to make the decision, I think.

You guys are building a pretty interesting picture of who attends what events. Are you planning to tread further into the social graph and begin recommending events to people based on past attendance?

Yes. We see that to be something that’s very exciting, but we want to do it in the right way. Hyper-relevancy is key to us, so, um, I can’t say how we’ll do it, but when we do it, we’ll definitely take into account what’s out there right now and try to innovate on that. I’d say that will happen in the broad window of the next two years.

What are your major moves going to be in 2010?

How about this? How about the fact that in five years, Eventbrite will be the only place that you will ever go to buy a ticket for any event that you would ever attend. I truly believe that, and I can actually see how we’ll get there. We are a smaller business and can move quite quickly. We don’t have a bullseye in your office with the Ticketmaster logo in the middle. We aren’t a Ticketmaster killer, but we see our model as becoming the status quo for all ticketing.

The In Living Color Interview

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100216/almost-famous-julia-hartz-of-eventbrite/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20091231/time-warner-cable-shows-subscribers-how-to-cut-the-cord/ http://allthingsd.com/20091231/time-warner-cable-shows-subscribers-how-to-cut-the-cord/#comments Thu, 31 Dec 2009 16:41:21 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=14620 The nightmare scenario for cable companies is that customers drop their TV subscriptions and grab their video directly from the Web, turning the cable guys into mere providers of “dumb pipes.”

But here’s a comprehensive set of instructions from a big cable company showing its customers how to do just that. It suggests that they head to the likes of Hulu, Fancast or “any search engine”–weird for it not to call out Google (GOOG), no?–to find their favorite shows.

Time Warner Cable’s (TWC) instructions on “How to Connect Your PC to Your TV” are embedded at the bottom of this post. And here’s a helpful video (sorry for the clumsy screengrab; the video kicks in at about the five-second mark, and there’s some unpleasant coughing around 2:30. Yikes!):

The instructions (Time Warner Cable promised to provide them last week) are part of the company’s game of chicken with News Corp.’s (NWS) Fox, which is supposed to come to a head tonight. If you believe the posturing so far, Fox and its associated cable channels (Fox News, FX, etc.) will disappear after midnight tonight because the two sides can’t agree on  new rate.

Alternate view: This thing will go down to the wire and then get resolved, like Time Warner Cable’s back-and-forth with Viacom (VIA) a year ago.

If you want blow-by-blow coverage, let me suggest the Los Angeles Times’s tireless Joe Flint, who is updating each salvo in real time, or very close to it. Or you can just turn on your TV set after midnight tonight and take a look for yourself.

Still, no matter how this resolves, the danger for both sides is that consumers really do take up Time Warner Cable on its offer and start watching Fox stuff on the Web. And to be clear: Fox would prefer that people keep paying for cable TV, because the media company really likes subscription fees from cable TV providers.

Peoplr are already moving to the Web to watch TV, of course, but it’s not mainstream behavior yet. It may be inevitable anyway, but no matter what you hear from both sides of this contract dispute, both sides like this model very much and they’d like to keep it intact as long as possible.

Which is why discussions with would-be “over the top” providers like Apple (AAPL) are supposed to be about adding additional TV programming, not replacing cable.

The safety catch here for the TV business is that consumers who do go to the Web to watch TV, at least through sanctioned means, may be disappointed: They’ll find that programming there doesn’t show up for at least a day, and often longer, after it airs. And some stuff, notably live sports like the NFL playoffs (contrary to the image in the screenshot above) and Fox’s “American Idol” don’t make it on the Web at all.

TV_to_PC_TWC –

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20091231/time-warner-cable-shows-subscribers-how-to-cut-the-cord/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20091222/the-jay-leno-effect-eyeballs-bail-on-broadcast-for-cable/ http://allthingsd.com/20091222/the-jay-leno-effect-eyeballs-bail-on-broadcast-for-cable/#comments Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:32:40 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=14352 When you sit down to watch TV at night (which you are still doing an awful lot of, no matter how much Web time you’re logging), you don’t distinguish between shows that are on broadcast TV and those on cable. You just want to watch TV.

But TV executives and advertisers haven’t caught up with you. Advertisers still pay less for a cable TV eyeball than for one watching something from a broadcaster. And programmers still cling to the belief that a broadcast TV viewer has different habits from someone watching cable.

Makes no sense, but there’s a lot about old media that doesn’t make sense and that takes a long time to change. Worth remembering as you watch ad dollars trickle ever so slowly to the Web.

