quarta-feira, novembro 19, 2014

Measuring Global Audience Is Labor Intensive



  Print Page

Measuring Global Audience Is Labor Intensive

11/17/2014

WASHINGTON—Imagine trying to measure your audience in third-world countries where people can’t afford a television set or a radio.

You can’t exactly ask these viewers and listeners to carry a portable people meter or fill out a diary. And call-outs don’t work either.

Yet that’s the audience Broadcasting Board of Governors-led U.S.-government-backed overseas broadcasters like VOA, Radio Liberty, Radio Marti are trying to reach. And to justify continued funding, the BBG needs to prove to the U.S. government that its broadcasters are relevant, impactful players.

BBG contracts with Gallup Poll to ask respondents about their media habits. In turn, Gallup works with local polling firms in the countries to get that data using in-person interviews.

Such interviews are typically 45 minutes in length and BBG keeps the data in its audience “wheelhouse” from two to five years. Think of it as an Arbitron/Jacobs Media Bedroom Project, a 2007 study of how young adults use digital media in their everyday lives, butfor overseas listening, where interviewers ask respondents, in their local language, about their media habits for TV, AM/FM and shortwave radio, online and social media sites. In many countries, much of the audience is reporting out-of-home media consumption because they may not own a TV set or a radio receiver, or perhaps the government restricts their power use or for some other reason, like war.

Figures released today for something like 100 markets show BBG has a global audience estimate of 215 million weekly people 15+ in unduplicated audience, including radio, TV, and Internet, up from 206 million in 2013. Markets where BBG is unable to conduct audience research, like North Korea, Tibet, Cuba and others are excluded.

The overall takeaways, according to audience research officials for the BBG, is the television, and online audience is growing at 124 million and 25 million people weekly while radio is stable at 111 million weekly people.

The largest audiences by country in 2014 were in Indonesia, Nigeria and Iran, compared to Indonesia, Nigeria and Mexico in 2013. You can see how the top countries measured by BBG rate later today as part of a larger report on the BBG website.

When I asked whether the analog or digital radio and television audience is measured, officials said it depends on the “local regime” in each country — meaning the method of delivery by the local media affiliate that BBG partners with (some 2,300) in a particular country.

Of interest is how programming delivered by BBG broadcasters Alhurra and Radio Sawa to the Middle East and Northern Africa is counteracting propaganda by ISIL, data they hope to have soon.

Though overseas audience data-gathering is different from such data gathered for a U.S. audience, where advertising markets are key, I have some context for what BBG is doing. One of my news radio jobs was at Voice of America. In 1986 when Dictator Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier was ousted, the U.S. wanted to add more hours of democratic programming aimed at Central America. I was the English news anchor and writer for a daily VOA program broadcast mainly in Creole to Haiti. Our shortwave frequency was changed often to counteract jamming by the Russians and Cubans. We announced slowly, to counteract the variable shortwave signal and wrote with no jargon or contractions, to account for the fact that the majority of listeners spoke English as a second or third language.

BBG broadcasters are still aiming their content to countries that have what they politely call “challenging” news environments; the advent of digital means now they have more avenues to try and reach those audiences.

  Print Page

sábado, novembro 15, 2014

#SFMusicTech Summit | Recap & Remarks - hypebot

#SFMusicTech Summit | Recap & Remarks - hypebot

#SFMusicTech Summit | Recap & Remarks

IMG_8280Let's start by admitting that I'm about to break several basic rules of journalism. While there's reporting in this piece, I am also a newly minted fan of SF Music Tech. So, it is with heartfelt gratitude that I take to my computer at 11:30pm to gather my thoughts after a whirlwind day at SF Music Tech Summit. Gratitude for Brian Zisk and the incredible team that worked tirelessly to pull of an impeccable conference; for the countless enthusiastic individuals who I crossed paths with both intentionally and circumstantially; and for the ideas shared, expanded upon, and set in motion throughout the day. While there is entirely too much future content for one blog post to handle, there were a handful of recurring themes worth highlighting.

