Next New Networks is an online media company with big plans for “micro television networks”.
The New York based company launched in January with $8 million in funding from Spark Capital.
The team behind the service is impressive. There are five founders of the company, Herb Scannell, Fred Seibert, Jed Simmons, Tim Shey and Emil Rensing. CEO Scannell is the former President of Nickelodeon Networks and Vice-Chairman of Viacom’s MTV. Seibert was the original creative director of MTV and a former president of Hanna-Barbera, Simmons a former senior executive at Excite and Turner Broadcasting. Shey cofounded and ran interactive agency Proteus and more recently produced Amanda Across America, Amanda Congdon’s post Rocketboom video blogging project. Rensing was an engineer at AOL before co-founding Frederator Studios.
Next New Networks aims to build internet based “micro television networks” for targeted niche communities. The concept brings together elements of traditional TV networks with Internet functionality that invites viewers to contribute, share and distribute content.
Next New Network’s PR spokesperson Brooke Hammerling shared the following description of a micro-network as the company sees it:
“[micro-networks are] a brand that lives on the internet and creates a relationship with its audience wherever it goes. In practical terms, every network of [Next New Networks] will have one or more shows, 3-11 minutes of programming, on a weekly or daily basis, a website, and a feed that can be subscribed to in places like iTunes or My Yahoo. Many may also have a Channel or homepage on sites like YouTube. You can go to any of those places and get every episode of the networks’ shows when and how you want them”.
Think Weblogs Inc meets video blogging with an everywhere distribution model.
Next New Networks has already launched 9 micro-networks with a plan to expand that number to 30:
Indy Mogul: a the network dedicated to DIY filmmakers and film lovers.
Channel Frederator: billed as the world’s original cartoon podcast, it serves the funniest cartoons sent in by viewers each week.
Fast Lane Daily: a car news network providing 5 minutes of fresh car news every day.
Pulp Secret: “the world’s first network dedicated to comic book news and culture”. Includes comic book news, interviews and reviews.
ThreadBanger: targeted at people who make their own clothes and accessories. Includes DIY tips and how-to guides.
Veracifier: “Alternative channel” with “original ideas”, reporting and commentary on news of the day.
VOD Cars: promoted as the “#1 Broadband Car Network”. Features clips of driving, racing, showing, drifting, posing and more from viewers. One for rev-heads.
The company recently signed a distribution deal that will see 7 of the 9 channels appearing on Veoh.com.
The content is niche targeted so it’s not going to appeal to everyone. However with $8million in funding and a wealth of industry experience, Next New Networks will be a company to watch in this space.
I think niche marketing is an awesome thing, and it can certainly afford us the opportunity to find exactly what appeals to us. I think it will be interesting to see how this company balances quantity with quality. If you really want to market to many niche markets, then it seems that you would need lots and lots of shows. I wonder how much screening is involved for people who want to create a show, and to what extent that may limit expansion into different niche themes. Will it wind up being 200 shows, or 5000?
It’s so strange to see what I thought would happen and work nearly two years ago actually starting to happen. I’ve been talking about how I think professionally produced content would have legs and here we are. Incredible!
Anyway. I might not be understanding their model correctly, but in my experience, most niche communities that can bring in video would just do it without them. Video is so cheap to do and deploy – quality isn’t important, yet, so there’s a lot of room for low budget produced stuff right now if someone wants to deploy. Second, few established sites are willing to let outside companies in – these kind of things are looking to leverage other people’s traffic as much as they’re trying to help bring something to us. Unless there is real value (aka $$) to bring in your product to another site’s already established audience and traffic, a lot of sites are reluctant to do it. Third, how they “enable users to contribute content” is going to depend on who’s platform that takes place on. Again, few sites are willing to let you have their traffic for nothing, especially since a lot of niche players are small start ups like us.
I think the web’s always taught us that strenght and might (aka, talented, fluffy execs like those here) don’t necessarily mean they get it or will be successful. I personally believe that this whole “let the user collaborate and share!” mantra will end up fizzling as internet tv becomes more like traditional tv, which is the natural path we are on. Just like “social networks” was all the buzz to have last year, this is how I feel about the whole collaborate and share thing that’s going on. I realize it’s kitchy to an industry that has never shared, but I think that’s going to drop a lot as things continue to evolve. I feel the same about user choice. Again, everybody’s all excited about it, but choice isn’t going to be what site you view it on, it’s going to be which device, in the future. and when.
