“I think I just passed by Sarah Jessica Parker, and btw I’m much taller than her,” I immediately texted my lady as I was walking into AOL’s annual Newfront presentation.

The Newfront is a digital content event similar to the TV industry’s upfront. The Newfront also one big soiree, and lots of fun, usually including many celebrities, TV icons, and senior executives.

AOL Senior Vice President Ran Harnevo opened by discussing AOL’s vision, and at one point during the presentation, displayed on a big screen, a high-resolution picture of his young daughter Dani. He described how Dani consumes content, and why it’s very different than what our generation is used to. To Dani, it doesn’t matter if  video is presented on a TV, on an iPad, or a Boxee box – it’s content.  In fact, when it’s on TV – Dani at times demands to be able to pause the show with a swipe of her fingers, or share it with friends, and when Harnevo told Dani that’s not possible on TV, she got upset, not understanding why the TV can’t do what she would like it to do.

TV offers reach, while the Internet offers quantification. If given a choice, reach aside, I would probably prefer to advertise online, as I’m likely to get a better dashboard on the performance of my ad: did the user click, did the user share, what was the earned media created, and more.

And indeed, the way things work today, TV and Web are totally different environments. You can advertise on TV based on ratings, or you can advertise on the web based on demographics, but there is no real bridge between the two.

AOL wants to change that.

And as first phase, AOL has presented a strategic partnership with Nielsen that will enable TV-like ratings for AOL viewership. Imagine you could buy TV inventory, and at the same token be exposed to a HuffingtonPost live audience, or Techcrunch TV while interfacing the same metrics you already know and use: ratings.

I don’t know what that journey is going to look like, and how long it is going to take till we have real convergence, but I think we have a good idea about the end game.

I wish AOL, and Nielsen the best of luck, and if we could get to do what Dani is already taking for granted, it means we are on the right tracks: advertisers would not buy TV and the Web separately. They would be integrated to the future experience of online viewership — because, as at the end of the day, people are people are people, no matter where they’re consuming content.

We just want to make sure we reach the right ones.

Just after it gave its NewFront presentation without mentioning it at all, The Financial Times says Google’s YouTube is ready to debut a pay wall for some of its specialty channels.

YouTube so far is distancing itself a bit from the story—nothing to announce, they say. But it’s not flat out dismissing it.  It told the paper it was “looking into creating a subscription platform that could bring even more great content to YouTube for our users to enjoy and provide our creators with another vehicle to generate revenue from their content, beyond the rental and ad-supported models we offer.”

In other words, part of the revenue would be split with creators, who could use the money to make bigger projects, presumably for conventional TV and theatrical release.

That could be lucrative for channels like Machinima, The Onion, Howcast, or maybe even Awesomeness, the kids site that was sold last week for $33 million to Dreamworks.

The FT story says “Viewers will be able to subscribe to each channel for as little as $1.99 a month” as if that is dirt cheap.

The vast millions of  YouTube videos, and all the user-generated stuff,  would still be available for nothing, which in many cases is what they are  worth.

The pay channels idea sounds iffy to me, but it’s an interesting experiment that could become an indicator of just how much consumers are ready to pay for content, and how paying for it changes it.

YouTube is not only the 800 lb. gorilla in the video space, but is a veritable pack of gorillas in a jungle of little furry animals. If they can make turn a free site into just a partly-free site without adverse effect, things will have changed.

As everybody knows, in the history of the Internet, users have not been too friendly toward paying for that which was once instantly available sans wallet.

Paying for content is working to some degree for Hulu Plus, but probably not as well as Hulu would have hoped. Free content converted to pay content is still a mixed bag for newspapers that tried it.

Still, the allure to online video—probably more than content makers would like to know–is that most of it is free and free-form. There’s a cultural allure that even YouTube acknowledged at its NewFront presentation. YouTube fans feel they’ve “discovered” channels, and indeed YouTube’s presentation was loaded with performers that users, not Google/YouTube, did most of the “marketing” to make into stars.

Throwing up a pay wall, even for a fraction of the channels, commercializes the idea of being an online hunter. It changes the experience. Does it ruin it? Maybe we’ll find out.

The online video entrepreneurs say they compete with cable for audiences, but that’s not totally true because while cable does get money from customers it happens in a whisper. You don’t really know you’re paying $4 a month for ESPN and lesser amounts for dozens of others because it’s folded into a much larger cable bill.

But subscribing a to two or three YouTube channels, and then to Netflix or Amazon, and MLB.com,  and maybe to The New York Times digital edition (or the very excellent Financial Times, which is reporting this story ahead of others), a consumer will start to see those charges adding up on the Visa card.

Then what? Are a bunch of short/quirky/niche videos worth $1.99 a month?  How about 10 subscriptions?

pj@mediapost.com

Recently, Alloy acquired DBG, while Dreamworks acquired Awesomeness TV.

Terms of the Alloy/DBG deal were not disclosed.  Dreamworks paid $33 million for AwesomenessTV, with earnouts pushing the deal up to a deal size of $123 million.