Still, maybe this will help the industry figure it out. Look what happened when GE’s (GE) NBC replaced its 10 pm dramas with Jay Leno. For some reason, executives at CBS (CBS) and Disney’s (DIS) ABC figured viewers who liked to watch stuff like “ER” or even “Southland” would automatically move over to their offerings.

But as Pali Capital’s Rich Greenfield (registration required) points out, citing data from MediaLife, NBC’s viewers didn’t move to other broadcasters when they didn’t like what they saw at 10 pm. They went to the cable guys:

The cable network original programming push continues to gain momentum, with the notable increase in overall cable network ratings at 10 pm so far this TV season likely leading to even more significant programming investment in the year ahead–cannot be viewed positively for broadcast networks as higher quality original cable programming will drive continued viewer fragmentation.

While originally we expected networks such as TNT (TWX) and F/X (NWSA) to be the prime beneficiaries of the Leno move on NBC as they focus on 10pm dramas similar stylistically to what NBC used to air at 10pm, we believe the impact has been quite fragmented, helping a wide array of cable networks that air original programming at 10pm (including networks owned by DIS, DISCA, SNI, VIA/B).

And here, to underscore the point quite nicely, is broadcast’s Jay Leno interviewing the cast of cable’s “Jersey Shore,” the MTV show that, for better or worse, is one of this year’s big hits:

(Quasi-apology for making this the second “Jersey Shore” clip on All Things D today. But then again, The Situation is The Situation.)

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20091222/the-jay-leno-effect-eyeballs-bail-on-broadcast-for-cable/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20091221/fox-faces-off-against-time-warner-cable-will-hulu-get-roped-into-the-fight/ http://allthingsd.com/20091221/fox-faces-off-against-time-warner-cable-will-hulu-get-roped-into-the-fight/#comments Mon, 21 Dec 2009 20:27:27 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=14311 The TV business loves to recycle old plots. Here’s a familiar one: TV programmer A wants more money from cable company B, which doesn’t want to pay up. Negotiations stall and both sides threaten to take their balls and go home–which would leave cable subscribers with empty TV channels.

Last year’s version featured Time Warner Cable facing off against Viacom (VIA). This year, it’s Time Warner Cable (TWC) versus News Corp.’s (NWS) Fox channel. (Disclosure: News Corp. owns Dow Jones, which owns this Web site).

If you’re looking for a  variation on a theme, note that Fox is trying to get paid for its Fox broadcast channels, which the cable guys traditionally don’t pay for, at least not directly. But big picture, it’s the same pool of money, divvied up by the same companies and funded by the same people–Time Warner Cable customers like me–who don’t really have a say. Nothing new here.

I have noticed one difference. Last year, the Time Warner Cable guys suggested that if Viacom shows really did disappear from customers’ homes, it would be easy enough to find them by going online. And the company promised to help its customers figure out just how to find the likes SpongeBob and Jon Stewart on the Web, if it came to that.

This year, we haven’t heard this particular threat. But for a lot of people, Web TV is a much more plausible alternative than it was 12 months ago. What gives?

Nothing, says TWC spokesman Alexander Dudley. He just hasn’t gotten around to talking about it yet.

“We have plans, if it goes on, to direct customers to specific content” on the Web, Dudley says. One of the reasons it hasn’t come up yet, he adds, is because it’s so obvious–everyone knows that if you want to watch Fox shows on the Web, you go to Hulu, the video site the company owns with GE’s (GE) NBC and Disney’s (DIS) ABC.

“Part of the reason that we find their demands outrageous is because the content is available for free online,” Dudley says. “And if it goes on, we plan to show our customers how to connect their PCs to a TV using an S cable.”

Dudley won’t spell it out, but he’s essentially repeating one of the cable industry’s main criticisms of Hulu: Handing out free TV on the Web devalues the stuff programmers try to sell to the cable guys.

We’ll see. I think that if push really does come to shove, casual Hulu users might discover that the site is no longer the treasure chest of free TV they thought it was.

For starters, there’s broadcast stuff that never gets to Hulu in the first place–like live events. In Fox’s case, that’s a very big deal, since its January schedule includes both NFL football playoffs and the start of “American Idol.”

And when it comes to cable programming like “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia” or “Nip/Tuck”–stuff that Time Warner Cable is already paying for–Hulu’s owners have been careful not to put much on the Web in the first place. Go try to watch “Sons of Anarchy,” the FX biker show on Hulu and you’ll end up pretty frustrated.