Opportunity makes a follower. Experience makes a fan. 

"I believe all music fans have moments like this with their favorite artists. They see an amazing performance at exactly the right time in their life or they get to to meet a member of the band and they really like that person and the go from someone who really likes an artist to someone who is a true fan of that artist." - Ethan Diamond, Bandcamp 

IMG_8224The secret to making money? Knowing who's going to spend it. 

"The question around is recorded music an important part of a musicians life is, I believe, absolutely yes, how you present that recorded music is changing. Everything we've talked about are great ideas for monetization, but in order to make them work, you must first truly understand your fans - both who they are, and what they want." - Amy Dietz, INgrooves

Think like a Startup 

"I think we need to shift our mindset as musicians to looking at music as a small, medium, or large business depending on where you are in your career. It's like a startup, and if I were starting, I'd knock on every venue door, talk to every band that's playing, try to get in front of their audience, put my work out there for free, play as many shows as possible to try to best understand who my customer is and what they want." - J Sider, BandPage

IMG_8208System + Spirit = Success

"We never got a free pass. Our fans wanted our best. So our mantra was it's that 10% extra that makes it 100% better than anything else. Thats the work ethic we walked into every rehearsal with - our fans demanded it. That knowledge of our fanbase is what forced us into working for the credibility we came to have in this space." - Jimmy Chamberlin, Smashing Pumpkins

Dan Berkowitz, of CID Entertainment said yesterday, "Every single person in this room right now could sell words on the internet. Selling experiences is one thing, creating those experiences and over-delivering for those people is everything." That is exactly what, as an industry, you did for me at SF Music Tech Summit.

So, that being said, I want to personally thank each and every one of you for an informative, invigorating, and inspiring conference. I am eternally grateful to those of you who welcomed me into your tight knit community with open arms - I look forward to following your journies and to learning more from you along the way. 

I close out the day hopeful for the future of the music industry. Not because there aren't obstacles, but because there are people out there like you who are committed to overcoming them.

Related articles



Sent from my iPad

quarta-feira, novembro 12, 2014

"Trava química" impede que duração da bateria cresça com rapidez do celular - Notícias - Tecnologia

"Trava química" impede que duração da bateria cresça com rapidez do celular - Notícias - Tecnologia

"Trava química" impede que duração da bateria cresça com rapidez do celular

A principal reclamação dos usuários dos smartphones --independente da marca ou do modelo--está relacionada à durabilidade das baterias, que os tornaram reféns dos carregadores e, consequentemente das tomadas.

Se há uns três ou quatros anos as cargas chegavam a durar até uma semana, atualmente, no entanto, o tempo entre uma recarga e outra dificilmente ultrapassa 24 horas. Por que isso acontece? Será que as baterias não acompanharam a evolução dos celulares? Ou será que não se adequaram ao novo comportamento dos usuários?

Maria de Fátima Negreli Rosolem, perita em sistemas de energia do CPqD (Centro de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento em Telecomunicações), afirma existir uma desproporção dos avanços dos celulares e das baterias. Uma diferença que, segundo ela, 'atravanca' de certa forma o desenvolvimento do setor de telecomunicações. 

Ampliar

Bateria do smartphone pode durar mais com ajustes simples; saiba como25 fotos

1 / 25

Quem usa smartphone sabe que um dos pontos fracos do aparelho, independente da marca, é a duração da bateria. Isso ocorre justamente porque as funções ""inteligentes"" consomem a energia do celular para funcionarem. Mas alguns ajustes pequenos nos smartphones podem fazer a bateria durar mais nos sistemas Android e iOS; veja a seguir Arte UOL

Mas, como justificou Maria de Fátima, as pesquisas nas áreas de materiais são muito mais demoradas, principalmente por trabalharem diretamente com compostos químicos. "Não é algo que se possa lançar de um dia para noite. Depende muitos testes para que se possa garantir que os elementos não sejam agressivos ao meio ambiente, não comprometam a saúde dos usuários e, além disso, seja eficiente", explicou ela.