The companies have some similarities, as they all operate in the video space.  Both targets (DBG and AwesomenessTV) have a repping business on top of their core: AwesomenessTV produces content, but as a multichannel network (MCN) on YouTube, it has aggregated 55,000 other channels who share a similar demographic.  Other MCNs include Machinima and Maker Studios.

I’m personally a bit cynical on the long-term viability of MCNs, though invariably the top few will have big businesses when the market shapes up.  Anyway, DBG produces its own content (most of which was created for sponsors), but the bulk of its business is the distribution of content and advertisement across a network of third-party sites.  As such, both businesses have “owned-and-operated” dynamics with a representation layer.  Also similarly, neither had an actual “owned-and-operated” web property, focusing instead on distributing content on other sites:  DBG on mid to long-tail sites, AwesomenessTV on YouTube.

Until fairly recently, an audience built on YouTube wasn’t deemed valuable at all.  But then once people realized that YouTube was the main hub where people actually watched videos — and Google paid $100 million for content and investors took notice – -then YouTube went from pariah to the belle of the ball.

AwesomenessTV focuses exclusively on YouTube.  As an earlier entrant in the online video landscape, DBG instead focused everywhere else.  Early on, when marketers were adverse to YouTube, this was a sound strategy.  Today, it’s not.  It’s worth noting that until a year ago Alloy itself had fairly little exposure to YouTube, but that all changed when Alloy bought Smosh and ClevverTV, giving them a sizable footprint on YouTube.

While DBG showed high reach on comScore, the reality was that a distributed model just isn’t as attractive as having a large audience on one property.  Naturally marketers prefer if the property in question is a producer’s owned-and-operated website, but by 2013 it’s pretty clear that that is wishful thinking and not going to happen; at best you have a large audience on YouTube, where people come to watch videos.  Since YouTube partnered with comScore (and thanks to Google’s robust Analytics platform), then an audience on YouTube is as good as it gets.

YouTube has gone from a promotional platform to a commercial platform in about two years, while the syndicated Web seems to have fallen out of favor.  Let’s face it: bundling content in a player and then distributing it all over the Web is tough to monetize and will only get tougher.

DBG’s decision to sell to Alloy is a reflection that its branded business wasn’t going to grow fast enough, or grow to be big enough (despite all of the hype around native advertising)  –and that with no presence on YouTube, its “consumer-facing” business was nonexistent.  It needed to catch up, and partnering with Alloy was a “good enough” solution.  But because an audience on YouTube doesn’t come with a shortage of obstacles and headaches, Alloy is basically buying DBG’s distribution network to ensure that it has beyond-YouTube reach.

That decision to hedge from YouTube isn’t all that different than when LA-based The Collective (not to be confused with the NY-based display ad network Collective) bought Metacafe, despite having a large enough footprint on YouTube. (The grass, my friends, is always greener on the other side).

As is often the case in these deals, sometimes these decisions make sense when you consider the pedigree.  DBG was founded by Chris Young, who previously sold Klipmart to Doubleclick; he becomes Alloy’s chief marketing officer.  AwesomenessTV wasn’t coveted by Dreamworks for the 55,000 channels or 14 million claimed subscribers — it was founded by Brian Robbins, whose acting credits include “Head of the Class” and producing credits include “Smallville.”  If that wasn’t enough, AwesomenessTV lists a who’s who of backers, including Mark Terbeek of MK Capital, UTA’s co-founder and CEO Jeremy Zimmer, Machinima founder Allen DeBevoise, MediaLink CEO Michael Kassan, Greycroft Venture Partners, New World Ventures and Matt Coffin, founder of LowerMyBills.

While DBG most likely had more reach and revenues, it should be abundantly clear which one of these two deals was more lucrative.  Whether or not that means that the Dreamworks/AwesomenessTV is a crazy outlier, or a shift in the online video and M&A market, remains to be seen.

It may be the small incentives via mobile that drive consumers to spend more at retail.

There are the big deals, like a half-off-the-price sale, that can drive a consumer to a location and cause a sale.

But there also are small deals that, with a little customer push, can drive shoppers on site to buy more.

For example, a gas station and convenience store chain in Canada found that by sending a mobile offer of 10 cents off per gallon to customers on site, it could drive up to almost a third of motorists at its pumps into the stores.

Another chain, U.S. National Oil and Gas Inc., has been sending mobile coupons to customers as they pull up to a store. If their Wi-Fi is on, motorists receive a mobile offer when they come within a 300-foot radius.

These offers generally involve small incentives, like cents off on gas, but they cause customers to go into the store, where they can be sent additional offers, driving incremental sales.

As mobile commerce evolves, the sophistication level of targeted marketing is increasing.

The power is the context and relevance of the small consumer push.

A supermarket shopper could be sent an on-the-spot coupon based on what they just scanned.

When a shopper is looking at their shopping list or recipe on their phone, they can see which items have associated coupons, a feature recently introduced by Coupons.com.

The point is, these are very small but highly relevant incentives for consumers based on their exact location and current activity.

Rather than a grand scheme to conceive of ways to drive more sales, it may just take a little mobile nudge.