And, not to further kind of be the naysayer
but I think Amanda Congdon’s show is terrible and she was a bad choice. I would have gone with somebody like Leah Culver, who’s much more of a fit and a lot cooler/fresher.
Patricia hit the nail on the head.
what a team of people though. it’s all about the niche, and so many people pay no mind to it because it’s….niche. kudos to NNN and they’re teaming up with some impressive talent (ie: jetset)
@ drew, people in those shoes would be fools not to work their way in at this point. If they were really impressive, they wouldn’t have waited until now
Expect more big names to come in but I still think it’ll be the meek that inherits the earth on this one for a while because where everybody else loses in big names, they gain in expertise and experience over them in my opinion.
I should add that I think niche players should hold tight to their audiences and leverage it right now. it’s easy to get excited to think something like this will add value, but right now, we’re the value to them, not exactly the other way around.
I’m going to blog about this today.
Drew : you said
“what a team of people though. it’s all about the niche, and so many people pay no mind to it because it’s….niche. kudos to NNN and they’re teaming up with some impressive talent (ie: jetset)”
but as I was checking nnn out I found that they offered 7 of there 8 micro-networks to veoh.com and they one network that you actually like or mentioned here “ie:jetset” they didnt get offered to veoh.com
I figured it was because nnn had to many networks to choose from but they dont. they only have 8 networks in all. so the fact that they didnt offer jetset is something to ponder
patricia I agree with you, the funny thing about nnn and veoh partnering is that I didnt read anywhere that veoh or nnn would be paying any of the networks that partnered any money. just yet….did you hear any thing about it
and as of right now I dont think there is any reason why any of those micro-networks would want to really contribute their content over to another larger network to make money off of them free of charge. I think that business model aka (bulls***) would work with the garbage that viewers upload over at youtube.
To me this seems like a more poorly thought out version of Joost. Joost already has the technical infrastructure , content partnerships , and monetization schemes in place. These guys seem I dunno …very behind.
Justin, you raised a really good question (200 shows, or 5000?). It’s something we talk about here, and we won’t pretend to have the answer. The main thing now is to try things and learn what works, and try to stay flexible enough to go where the opportunities are.
As for some of Patricia and Sean’s questions — the only reasons JETSET wasn’t in the Veoh release were because JETSET is not technically one of our networks, but a show we’ve licensed to build out a future network with, which we’re working on now, and that JETSET was already available on Veoh as its own channel, as Steve and Zadi believed like we do they should be in as many places as possible. I agree that there’s lots of opportunity for anyone in this space, and the people who focus on their audiences will do well. It’s how we started — Channel Frederator and VOD Cars were some of the very first video podcasts, launched without any funding or fanfare for personal reasons, and have been building their audiences for coming up on two years. We won’t be in every niche — it’s not possible — and we’re not looking to dominate the space; we think those days are over. But we do hope to make it easier for our networks to succeed by allowing them to focus on serving their audiences, and consolidating efforts where it makes sense on things like technology platforms, advertising, and distribution.
The idea is great although, as Nima said, I’m not sure how it will stack up next to Joost.
5 founders also has to be a problem. Sure, all of their experience can only help, the more the better, but in reality that is tough to execute.
Good luck to NNN with their projects. Like Drew said, they definitely brought in a lot of talent on the management end as well as the support/programming end, so it’ll be interesting to see what moves they make in the coming months.
The management behind NNN certainly are distinguished, but I wonder if they will be able to adapt to the online world.
Joost is nothing like Nickelodeon or MTV.
Tim: here is my thing with your business model. I like what it is that the 5 man team is doing. I think of it as you guys taking a look at the future of TV and the internet and making an evaluation as to where things are going. Or better yet, asking yourselfs where do you want to be in the next 5-10-20 years (which is whereever the money’s at, right?)
Now as for some of your business ideas… what plans do you have for the micro-networks to compensate as far as being assets of your partnership?
Its understandable that not just any deal like this would be worthy of some type of compensation but because you’re dealing with what I believe to be a higher quality community in relations to the type of content the quality of content and the time spent creating it. Its of higher caliber than that of majority of the users over at say…..youtube….when you compare the two together you have to take notice to that marginal gap you two have. but my question is :How do you guys plan to supplement the micro-networks?
