Update: Revlayer was previously known as Prerollr
Revlayer a new product that gives bloggers and other content site owners the ability to monetize embedded videos, launched today. The product focuses on creating revenue for the sites actually embedding video, as opposed to the creator of the video content or the service (Youtube, Veoh, etc.) hosting it.
This is a space we’ve covered extensively. See our recent overview of video advertising solutions, as well as coverage of Kiptronic and Adbrite.
Most of those solutions, however, focus on revenue for the content creator as well as (sometimes) the sites showing the embedded content. Revlayer is only focused on the end point site showing content to users.
Advertisements aren’t video - rather they are normal display ads shown over the video player itself, and viewers must click on it to see the underlying video. See a demo here (it should work on all browsers except Firefox with Macs, which is coming soon).
Publishers can choose to show ads sold by Revlayer directly and take a revenue split, or promote their own content or ads. If a publisher shows their own content, Revlayer will take 25% of the inventory to show their own ads and generate revenue.
Integration is dead simple. Once a publisher has created an account they simply add a bit of code to the header file of the site, and ads will then be shown over all supported embedded videos. Most popular services are supported.
Revlayer was co-founded by Allen Stern (CenterNetworks), Felix Shinir and Sam Falah.
See all
Post
Nice concept, my only issue is that it relies of code at the point of delivery which I presume means that these ads only appear on a owned website, not say to those people watching the video via YouTube itself.
I can already smell a bunch of cease & desist notices from YouTube etc.
I can already see the lawsuits coming from the content creator.
On the other hand, there is hope. The company could license the name to the local PD and let it be used in field sobriety tests. The officer administering the test would ask the alleged drunk driver the repeat name “Prerollr”. A successful pronunciation would set the allegedly drunk driver free.
I’m not happy with the idea of someone overlaying ads on my video and I get no piece of the ad action. I don’t mind it getting embedded, and adjacent ads on someone’s site does not strike me as a violation of the Creative Commons Non-Commercial license I use, but overlaying an ad on top of the video I think constitutes a violation of such licenses. Not cool.
I think we’re going to see alot of video ad products roll out soon because youtube has nearly got one too.
I imagine video creators won’t like this, but I think it’s a great solution to monetizing video. Later on they can engineer a revenue split with content creators, if it turns out to be necessary. If they can achieve critical mass before someone nicks their idea, this company will do well.
The content creators will want a piece of the pie, so I would expect a successful product to include this integration. Custom Software Development
Yeah, as a Revver content creator, this service disturbs me a little bit. As you know, we take 50% of the revenue for click-throughs on the ads placed by Revver after the video ends. Revver already has an affiliate program to reward those to distribute and embed creator’s vids elsewhere.
So basically, this service allows some porn “blogger” (because the content I created features a semi-nude Penthouse model) in his Mom’s basement to potentially earn more revenue (from Prerollr AND Revver) than I do (just from Revver)–either that or the viewer cannot stand to see any more advertising by the time Revver’s sponsors hit the screen (if the were paying atention in the first place). I think Prerollr spells doom for me AND Revver and I am going to rail against Prerollr in Revver’s forums RIGHT NOW! HA!
*leaves*
Despite all the gripes, this is rewarding the right person, i.e. the person who has the audience. In a newspaper it is the publication that receives the advertising revenue associated with any article, not the journalist and in the case of Prerollr the same principle is being applied.
The only way that ‘cease and desists will start flowing’ is if the original content is used without permission, but this is a different issue - it’s not Prerollr’s fault.
Based on the little information provided , it seems that the solution works through simple javascript/Div manipulations .The video and ad are disconnected.
Their is no information available regarding teh targeting capabilities of the ad delivery system or any interface between publishing sites and the ad network that deals with dynamic ad insertion based on user profile data.
In the light of content creator rights management issue, and limited targeting capabilities it would be interesting to see what the advertisers will have to say about the available inventory and resulting CPM rates.
@ Jack: Your newspaper/journalist comparison is invalid for several reasons and not the “same principle” as Prerollr is pursuing…
1. Revver agrees to split 50% of it’s advertising revenue with me, the creator–as an independent contractor, not an employee like a journalist.
2. A newspaper would not allow some random advertiser to seize a bunch of papers and beginning stuffing inserts into them without paying the publication itself (Prerollr is essentially doing the same thing with videos).
3. In any event, whoever legally owns the content–be it the newspaper or the journalist–has the the right to collect royalties from said content if it is used by a third party to generate revenue.
You are also misguided with regard to the nature of the cease and desists Prerollr will receive. They won’t be about “using content without permission”, they will be about leeching revenue off the content without permission.