So here’s a question for Time Warner Cable: Do you really want to send angry customers to Hulu–and then have to deal with them a second time, when they find they still can’t watch their favorite shows, S cable and all?

Another thought: What if Fox simply yanked the programming it supplies to Hulu from Time Warner Cable users? Is that doable–either technically or contractually? I’m lobbing the question to News Corp. and will let you know if I get a response.

Best bet: Just like last year, this year’s fight will likely go up until the Dec. 31 deadline. And then it will get resolved, with the cable guys paying more than they wanted and the network getting less.

Then again, there is dark muttering that is really different this time because both sides have important precedents at stake, etc. I wouldn’t put much stock in that yet–what else are they going to say?–but if it pans out, it will be interesting to see what role Hulu ends up playing.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20091221/fox-faces-off-against-time-warner-cable-will-hulu-get-roped-into-the-fight/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20091218/news-corp-ads-on-tv-fees-target-time-warner-cable/ http://allthingsd.com/20091218/news-corp-ads-on-tv-fees-target-time-warner-cable/#comments Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:00:13 +0000 Shira Ovide and Sam Schechner http://voices.allthingsd.com/?p=19290 News Corp. (NWS) is preparing to launch a marketing blitz Friday aimed at Time Warner Cable Inc. (TWC), according to people familiar with the matter, escalating a fight between the two companies over television programming fees.

Time Warner Cable’s contract to carry News Corp.’s Fox network, as well as cable channels including FX, expires at the end of the month. Contract talks have hinged on a relatively new issue in the media business: cash fees for the rights to carry broadcast TV.

News Corp. has been a prominent advocate of cash fees for its Fox network, while Time Warner Cable has said media companies are making unfairly high price demands that will lead to higher cable bills for consumers.

News Corp. also owns The Wall Street Journal.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20091218/news-corp-ads-on-tv-fees-target-time-warner-cable/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20091124/a-clicker-to-watch-tv-online/ http://allthingsd.com/20091124/a-clicker-to-watch-tv-online/#comments Wed, 25 Nov 2009 01:43:07 +0000 Katherine Boehret http://solution.allthingsd.com/?p=934 Finding TV shows online can be a major hassle. If you can remember which network hosts the show, you then must hunt through a maze of listings of several other television shows on that network’s Web site to find it. The show you want to watch might not even be available since many networks rotate only a handful of recent episodes online at a time. And if you do finally find the correct episode, you may be required to download a special media player to watch it.

Some services make this process a little easier. Hulu holds episodes from 1,200 television shows, but is still missing many. Apple’s (AAPL) iTunes Store offers over 50,000 episodes, but unlike network sites or Hulu, it requires viewers to pay to download and watch them (though they are commercial-free). Video search engines like Truveo browse the entire Web, returning an often-overwhelming number of results. And while YouTube is the king of Web video, it can too easily return a search result that isn’t a complete and genuine episode of the show you’re seeking.

This week, I’ve been testing Clicker, a free Web site that aims to be the TV Guide for all full episodes available to watch on the Web. It searches over 1,200 sources, so it can index some 400,000 episodes from 7,000 shows. Results include television programs as well as “Web originals,” or shows that are native to the Internet and are of broadcast quality. Clicker either plays the video on its site or links you to where this content is shown on another hosting site—like NBC or Hulu. If a show isn’t available online, Clicker tells you so you don’t have to keep hunting all over for it.

I like Clicker and found it to be a quick resource for finding all sorts of shows online. In many cases, it directed me to find the episodes I wanted to watch and saved me the hassle of less efficient searching. It also suggested shows I might like and offered a playlist where I could subscribe to receive episodes as they became available or save available videos to watch later.

Clicker makes descriptive pages about each show

Though it has a search box, Clicker feels more like a directory than purely a robotic search engine that relies mainly on algorithms. In fact, Clicker created a descriptive page for almost every show, and these pages can be edited or created via user submissions, which Clicker will review before posting them to the site. And because it’s focused on TV shows or Web originals, it won’t clutter your results with kids’ birthday parties or cats on skateboards.

The site is still rather new, so it has some kinks to work out—like links to videos that didn’t actually play if, for example, they were pulled by the network. But these were rare, and for the most part, if a video wasn’t available, a clear, brief explanation was displayed at the top of the page. Also, if Clicker sends you back out to a network’s site and that network uses a special player for videos, you’ll still have to download that player.