I know you guys probably say to yourselves hey. There has been a lot of success around the net without having to compensate the original content providers. But if you ask me, if you really want to head in the right direction is to offer some type of monetary compensation to “quality content providers” in this since you promote whats at the core of making any business model as successful as it could possibly be instead of being just a “moderate success”
Mike sabat: have you taken a look at these guys backgrounds. If you havent you might want to give that a look, it might help as to how they each may play a roll. To me it looks as though they are marrying of internet and TV and what better way to do this than with having guys of strong backgrounds in different areas of TV and internet form a partnership
hopefully one of you guys have that uncommon factor that may not be present to the other 5 guys. :insight
hope you got that…in most cases its what determines a success or failure.
..hehe I wonder if there is a business for consulting companys in these types of decisions.
Plus Mike, if you havent notice everyone is tossing money to any website that can harvest a growing user community. So they’ll have that option which I doubt they’ll sell off their community because they already know what to do when it comes to marketing. But what Im thinking these guys are gonna do is hold on to this “piece of rock” that they believe to be the future of internet and tv so that they have a stake. Its kinda like saying they’ll be to the internet what Viacom is to TV Networks.(a major Player in the game).
8million was a fairly small amount to fund something that could be as big as nnn and veoh is planning it to be.Im still trying to figure that one out too.
hiro: dont know whether you know it or not but as far as joost goes.
Viacom already has their hands in Joost pockets.
Take a look at joost’s content some of that content is from MTV and maybe a few others which is under Viacom. So once again there is a pattern of big name corps taking there positions in the game of keeping-up with the changing technology and directions that the future might have on the internet.
@ Tim, very cool that you came to talk with us. I’m still not sold, but I think you sound like you’ve got confidence in what you think will work and that’s cool. I think all of us here that own start ups can attest, a lot of things go how you think, some go opposite, and you sort of adjust all along the way. Good going to you and good luck!!!
@ Hiro, I agree on that. Marlboro not long ago spent a fortune (millions) with an incredibly stacked, talented staff to produce videos and do all these initiatives on their site and it did nothing – I think it was less than 6k people came to it? Some really low number. Anyway, morale of story: talent offline no matter how sexy or stacked seems to mean very little when it comes to the web – lots more failures than success stories. My partner and I were nobodies when we launched StyleDiary (www.stylediary.net) two years ago, out of an apartment, two people, no funding. Today it’s in 72 countries. You just never know.
as everybody knows here this is not just a guess as to where we are going. the talent and the content need to be compensated at some level, and if there is no room at the end, there will be no success for anybody – i want to know who gets paid and when and why would i go to the site or contribute my content – simple – be real and ask yourselves all, what comes of making an interenet bases tv clip 3 – 11 minutes if you cant pay the talent or have affordabilithy backed by huge distribution funds – make a brand? it takes a lot more
Impressive talent, though I don’t find the idea that impressive. Somewhat of a crowded space.
Seancurt, thanks for the thoughtful response. One thing I should point out is that we absolutely do compensate the people who work with us on our networks. All of the show creators and producers are paid for their work. Their audience members who send in videos, comments, and the like are not paid, but they do it to be a part of the networks and have fun — and we thank them and work their responses in all the time.
We also have a different business model than Joost, which has raised a bit more money than we have, as people have pointed out. Joost is a platform with content from lots of partners, aiming to compete with other platforms and destinations; we cooperate with platforms and offer our programming everywhere the audience wants it to be — which could include places like Joost, and right now, we’re already on YouTube, Veoh, iTunes, and almost anywhere else that can aggregate an RSS feed. We’re trying to figure out how you develop programming and build relationships with audiences and advertisers in a super-distribution world, where the audience members are the ultimate programmers, distributors, and marketers of what we offer.
I dig the polymorphic distribution rules.
You kind of side step the infrastructure problem by ’super distributing’ it. However by going this route do you have the metrics & monetization machinations in place to really know how well the ’super distribution’ is working for a piece of content?
Will you guys apply this same ‘open-ness’ to advertisement sales?
Joost is very stern on human involvement in the sales process which is partly why I think big media has embraced them so readily.
It seems like there is a lot of life hacking and social engineering going on at NNN, which I think is the business R&D that someone needs to make a concerted effort in. So hats off to you on that. I look forward to learning more.