See MySpace vs Photobucket.
@ Jack…
And I forgot the most obvious reason why your newspaper/journalist analogy was complete nonsense…
4. I own my content–not Revver, not YouTube, not anybody. Me. It’s mine. Newspapers own their content because the journalists work for them. I work for me.
And if someone posts their own video on their own blog? People who vlog? Content creators who don’t use revver?
Please, don’t think so highly of yourself. If someone posts your video on their site, you should thankful for the exposure. If they view it on revver or your own site, go ahead and get paid. Don’t allow people to embed your content if it bothers you so much.
Why should *you* profit off of *my* site?
As you can see, it’s kind of a catch 22. However, publishers are going to publish something. If you don’t post your video, I highly doubt the publishers will skip a beat.
I don’t really understand the technology yet (my demo is later today, I think) but if it does what I think it does, I see it as a useful tool. I think it can be used as its being rolled out, and then probably in other ways for advertisers themselves - it’ll be interesting to hear and see more about it.
There were a lot of video ad solutions at the last VON (voice over net) show I attended (which I coincidently wrote about for CenterNetworks) so I am intrigued by whatever comes into the market. I think as video increases online, so will the creativity in terms of monetizing it. Especially with the bit of control the users now have regarding whether or not they watch ads.
Congrats on your new baby, Allen.
Congrats Allen! I’ve been so tied up in my own work, it’s nice to see you actually launching this idea. I know we talked about your new startup and that was awhile back. I’m glad to see that it’s live.
For those doubters - Allen Stern ROCKS!
Rex
Is a new player in the advertising field arrived? I hope so, but i think as stated above, that the problem is to gain money from YouTube…and i don’t think that people from Mountain View will be very happy..
I hope they also own the domain preroller.com. Otherwise, it’s a pretty dumb move on their part for going with prerollr.com as their domain name. All they are doing is driving traffic to preroller.com!
Either way, I signed up with them. I hope their payouts are decent. Thanks for the article.
All of these little vanity driven “producers” can shove it. If they don’t want people putting their videos out on their websites for distribution on the webmasters dime then don’t produce the videos. Smoke that you whining babies.
These thoughts immediately come to mind:
1) One click is enough. When the viewer clicks to close the ad, let the video play be executed as well. (Will lessen viewer frustration with the ads.)
2) How sophisticated will these ‘ad overs’ be? If they were themselves 5-15 sec video/animation clips, then the transition experience would be smoother. The ability to even embed simple form fields in these ‘ad overs’ would help. (Otherwise just more banners being forced into view flow.)
3) Figure out a way for the ‘ad overs’ to work inside my custom widgets, and then I can put my ‘network’ to work. As they embed my ‘widget site’ into their web property, they help me increase my CPM.
Digital Doctor
As a site owner; I like the idea -
- If you don’t want ads over your video - don’t put them on shared service.
This is a sleazy idea.
darn advertising filters on my computer, i miss all the good ads. wait a minute, there are no good ads, hehehehe.
@ James: “Why should *you* profit off of *my* site?”
Your logic is flawed. Are you allowed to find a clip from “The Daily Show” on YouTube, post it on your site, and make a profit from it without paying some sort of royalty? No, you’re not. Why is my content any different in that makes you feel Prerollr is perfectly ethical–because I’m not Viacom?
It amazes me and my fellow creators are referred to as “thinking highly of ourselves” and “whiny”–if you invested your hard-earned money into creating something, wouldn’t you want to ensure that your investment reaches 100% of it’s profit potential? Of course you would.
Anyway, I would like introduce you to the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 license, which protects all Revver content…
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/
If you don’t think Prerollr’s ad at the beginning constitutes “alterting” the original work, think again.
Enjoy.
@ Concrete Stain:
I DO want ads placed over and/or in my videos–by Revver. They have permission to do so, not Prerollr.
Has anyone got this to work yet? I can’t close the ads when I put the code on my blog.
“Patent pending” - this is so ridiculous. What the heck can be patented from Prerollr? That’s simple and very common technology used for many, many years. In fact, not for videos from video sharing sites, but anyway, you cannot/shouldn’t be able to patent such technology. This is just ridiculous, really. Typical for USA. Next time a startup with another stupid name with an ‘r’ instead of an ‘er’ at the end patents the technology how to delete such ads before they appear. Ah, did anyone patent the way how to shit?
Want to see how much money the domain Flicker.com is worth? Just check out the web site: Flicker.com
These guys are geniuses! This is a great idea.