Get On Board With Girl Power

For the past several months, the “modern woman” has been the center of media focus, from the debate on having it all in the New York Times to Time’s exploration of the balance of power in the workplace to the PBS documentary about inspiring women. And, of course, there’s all the talk about the depiction of young women in HBO’s “Girls.” During election season, social media was flooded with petitions and videos about women’s rights and information about politicians’ stances on women’s health issues. Many women (and men) posted status updates and photos making statements for women’s rights. Teen girls are certainly paying attention — they look up to and aspire to be like their older peers who are at the heart of the current girl power movement.

Until this recent focus, most American teen girls probably didn’t think too much about gender issues. From their perspective, throughout their young lives, they have always had access to female-centric media, there have always been women who wield political power, there have always been TV shows with strong female characters, and they have always had equal access to education…  But now, with women’s issues at the fore, teen girls are no longer taking their place in society for granted, nor should marketers. Here’s some advice to navigate this trend:

Don’t ignore the girl power movement. While it might seem easier to sidestep the issues at hand and take the safe road, the fact is that Millennials like to see the companies and brands they support supporting the movements that matter to them. Brands will get extra credit for showing they also care about women’s issues. And if you’re worried about stepping into controversy, remember that there are a variety of women’s issues that range from education to health care to equality — find one that fits with your brand and your target audience.

Feminists can be feminine. While teen girls aren’t necessarily adopting the title of “feminist,” they do reflect several of its principles, such as being girly and strong at the same time. Let’s just say there’s a reason that edgy florals are in this spring. The current version of girl power doesn’t mean that she can’t wear pink and still be powerful, so marketers should remember teen girls still have a feminine side to appeal to.

It’s not girls vs. guys. Don’t worry that getting on board with the girl power trend will alienate your guy customers. Many teen guys are supportive of women’s issues — after all, they have mothers and girl friends. They’re also taking a cue from an increasing number celebrity guys, including Daniel Craig and Ian Somerhalder, who are leading the way by actively speaking out for women’s rights.

NPD Group  released new findings on the mobile shift, leading companies like Facebook, Google and Pandora to alter their business models as more people consume media on devices.

The research firm said more than a third (37%) of those surveyed use their PC less often or not at all because they are spending more time on tablets and smartphones. Web browsing and accessing Facebook are the top activities people are switching to on mobile.

The social network announced last week that 680 million of its 1 billion users now access the service via mobile, and that 23% of its ad revenue now comes from mobile.

Among tablet owners, 27% say they’re using their PC less often for Web browsing, while 20% are going on Facebook less from the desktop. Similarly, 27% of smartphone owners have reduced both Internet and Facebook use on PCs in favor of their phones.

Underscoring the impact of the mobile migration, Google announced Wednesday that it will soon make ad buys on tablets mandatory, even if advertisers just want to reach desktop users. With the rollout of “enhanced campaigns,” the change will go into effect for all AdWords advertisers by mid-2013. The step is expected to bolster mobile ad prices.

While people are still using their computers for many PC-centric activities, NPD said tablets and smartphones are gaining ground. Internet browsing is still highest among PC owners, at 75%, followed by smartphones (61%), and tablets (53%).  Facebook use follows the same pattern with PC owners at 63%, smartphone owners (55%) and tablet users (39%).

TV is impacting PC usage. A fifth (21%) of consumers that have a TV connected to the Internet are now switching from their computer to using their TV to watch video from streaming services, such as Netflix, Hulu or Amazon Instant Video.

Mobile devices become equipped with sharing technologies like Samsung’s AllShare and Miracast, allowing users to bridge the gap between their devices and TV screens. The NPD results were based on a survey of 4,000 U.S. adults in the fourth quarter of 2012.

Greetings!

If you are looking to supercharge innovation, but not ready to fully upgrade to Trend Hunter PRO, we now sell our 2013 Trend Report on its own, for almost half the price of the full PRO package. We’ve also started adding more features to our Enterprise Platform, including a service where we create 1 monthly niche report, included in the base price.

Featured TrendReports.com articles this week:
Understanding White Space Innovation Strategy (INTERVIEW) – Charles Cain, VP at Starbucks 
The Value of App Marketing 
Effective Marketing Campaigns Through Video Advertisment 
The Power of an Effective Holiday Marketing Campaign 
What You Need to Know About Eco-Friendly Marketing 

Enjoy!

Jeremy Gutsche, Chief Trend Hunter (@jeremygutsche)

P.S. If you’re wanting to track me down, here’s my innovation keynote schedule:

Jan 30 - New Jersey Feb 6 - Las Vegas Feb 19 - Orlando Feb 22 - Kansas City

Feb 25 - Miami Mar 21 - Omaha  Mar 25 - Orlando Mar 27 - Toronto

Apr 16 - Omaha  Apr 20 - Miami  May 9 - Saskatoon May 17 - Toronto

Jun 3 - San Francisco Jun 5 - Orlando Aug 4 - Vancouver Sep 2 - New York

Oct 8 - Houston Oct 9 - Palm Desert

More details HERE.