It raises an interesting point that from a business stand point there needs to be as much ‘Business R&D’ in this new media world as hard technical development.
It’s pretty exciting.
I think something has been overlooked that needs to be stated because most of the comments have been focused on either the technology or the distribution.
These cats are masters of building brands.
Seriously look at their resumes. Brands transcend the “tools” that are needed to distribute them, and thus they become a real asset that the company can continue to find value for into the future. Conversely the code we’re writing today is worthless tomorrow. Tool services have a different life cycle plan, and that is what we’re used to seeing posted to Techcrunch….. Cool Tool sites.
What makes this important and relevant is that these brands are being packaged for Internet consumption. Targeting micro-communities, they are building (what I would argue) are SIGNIFICANTLY higher value viewers than generic tool sites. Brilliant strategy, build a super high value audience by being platform agnostic and just ride the work off all the tool sites out there.
I believe it’s going to be increasingly more difficult to be heard above the noise. The “Next New Networks” model isn’t bad, it’s just that there are an increasing number of similar players and services emerging. The intelligence is in owning or licensing the content and understanding the critical importance of being able to spread it virally in a platform agnostic methodology to build the audience no matter where they are.
They get that.
I think the opportunity for NNN is to hopefully capture lightning in a bottle like “Ask a Ninja”, “Tiki Bar TV” or “RocketBoom”. Channel Federator is solid and a couple of others look promising, but…..who knows? There are hundreds if not thousands of more self produced, semi-professional programs undoubtably in production right now. As was mentioned earlier, the tools for production are almost nothing and distribution is a non issue. The real key is building the audience and thus creating the brand. That is getting more difficult as deep pocket traditional media like radio, TV and film studios rush into the space. We are entering into an epic battle of small, medium and large scale content producers and the stakes are frickin’ humungous.
As of right now, if you’re a podcast producer, you have to be on iTunes and if you’re doing video, YouTube as well. But only by being a player in your niche will you ever be noticed in the exploding mass of content. But while these services are great, you still need to stand out or at least be filtered to a micro/niche site. You can either get on iTunes and hope you land on their front podcast page or conversely, try and become a big fish in a little pond in a micro-site like IndiaPodcasts.com
Also, I believe that as time passes, it is going to become more important to find ways to draw your audience back to your landing page and on to your website. This is where advertisers feel more comfortable with traditional models of CPM, etc. It also provides a venue to offer other products and services such as e-commerce in a secure environment where profits can be easily extracted by the producer without having to share revenue.
A podcast landing page is also the platform to offer blogs, widgets and other perks to strenthen the brand and truly engage in “social networking” that will provide critical audience retention. If your a producer, you must find as many ways to monetize or perish.
@Adam, isn’t Marlboro a master at building a brand? I think building a brand online and building a brand offline are different at the moment. I can say I will be very surprised to see this group know and understand the places people go and hang out online beyond the obvious (MySpace, YouTube, etc) because I know tons of really brilliant business people that don’t. Nobody’s saying it can’t /won’t do well.
Jughead hits it on the nail: you need to think about bringing people back to you.
Love this idea. Can’t wait until Nick Denton starts attacking its founders.
The real test here will be whether or not each community embraces these sites. It’s been said that YouTube was so successful because of the community, but it’s also been said that it was because of so much copyrighted content. Lots of times, there isn’t anything in particular that makes some sites blow up.
I think this model can be easily replicated, and there isn’t much keeping the users from flocking to another site with similar features. The similarities between each of these sites proves this point. On the other hand, I believe that niche video sites will win out in the long run over YouTube and its clones.
People are getting tired of “shock value” clips of things exploding, and copyrighted clips will eventually be hosted by the TV companies themselves. YouTube has already considered this, and it shows in their “Sketchies” contest. They’re looking for well-produced content. Consistently well-produced content. Not only do the contest winners get a prize, but they also will be destined to continue uploading content on YouTube, where they already have a fanbase. Those types of videos set up future YouTube stars for the coveted LonelyGirl15 status.
I’m surprised this transition from junk to semi-professional content is coming as a shock to so many people. Did we all think stuff like numa numa would keep us entertained forever?
These guys understand this. I’m really curious to see where this goes.
Hmm just a quick note, the site appears to be down at the moment. So can’t comment on it (at least link as linked in the article)