OK, now I'm confused [well, not really]. Just a few days ago I blogged about Kontiki and how AOL chose the video distribution vendor to power its Hi-Q IPTV venture. At the time I noted that competition was fierce in the market for online video distribution and one of the firms mentioned was Jeremy Allaire's Brightcove.
Then came the announcement that AOL/Time Warner was the lead investor in Brightcove's $16.2 million Series B round. AOL was joined by Barry Diller's IAC/Interactive [Diller also joined the Board], Hearst and noted media investor Allen & Company.
Coincident with the Series B raise, AOL and Brightcove announced plans to launch a co-branded service that will allow the creation and publication of individual-produced videos at AOL.com.
So on one hand we've got AOL cozying up with Kontiki for In2TV Hi-Q streaming, on the other hand we've got Brightcove serving as the engine for personal creation of IP video on AOL's linchpin property. So is AOL simply hedging its bets in the early going of broadband video? That's possible, but frankly I think these two announcements are for more complementary.
Kontiki provides a commercial-grade P2P-sharing for high resolution video. The company has cut its teeth over the last five years in the enterprise segment. Meanwhile, Brightcove is the proverbial "long tail" enabler. The Brightcove platform is about enabling individuals to create, publish and syndicate their own video content. Security is less of a concern whereas massive scalability and ease of use are paramount. Allaire has talked a good game so far...saying he wants to create a platform that "has the scale of Google, an Amazon or an eBay."
So Kontiki {enterprise class} is the engine used for Time Warner's content library. The collection of old television shows is a tangible asset that AOL/TW wants to carefully control. Whereas Brightcove will power AOL.com users and the tens of thousands [millions?] of videos dancing around in their collective minds.
I'm not going to bet on whether Brightcove, Kontiki or both flourish under AOL. But it would seem Brightcove's model is far less reliant on AOL [i.e., the power of their model comes from the myriad users/creators of the video content] and, by virtue, will be able to dictate its own course more directly. Kontiki, at least as it relates to the AOL properties, is essentially reliant on whether or not AOL.com subscribers want to sit at their PCs and watch Welcome Back, Kotter.
Comments