Filtering Results

Clicker’s program pages contain a description of the show, and a way to filter results by season, airdate or popularity. And the site shows the actual airdate of each video—something that not many other sites do. A column on the right side of each page displays several related shows, like the suggestion of “Modern Family” for fans of “How I Met Your Mother”; and “Roswell” and “Dead Like Me” suggested for people who like “Heroes.” In December, these recommendations will become even more personalized.

Some of Clicker’s sources include NBC, Fox, ABC, PBS, the Food Network and Web original content (i.e. “The Onion”). It also can search movies and music videos; the movies can be watched free in some cases, or paid for via Amazon’s (AMZN) Video on Demand or Netflix (NFLX) Instant Streaming. In January, Clicker plans to incorporate shows and movies from iTunes, using Apple’s pay-and-download method.

Clicker is especially handy when you’re looking for a show that isn’t where you think it should be. “Seinfeld,” for example, is on TBS rather than NBC, where it originally aired, and only nine episodes are available at once before they rotate out and are replaced by nine more. “Friends” is found on theWB.com, rather than on NBC’s site. “Damages” isn’t available on its network site, FX; instead, it can be found at Crackle.com, another video-hosting site. It’s easy to understand why people settle for missing an episode rather than trying to find a show online.

Clicker finds over 400,000 television and Web-original episodes so you can search less and watch more.

Clicker also comes in handy when you’re querying something or someone you need to learn about. By typing in a term like “Thanksgiving travel,” I get news results from NBC’s “Nightly News with Brian Williams,” the “CBS Evening News” and the Associated Press. I also get tips for traveling during this busy time of year from an AOL Travel online video, as well as a 1968 episode of “The Beverly Hillbillies” called “The Thanksgiving Spirit.”

Clicker isn’t the site to use if you want to find the hot video clip that everyone is watching. When I searched for “Whitney Houston” the morning after the American Music Awards, the most recent video I found was the singer performing on “Good Morning America” in September—not the one showing her singing during the awards show the night before.

But the fact that Clicker can find Whitney Houston on “Good Morning America” is useful in itself. A search for Warren Buffett’s most recent appearance on the “Charlie Rose” show can be conducted in a similar manner—either by typing his name into the box at the top of the page or by opening the show’s page and searching within that show for anyone who has appeared as a guest. Performing a search within a show like this anywhere else is nowhere near as easy as on Clicker.

Playlist of Your Shows

Clicker can be used as a TiVo (TIVO) of sorts if you create a username on the site or simply sign in using Facebook Connect, which I did.

Users can make playlists where they can add just one episode, all episodes, or new episodes to this list—subscribing to receive all new episodes in the playlist as they become available. I added episodes of “The Amazing Race” and “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia” to my playlist. This list can be accessed anytime, and it’s helpful for people who don’t have enough time to watch a show that they found. In December, email and Facebook notifications will be added to tell users that new episodes are in their playlists.

If you spend a lot of time in front of your computer and find yourself searching all over the Web for the TV shows you’d like to watch, Clicker will be a huge help. And even if your show isn’t available, you might find something similar—or better—in Clicker’s recommendations.

Edited by Walter S. Mossberg. Email mossbergsolution@wsj.com

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20091124/a-clicker-to-watch-tv-online/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20090501/why-it-took-more-than-four-months-and-millions-of-dollars-to-get-lost-on-hulu/ http://allthingsd.com/20090501/why-it-took-more-than-four-months-and-millions-of-dollars-to-get-lost-on-hulu/#comments Fri, 01 May 2009 15:45:48 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=6889 What does it take to add a third player to a joint venture between two media conglomerates? More than four months of negotiations. Tens of millions of dollars help too.

That’s what finally allowed Disney (DIS) to join up with GE’s (GE) NBC and News Corp.’s (NWS) Fox in Hulu, the fast-growing Web video site.

The deal, which was finally announced yesterday, has its roots in a November 2007 meeting between Hulu CEO Jason Kilar and Disney’s executive team where Kilar demoed a private beta of the service on Disney CEO Bob Iger’s computer. But the two sides didn’t really start talking in earnest until mid-December of last year.

Since then, people who were involved in the negotiations tell me, the discussions were a long slog, complicated by the fact that there were essentially five parties in the talks. But at no point did the deal ever look to be in jeopardy, I’m told–even though everyone from Google (GOOG) to Comcast (CMCSA) was trying to convince Iger not to go forward.

