» tagged pages
» logout

sorted by: recent | see : popular
Content Tagged with cbs + Google

Google Tops Reputation Survey in U.S.; No. 2 Worldwide. Do You Agree? Vote In The TechCrunch Reputation Poll.

Which Companies Do You Trust Or Admire The Most?
( surveys)

Who do you trust more, Google or Toyota? The answer might depend on where you live. In its annual corporate reputation survey of 60,000 people worldwide, the Reputation Institute finds that Google scores highest in the U.S., but is No. 2 worldwide after Toyota. On the global list, Ikea is No. 3, Johnson & Johnson is No. 5, and Walt Disney is No. 12. Apple doesn’t even make it into the top 25 (see below).

Using the same data, Forbes breaks out the top 75 companies in the U.S. In the U.S. alone, Apple is No. 17, HP is No. 18, Intel is No. 19, Dell is No. 25, IBM is No. 35 and Microsoft comes in at No. 43. Bringing up the rear is Motorola at No. 50, Cisco at No. 55, CBS at No. 62, and American Express at No. 75. (See partial list below).

These rankings are based on an opinion poll, but they just don’t seem right to me. How can Dell be No. 25, with all of its customer service issues last year? And why is American Express, which regularly ranks as one of the most admired companies in the world and one of the top brands, dead last?

It is instructive to compare some of these rankings to the top 100 brands, as measured by an estimate of brand value. (See below). Google, again is No.1. Microsoft is No. 3, IBM is No. 6, Apple is No. 7, Toyota is No. 12, HP is No. 16, American Express is No. 20, Intel is No. 27, and Dell is No. 41. About the only company the two rankings agree on is HP. These brand rankings feel like a better measure of reputation to me than the Reputation Institute’s survey.

What do you think? Take our own poll. Vote for the companies you trust or admire the most. Multiple answers are allowed.

Editor’s note: I put in BMW twice by mistake in our poll, so please only vote once for BMW if you vote for it at all. I’m keeping the existing poll up rather than put up a new one and throwing away the votes that have already been cast.

Crunch Network: CrunchGear drool over the sexiest new gadgets and hardware.

Web2.0: TechCrunch

Google: How High Can It Go?

Google (GOOG) crossed the $600-a-share threshold today, giving it a market capitalization of around $188.1 billion. The big questions is, how high can it go? $750, $1,000 or (shudder) $2,000 a share?

Here is what $188 billion buys you:

  • 3,133 Gulfstream G550 jets a $60 million a pop. Basically one for anyone with the title “manager” who works for Google.

  • A whole lotta media companies: the New York Times Co. (NYT) ($2.86 billion), Reuters (RTRSY) ($16.5 billion), CBS (CBS) ($23 billion), Viacom (VIA) ($28 billion), News Corp. (NWS.A), ($71.5 billion) and Yahoo (YHOO) ($35 billion) — with money left over for buying Facebook at Zuckbuck-prices.

  • 940K Virgin Galactic tickets.

  • Round-trip tickets to Mars for Larry and Sergey, inflation adjusted, of course.

  • The country of Ireland ($190 billion), to be renamed (B)Goog-org. Larry & Sergey can be the royal leprechauns.

Technology-News: GigaOm

Bebo, Wall Strip, Feedburner - who is getting bought out?

Which of the three rumored deals - CBS-WallStrip, Bebo-Yahoo or Google-Feedburner - will come true? Take the poll. If you think two out of three are going to happen, let us know your pick (in comments of course.)

