It was a wonderful frenzy of speculation and doubt when a simple leak on Twitter caused an entire industry to go up in arms about an acquisition that should/could/would never happen, here is why:

1.  Google does not need Brightcove

2. Google has enough exposure to entice Broadcasters and Media companies to use their “platform” to distribute video media online on their own, without just buying a company for their client roster

3. Google has enough resources to create their own CMS within their eco-system such that it wouldn’t make sense to buy something that is built on antiquated operating layers

4. Brightcove is not even in the same league as The Google – if I was Google I would go directly to a Tremor buy out and skip the middle man… just a thought.

Tremor

5. It would only make sense if Google were looking for a vehicle to unleash their own brand of a triple play offering, i.e. True marketing power will come from an entity that “owns” an individuals behaviors from ISP, Mobile and STB (Set Top Box or Cable TV, etc.) – I would add GPS but it is yet to be seen how deeply GPS usage will be opted in to for tracking on mobile devices.  It is apparent that the use of NetBooks and Smart Phones could take down the need for what we accept as our “in vehicle navigation”; However, I predict this will change and devices such as TomTom will be made obsolete by devices that are more mobile and able to multitask.

*Google has pieces of the requisite triple/quadruple play in their ecosystem – take Google voice/phone, google maps, youtube, insight (all their tracking and metrics) – so what is missing?  The STB, so it could make sense if there were a means by which one could inject live targeted ads into Video Broadcasts across STB’s with a micro-behavioral focus, but I don’t think that Google BUYING a CMS like Brightcove would be useful.

Sources tell me that there will be a new release of the Brightcove CMS that will include better turn-key metrics, a more resilient transcoding system and HD players, but I am not clear on if this is a total rebuild for a product that was originally developed to live in flat layers prior to cloud computing and db sharding… approaches to architecture that Google has excelled in from the get go!  The fact of the matter is, Google is in the perfect place to build the better CMS.

I use YouTube and despite a few limitations on video length and some traffic issues at various times of day (to be expected) – it works!

Last of all, we saw what happened when Yahoo! bought Maven Networks, there are many reasons why a company such as Yahoo! would have been better off hiring some developers and building their own CMS with a brilliant Architect at the helm, rather than make yet another half-assed acquisition of a product that barely served it’s purpose.

Between Maven and Brightcove CMS’ there is barely a difference in the backend – and I have seen both – personally monitored and tested – due diligence – and found them to be built on core technologies that are suspiciously similar and that yielded the same issues, weaknesses and overall clumsiness…

IMHO:  Google should not and would not BUY a CMS when they can build their own.  End of story.

Of course this was all rumor-mill to begin with, what this says to me though, Brightcove players (pun intended) are tired of working so hard to bubblegum and paper clip their product and want out.  Who else would start such a rumor, Google?  HA!  I think not…

Look, when Maven “players” were ready to move on, they were the first ones to whisper about who will acquire them.  Alas, I speak not out of ignorance but real, life experience.

What do you think?

I read a post on the CED Magazine site that made me smile -  Netflix signs on to stream movies to Sony’s Bravia TVs, just by connecting my TV to my broadband modem, I can access online video, music and content from more than 25 providers, including Amazon Video On Demand, YouTube, Sports Illustrated, Sony Pictures, Crackle, Slacker, Epicurious.com, Concierge.com, Style.com and Dailymotion.com.  Not that I have much time for viewing video, not when “America’s Got Talent” is so fricken awesome!!  I love the Sexy & Dangerous duo!

Judge not lest ye be judged!

Forgive me, I digress…back to my TV — “Sony was first to bring Internet video to the TV, and we continue to deliver one of the largest and most diverse catalogs of content to customers through Bravia Internet Video,” said Jeff Goldstein, vice president of Sony Electronics’ television business. “Adding Netflix gives many of our customers access to a vast library of streaming content through their existing Netflix accounts.”

So, now what does streaming media have to do with old school SMPTE Broadcast?  You be the judge!  Look out….

Read the full post here

Since August of 2008 we have had 5 different Verizon Business sales representatives assigned to our account – not to be confused with our stead-fast team from Verizon Core – Verizon Business sales teams, all of which came down to our facility to “evaluate” our requirements, one after the next… and guess what, now we have a new Verizon Sales team working on our solution.  It is very simple, we have a 1.5G fiber line run from our studio over to Azzurro, it is an FCC regulated “tarif” line that is approved for SDI HD/SD video/audio but what we need is a product that will allow us to use that line for “mixed” content – meaning we need to send “data” in addition to the SDI video, IP labeled packets of data into a Business network that we can control and dial in and out of as we see fit…

The fiber is installed and connected to our HUB, yet we still can not “legally” use it to pass along data in addition to the SDI HD/SD video/audio that we can currently receive and transmit.  The thing is, back in the day these units had an additional  “Ethernet 10/100″ RJ45 jack in the back that broadcaster could just plug into, albeit an illegal use, but they could. The line is just sitting there with its glorious 1.5G’s just waiting to light up.  But, as it turns out the manufacturer no longer makes the units with that additional RJ45 jack… only SDI can plug into it, not that I would even think about hijacking bandwidth like that anyway… but it would have been an interesting experiment in the lab.  Regardless, it is a step back not forward as we think about how independent broadcasters would have the freedom to transmit and receive video, either as a digital SDI or as a bunch of data packets…

But the point is, if the bandwidth is there, just sitting there, why can’t we send packets without having to switch services to something where we are charged for bandwidth on a line that is just sitting there anyway?  I know why, the question is rhetorical.  Because the FCC hasn’t approved that line for mixed use.  But, for accessibility to broadband and usage for all, why should a line that is completely unburdened by traditional ISP, a line that carries a dedicated site-to-site “feed” have regulations on the use of that bandwidth?

It’s not good for this country, it’s not good for business and it sucks for me.

Discovery” can be an arduous process to say the least – 100′s of hours have been spent on conference calls defining the vision of our Broadcast & Streaming Media ecosystem, how it works, the business case for it, the requirements set forth by our core clientele and how we plan to build and manage it.  After yet another series of head-banging “discovery” sessions, we have opted to go a more cryptic route, bringing more “partners” in to fill niche services using “Semantic” applications that scale based on bandwidth usage and requirements.  It could have been so simple, but it will be at least a year before the FCC takes action on this issue regarding the tariff lines – I heard an unconfirmed rumor that ABC may have a case with the FCC for a mixed use line – but alas,that is just a rumor and heck yeah I am spreading it!

Signing off, this is Nico having just spewed out a full months of frustration on you, oh avid reader… thank you and good day.