In the end, Disney essentially agreed to the same terms that NBC and Fox first used when put the site together two years ago. The main components:

• A two-year guarantee of exclusive third-party access to ABC’s online TV inventory, as well as a smattering of Disney cable shows.
• Marketing money, to be spent buying market-rate air time promoting Hulu on Disney TV properties. NBC and Fox handed over $50 million each, doled out over two years, when they formed Hulu; I’m told Disney has committed to a similar amount.
• A cash investment in Hulu itself. I’m told that NBC and Fox kicked in a total of about $30 million to get Hulu off the ground, prior to getting Providence Equity Partners to pony up $100 million for a 10 percent stake. Given that NBC and Fox took on substantial risk when they contributed their stakes, it’s likely that Disney ended up paying a larger sum.

At least as important as Disney’s contribution, though, is NBC and Fox’s decision to re-up their exclusivity arrangements for another two years. Some executives at NBC and Fox I’ve talked to have downplayed this part of the deal, arguing that their companies would have kept working with Hulu even without renewing their exclusives, which were expiring.

But the reality is that if NBC and Fox had not renewed, it would have been a signal that the networks were no longer committed to their joint venture, a question that’s been whispered more and more often in recent months. There are also some practical effects when it comes to dealing with the cable guys (see below).

The deal still needs regulatory approval, and you may hear the likes of Google and Comcast murmuring loudly that a partnership between three of the four broadcast networks violates antitrust statues. But assuming it does go through, here are some of the ripple effects:

CBS: The broadcaster is on a lonely road, which is not where entertainment companies like to find themselves. It may well be that the Web strategy CBS has been pursuing–don’t put too much of your stuff online, but syndicate the stuff you do put out there as widely as possible–is the right way to go. But if CBS CEO Les Moonves ever changes his mind, he will have a hard time climbing aboard the good ship Hulu.

For the record, Kilar is enthusiastic about bringing on CBS: “We’d love to see CBS jump into Hulu,” he says. We’d love to see Time Warner (TWX) jump in to Hulu, too.”

But executives at his partner networks–the same guys who forced him to cut off Web upstart Boxee, remember–says that the door is shut for CBS, at least in terms of the equity deal ABC just got.

If CBS (CBS) does want to make a deal with a big Web distributor, it may well end up doing something with Google’s YouTube, which already distributes snippets of CBS shows on its site. You won’t hear CBS bragging about this out loud, but I’m told partnership has worked out very well for the network to date.

The cable guys: Note that there’s very little of Disney’s premium cable stuff on Hulu–just a smattering of SoapNet and a few shows from the Disney Channel, but nothing your kids care about. And there’s zilch from ESPN.

That’s because Iger doesn’t want to freak out cable operators that pay Disney billions a year for cable programming. So that stuff will stay offline. (Meanwhile, it may get increasingly hard to find some of the NBC/Fox cable programming on Hulu, for the same reason. Good luck watching the most recent episode of FX’s “Rescue Me,” for instance).

But the Disney move, along with NBC and Fox’s commitment to re-up their exclusivity arrangement, just complicated efforts by the likes of Comcast and Time Warner to push an “authentication” arrangement. That’s where cable subscribers–but only cable subscribers–get access to a wealth of TV on the Web.

Without the exclusivity clause, the cable guys could demand that the networks hand over their best stuff directly to them for their online efforts. Now, at least for the next two years, they’ll have work through Hulu, on Hulu’s terms.

It may be that the cable guys are so far away from making their authentication plans a reality–I’m told Comcast’s test will launch this summer with just a few thousand subscribers and will add something like 50,000 subscribers a month after that–that this might not mean much. It’s possible that by the time the cable guys are ready to really talk shop with their programmers, the two-year deals will be long expired.

Bonus: We get to see new Hulu ads, starring actors from ABC shows. I’m hoping for one featuring Jorge Garcia, who plays Hurley on “Lost.” For now, here’s the newest one in the current campaign, featuring Dennis Leary from “Rescue Me.”

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20090501/why-it-took-more-than-four-months-and-millions-of-dollars-to-get-lost-on-hulu/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20090430/finally-disney-hulu-deal-announced/ http://allthingsd.com/20090430/finally-disney-hulu-deal-announced/#comments Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:40:22 +0000 John Paczkowski http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/?p=16677 Took ’em long enough.