Technology-News: GigaOm

NBCU-News Corp.: Who’s In, Who’s Not, Who’s Coming

So many messages, so little time ... everyone has spin to share now that the NBCU-News Corp. has been unveiled—why they’re in, why they’re not, why they might be, what it means and more.
Content partners: The effort to bring together content partners beyond the original two kept the deal on hold for months. Moving past the idea that other content providers had to be involved at launch—or as one executive familiar with the deal told me when “we finally got freed up to talk to the distribution partners”—turned out to be key. The theory: with distribution locked in on favorable terms, content partners would follow. Content partners can come in two forms: equity partners with exclusivity required or, as we reported, non-equity, non-exclusive.
But why sign with competitors and give up control, someone from a non-participating media company asked me. I put that question to the executive who was explaining some aspects of the deal to me and got a multi-part answer only made possible by the distribution deals:
-- Content partners coming in now will have “extraordinary content protection—IP protection that they hadn’t before. ... Any distribution partner is already signed up to protect your content.” The executive said all of the partners committed to protection beyond the requirements. The deals include filtering of all user-uploaded video. “If you’re getting paid for Heroes on someone’s profile page why would you let the same clip be uploaded by someone?” One more point: “The content-protection language was negotiated long into the night for the last three nights—no other (prospective) content partners know what we’ve got.”
-- a “really favorable rev share on the advertising” (We have confirmed independently that split is 90-10 for equity partners.)
-- “the opportunity to opt into a network that gives you immediate access to 96 percent of U.S. internet users”
-- “total autonomy” to do their own deals and the ability to opt out.
Here’s what a couple of potential content partners had to say publicly:
Viacom, which was courted for the venture but went its own way: “A new online video distribution platform that respects copyrights is a welcome addition to the industry. The venture supports our view that upholding the rights of content creators is the only logical and legitimate path for the creative and technology communities to come together and bring great new online experiences to consumers.”
CBS was put off by the idea of exclusivity for equity partners but this statement seems to leave room: “CBS continues to pursue its interactive distribution strategy by partnering on an open, non-exclusive basis with best-in-class, next-generation platforms in order to reach and learn about its audience and get paid for its content worldwide.  As with all existing and potential partners, we will continue to discuss opportunities with NBC and Fox to determine if we can work together in the future, and we wish them well.”
Distribution partners: So why would distribution partners take 10 cents on the dollar in this deal?
MSN: Adam Sohn from MSN Video was careful to say in response that he wasn’t confirming that split when I asked but admitted the income, while new, would be incremental. So why do it? Microsoft has been investing in a two-part video strategy—licensed content for MSN Video, user-generated content through Soapbox. Newco brings a large library to MSN Video, the ability to sell ads against the branded player although Newco will sell its own ads inside the player, and reasons for people to spend more time on the site. Sohn said existing deals with Fox and NBC continue as is unless the parties agree otherwise. The copyright protection requirements matched Microsoft’s own thinking; as we wrote earlier today, the company is putting Soapbox back in private to add a content filtering layer.
AOL (Google owns 5 percent of the TW subsidiary): Some notes from an AOL spokesperson show why the portal was interested: “This site’s videos will be directly integrated into the AOL experience. Users will be able to easily play videos from this site without having to open an additional window or leave AOL’s site. For example, you might be able to read a story about Keifer Sutherland in AOL’s celebrity news area and, with one click, watch the latest episode of 24. (Someone suggested to me that AOL’s entry was because of Randy Falco’s NBC connections but once MSN and Yahoo were on board I think AOL had to come on board.)
Google: No, Google hasn’t signed on yet but CEO Eric Schmidt called Peter Chernin and Jeff Zucker this morning to suggest talks. Plans are already underway to continue discussions. Google could slay a lot of dragons by signing with Newco since that deal includes filtering and copyright protection.
Comcast: One of the largest ISPs and content distributors; it would make sense but Comcast may not like the split. On the other hand, Comcast also could be a content partner. 

Content-Economics: Paid Content

While Viacom Sues, CBS Cuts Another YouTube Deal, This Time For March Madness

Sumner Redstone has it both ways with Google-YouTube ... two days after Viacom sued the company and its subsidiary, CBS announced another deal with YouTube NCAA tourney channel. Redstone, of course, is chairman of both companies. The attitudes of the two companies toward Google diverged even before the official split and, soon after, CBS was a launch partner for the Google Video marketplace and also has found ways to work with YouTube.
Google and CBS have yet to strike a comprehensive deal and efforts to match radio inventory with Google’s interest in radio sales didn’t pan out. Quincy Smith, president of CBS Interactive, worked with Google in his investment-banking life and his good relationships there may part of the reasons for an attitude that continues to differ from Viacom post-Google acquisition.
-- Announced within hours of the first top-off in the men’s basketball tournament, the CBS Sports NCAA Tournament Channel is sponsored by Pontiac and launches today in conjunction with the start of March Madness. The channel includes many of the usual YouTube elements—comments, rating, RSS etc.—but is missing a major one: embedding has been disabled. Programming will include near real-time uploads of highlights and game clips from CSTV.
Update: Had the chance to chat with Quincy Smith about this ... it wasn’t his day for big-picture talk like why CBS and YouTube get along better than Viacom and YouTube. He does say “there’s no better online audience than You Tube for video watching.”
Smith would rather talk about the various ways CBS is making money from the same set of rights—TV, radio, its own sites CBSSportsline.com and CSTV.com, live online coverage on MMOD, and the YouTube channel—and how it’s working with cross-platform advertisers like Pontiac. These are still early days for online money, though. Smith: “Point of sale versus brand building online. This is a pretty good piece of evidence that suggests advertisers are now thinking it’s the real deal.” With more and more people online, he adds, “it’s only a matter of time before the brands show up.”
WSJ: Speaking of brands online, the Journal has a good look at how advertisers are going beyond the main sites for attention—specifically by going directly to official school sites, adding a local approach to the broader national advertising. CBS college network CSTV with 250 college sites and Florida-based XOS Technologies with 100, 14 in the tournament—offer the easiest ways in. The theory—and it makes a lot of sense—is fans go to their school site first. Pontiac augmented its other CBS spending with buys on 50 CSTV sites with localized ads.
-- By working with XOS to add video and audio, Creighton expects to make $60,000 or so in online advertising next season, a substantial addition to its usual $800,000 ad revenue. 

Content-Economics: Paid Content