Just as MediaMemo predicted, Walt Disney Co. has finally taken a stake in Hulu, the video-streaming site operated by General Electric’s (GE) NBC Universal, News Corp. (NWS) and Providence Equity Partners. Under the terms of the deal announced today, Disney will sign on as a joint partner in the venture and bring full-length episodes of long-absent programs like “Lost” and “Grey’s Anatomy” to Hulu. Financial terms and the structure of the deal weren’t disclosed, but sources say Disney’s stake in the venture will be close to 30 27 percent.

“From our landmark iTunes deal to our pioneering decision to stream ad supported shows on our ABC.com player, Disney has sought to meet the constantly evolving viewing habits of our consumers, and today’s Hulu announcement is the next important step in that ongoing journey,” Disney CEO Bob Iger bloviated. “Disney and Hulu share a focus on delivering the highest-quality entertainment experience and we look forward to working with Hulu to build value for our consumers, our brands and our shareholders.”

A few points worth noting here before the full press release below. This is mostly a broadcast deal. Aside from a smattering of Disney Channel shows, it includes very little cable programming. There is, for example, nothing from ESPN. Presumably, that’s because Disney doesn’t want to upset the folks who actually pay to watch that stuff.

Disney’s decision to join Hulu shows the company is confident that the site’s audience is distinct enough from audiences served by cable, ABC.com and its other sites that there’s no real risk of cannibalizing them. And that runs contrary to what many networks assume about online.

Disappointingly, there’s no mention in the release of classic animation, whether shorts or features.

As MediaMemo has noted, this is a big deal for Hulu, which has now allied with three of the four big broadcast networks.

CBS (CBS) is now the sole holdout among big program providers. When asked about its position, a spokesman replied with this statement: “CBS has long employed open, non-exclusive content partnerships that allow fans across the internet to engage with our programming in such a way that we control our distribution, sales and profit. We continue to discuss similar arrangements with additional partners as we grow our online audience based on the strength of our content, and the passion of the communities it creates. The Company also believes that controlling our own rights for that content–in all media–preserves its value in a multi-platform business system.”

Disney (DIS) to Join NBC Universal, News Corporation and Providence Equity Partners as an Equity Owner of Hulu

LOS ANGELES–Hulu and The Walt Disney Company today announced that Disney, through a subsidiary of ABC Enterprises Inc., has agreed to join NBC Universal, News Corporation and Providence Equity Partners as a joint venture partner and equity owner of Hulu, a leading online aggregator of video content. Upon closing, the agreement will enhance Hulu’s programming line-up through the expanded online distribution of Disney’s most popular current and library primetime series and library feature films. In particular, full-length episodes of hit current and library programs like Lost, Grey’s Anatomy, Desperate Housewives, Private Practice, Ugly Betty, Scrubs, Greek, Hope and Faith, Less Than Perfect, Wizards of Waverly Place, Phineas and Ferb, Who Wants To Be A Millionaire, General Hospital, The View and The Secret Life of the American Teenager will soon be streamed on Hulu on an ad-supported basis.

“From our landmark iTunes deal to our pioneering decision to stream ad supported shows on our ABC.com player, Disney has sought to meet the constantly evolving viewing habits of our consumers, and today’s Hulu announcement is the next important step in that ongoing journey,” said Robert A. Iger, president and CEO, The Walt Disney Company. “Disney and Hulu share a focus on delivering the highest-quality entertainment experience and we look forward to working with Hulu to build value for our consumers, our brands and our shareholders.”

“We’re honored to welcome the Disney team in our mission to help people find and enjoy the world’s premium content, when, where and how they want it,” said Jason Kilar, CEO of Hulu. “With the addition of shows like Lost, Desperate Housewives, Grey’s Anatomy and many more to Hulu, we continue to aspire to deliver a service that users, advertisers and content owners unabashedly love.”

Following the closing, content available to Hulu users will include:

• Full-length episodes of ABC primetime programs like Lost, Grey’s Anatomy, Desperate Housewives, Ugly Betty, Samantha Who?, Scrubs, Private Practice and popular late night talk show Jimmy Kimmel Live
• Full-length episodes of hit ABC Family series like The Secret Life of the American Teenager and Greek
• Popular series from ABC Daytime and SOAPnet like General Hospital and The View
• Classic series from ABC’s library like Hope and Faith, Less Than Perfect, Commander in Chief, Who Wants To Be A Millionaire and Dancing with the Stars
• Select hit programs from Disney Channel like Wizards of Waverly Place and Phineas and Ferb which can be easily accessed from a new DISNEY location in the Channel section of Hulu.com
• Popular library titles from The Walt Disney Studios
• Short-form content including webisodes, sneak peeks and episode recaps from ABC Entertainment, ABC Family and SOAPnet
“Hulu, quite simply, now has the best premium content on the web,” said Peter Chernin, president and COO, News Corporation. “With three major networks and over 150 leading content providers providing content, combined with the best video user interface anywhere on the web, Hulu offers consumers the finest premium online video experience available today.”

“Hulu has shown that if you make quality content available on the web and combine it with an unbeatable user experience, viewers will come, and so will advertisers,” said Jeff Zucker, president and CEO, NBC Universal. “The addition of some of the best content Disney/ABC has to offer will only enhance Hulu’s standing as a top site for high quality video entertainment.”

Jonathan M. Nelson, CEO of Providence, said “Hulu is creating significant value for users, advertisers and content owners. This balance, together with aggregated professional content and an expanding base of over 200 brand advertisers, is establishing Hulu as a compelling online video monetization platform. Hulu is a bright spot in the new media landscape.”

The transaction is subject to customary closing conditions, including regulatory review. As an equity partner, Disney will have three seats on the Hulu Board that will be held by Mr. Iger; Anne Sweeney, co-chair, Disney Media Networks and president, Disney/ABC Television Group; and Kevin Mayer, executive vice president, Corporate Strategy, Business Development & Technology. All other current directors from News Corp, NBC Universal and Providence will remain on the Hulu board.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20090430/finally-disney-hulu-deal-announced/feed/ 1 http://allthingsd.com/20090427/disney-gets-ready-finally-to-hold-hands-with-hulu/ http://allthingsd.com/20090427/disney-gets-ready-finally-to-hold-hands-with-hulu/#comments Mon, 27 Apr 2009 10:00:07 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=6701

Is a deal between Disney and Hulu, which has been in the works for many months, finally ready for primetime? Yes, say multiple people familiar with the matter who tell me an announcement should be coming in the next few days.

The arrangement will add Disney (DIS) programming–primarily television shows from ABC like “Lost,” although it will also include some of the company’s movies–to the joint venture between GE’s (GE) NBC and News Corp.’s (NWS) Fox. In return for giving Hulu exclusive access to some of its content, but not for some high-profile programming like ESPN, Disney will get an equity stake in the joint venture and seats on the company’s board.

It’s a big deal for Disney, which until now has been focused on driving Web traffic to its own properties. And it’s a big deal for Hulu, which has now locked up three of the four broadcast networks.

Does all of this sound familiar? It should. It’s pretty much where things stood nearly a month ago when I was told a deal was going to be struck “any day.”

So what was the hold-up?

Just the tedium of i-dotting and t-crossing, I’m told. In this case, it comes in the form of haggling over programming decisions: Which shows and movies will appear on Hulu, how quickly they appear after their offline debut, how long they will stay on the site, etc.

A week ago, an executive involved in the negotiations told me the deal was “down to the short strokes.” By the end of last week, the four companies involved were massaging language for press releases, I’m told.

The long gestation period has led some observers to wonder if other players with a stake in online video–like Comcast (CMCSA), Google (GOOG) or CBS (CBS)–had been able to convince Disney’s Bob Iger not to go forward with the pact.

“Everyone’s been trying to tell Iger how stupid this deal is,” a TV executive tells me. The nuance of the critiques differs depending on who’s making them, but all of them make the same point: Throwing in with Hulu will strengthen the joint venture, which also includes investor Providence Equity Partners, but it won’t provide Disney with significant upside.

But the complaints seem to have fallen on deaf ears. While Google was able to get a deal with Disney to run excerpts of some of its programming on YouTube–a consolation prize, basically–it’s been unable to cobble together a deal for long-form programming.

Earlier this month, YouTube unveiled a new Hulu-like section for movies and television shows. But its inventory of TV shows and movies remains paltry and it doesn’t have any of the first-run shows that the TV networks highlight on their own sites (and on Hulu).

One thing to watch for going forward, regardless of when the Disney/ABC deal gets done, is how much access to those first-run shows Hulu users get.

Hulu is a hit with viewers but its network backers are still wary of training viewers to expect to watch their favorite shows on the Web whenever they want to watch them.

Which is why many of Hulu’s first-run TV shows have particularly short shelf lives. You can only see about half of this season’s run of NBC’s “The Office,” for instance. And if you want to watch new episodes of “Rescue Me,” which airs on News Corp.’s FX, you’ve got to be patient, then act fast. New episodes don’t show up on Hulu until eight days after they premiere on the cable channel, but they don’t last there for more than a couple of weeks.

In TV parlance, this now-you-see-it-now-you-don’t programming is called “windowing,” and casual Hulu users tend not to notice or complain about it. A small dust-up in January about “It’s Always Sunny In Philadelphia,” a disappearing FX sitcom, is the exception that proves the rule.

But what happens if NBC, Fox and ABC shows start taking longer to get to the Hulu site and leave sooner? We may find out. An executive at one of the joint venture’s network backers tells me to expect more restrictive windowing in the future as the TV guys try to get a handle on the Web.

Which means that just as the Disney deal pumps more content into Hulu, it may end up becoming harder to find.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20090427/disney-gets-ready-finally-to-hold-hands-with-hulu/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20090114/not-coming-to-hulu-last-weeks-saturday-night-live-highlight/ http://allthingsd.com/20090114/not-coming-to-hulu-last-weeks-saturday-night-live-highlight/#comments Wed, 14 Jan 2009 12:36:00 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=3115 I didn’t see “Saturday Night Live” last week, but NewTeeVee informs me that there was one highlight: Former “Doogie Howser, M.D.” star Neil Patrick Harris and a cast of of dozens performing the theme song to “Doogie Howser, M.D.”

So why didn’t I embed a clip of the sketch from NBC.com or Hulu, the joint venture between GE’s (GE) NBC and News Corp.’s (NWS) Fox? Because NBC didn’t have permission from whoever actually owns the rights to the theme song, NBC confirms. (News Corp is the owner of Dow Jones and this Web site.)

Bummer! Especially since the clip was one of the show’s “Digital Shorts,” which are designed to be viewed on the Web, à la “Lazy Sunday.”

You can still find versions of it on Google’s (GOOG) YouTube, though NBC’s lawyers are busy hunting them down–don’t be surprised if the following clip doesn’t work by the time you get to it:

If you can’t see it, don’t despair: These music clearance issues have tripped up “Saturday Night Live”/NBC before, and the clip in question–Andy Samberg and the dude from Maroon 5 doing “Iran So Far”–eventually made it back on the official Web.* (Another reason not to despair, at least in my humble opinion: The Doogie clip isn’t going to make you laugh outloud, anyway.)

The bigger point: Even when TV/Hollywood “get it,” they still can’t always serve up their best stuff to Web viewers because copyright laws and digital distribution still don’t synch up.

And much more often, the people who make TV shows and movies aren’t interested in serving that stuff up–legally, for free–anyway. Hulu was only able to show one full episode of “Mad Men,” AMC’s much discussed but little watched show about advertising. And it’s only going to be able to show “It’s Always Sunny In Philadelphia,” a cult sitcom from FX that owes some of its success to the video site, for a few more weeks.

So maybe that’s a cautionary tale for companies like Boxee that envision a future where you get all your TV shows and movies from the Web with the support of the TV networks and Hollywood. Or more likely, a cautionary tale for TV and Hollywood, which still aren’t ready to let their customers watch their stuff when and where they want to see it.

[UPDATE: As I'd hoped, NBC legal worked it out. See below]

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20090114/not-coming-to-hulu-last-weeks-saturday-night-live-highlight/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20080825/google-dollar-rally-to-drag-on-q3-results/ http://allthingsd.com/20080825/google-dollar-rally-to-drag-on-q3-results/#comments Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:11:17 +0000 Eric Savitz http://voices.allthingsd.com/?p=3088 Google’s (GOOG) third-quarter results will feel the effects of a strengthening dollar, Collins Stewart analyst Sandeep Aggarwal observed in a research note this morning. Aggarwal points out that currency has lifted earnings in each of the last 10 quarters, but that the company will suffer a sequential FX loss in Q3, with the year-over-year benefit “materially lower” than in recent quarters.

Aggarwal says trend reversal in FX “will put $22 million” of “negative pressure on Google’s gross margin” on a sequential basis, and will provide only a $132 million boost on a year-over-year basis, versus $248 million in Q2 and $202 million in Q1.

Aggarwal, who maintains a Buy rating and $615 price target on the stock, says that the currency shift “is not a thesis changer, but a noteworthy trend reversal to watch for.”

Read the rest of this post

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20080825/google-dollar-rally-to-drag-on-q3-results/feed/ 1