Para João Carlos Lopes Fernandes, professor de Engenharia de Computação do Instituto Mauá de Tecnologia, não dá para dizer que não houve uma evolução tecnológica das baterias, mas elas ainda são insuficientes para atender a demanda dos usuários.

"O perfil dos consumidores mudou significativamente. Antes os celulares, que serviam basicamente para receber e fazer chamadas, passavam a maior parte do tempo no modo standby. Hoje esses mesmos usuários passam 24 horas por dia conectados à internet pelo dispositivo móvel."

Consumo que, segundo ele, ganha ainda mais peso com a velocidade das redes. "Antes o acesso à internet era garantido pela rede 2G, que está sendo substituída pela 3G e 4G, e quanto maior a velocidade, maior o consumo da bateria." Ainda assim Fernandes cita evoluções consideradas importantes dos sistemas de recargas: "Nos primeiros celulares, na década de 1980, a bateria durava entre 5 e 10 minutos de uso. Sem contar nas recargas que levaram até 24h para serem concluídas", acrescentou ele.

Mesmo reconhecendo o aumento das funcionalidades dos smartphones --que levaram o computador para o celular-- e demandam uma potência cada vez maior das baterias, Maria de Fátima também destaca a intenção do setor de materiais em criar produtos que tenham durabilidade maior, menor tempo de recarga e vida útil superior aos atuais quatro anos. "A evolução está constante, mas é mais lenta do que a eletrônica. E essa lentidão, para os mais leigos, chega aparentar uma estagnação. Mas isso não é verdade", afirmou.

"Países asiáticos, assim como os Estados Unidos, têm investido muito dinheiro para encontrarem soluções mais eficientes. O setor ganhou ainda mais força com a chegada dos veículos elétricos, que também demandam evoluções nos sistemas de baterias ainda mais complexas do que as de celulares, mas que podem ser adaptadas", apontou Maria de Fátima.

O UOL Tecnologia levantou alguns dos protótipos de baterias e carregadores que, quando lançados no mercado, podem diminuir a dependência dos usuários de smartphones com as tomadas. Veja:

Protótipos de baterias e carregadores

Ampliar

Gadgets portáteis recarregam bateria de smartphones e tablets; veja opções 24 fotos

1 / 24

Nem sempre quando a bateria do seu smartphone ou tablet acaba você está perto de uma tomada para recarregá-los. Para evitar o contratempo, gadgets portáteis e capinhas podem dar energia extra para os dispositivos -- você só tem de se lembrar carregá-los previamente e depois levá-los na bolsa ou na mochila. Veja a seguir algumas opções à venda no Brasil | Preços consultados em março de 2014 Reprodução




Sent from my iPad

segunda-feira, outubro 13, 2014

Spain’s Economic Recovery Helping Local Startups - Digits - WSJ

Spain's Economic Recovery Helping Local Startups - Digits - WSJ

Spain's Economic Recovery Helping Local Startups

The South Summit has 3,000 startups attending this year.
Spain Startup

MADRID— Spain's fledgling startup scene is hoping the country's recent economic recovery rubs off on them.

The Eurozone's fourth-largest economy is growing at one of the fastest clips of any in Western Europe, unemployment is dropping and investors are flocking to previously taboo sectors such as real estate and banking.

They're also starting to look into startups. Data compiled by Venture Watch, a Spanish research firm, shows that investment in the sector rose 6.5% in the January-September period from last year.

More available financing is helping some firms— like Scytl Secure Electronic Voting, S.A., a provider of e-voting systems, or Focus S.L., which transforms existing fiber networks into early warning sensors for industrial clients— take advantage of bigger rounds of investments that allow for expansion plans.

"We started with Spain Startup in 2012, when all the talk was about a European Union bailout for Spain's government," says Sofia Benjumea, a cofounder and Chief Executive of Spain Startup, a company that organizes the South Summit, a three-day conference for Southern European and Latin American startups.

This year's summit, which runs through Friday in Madrid, has 3,000 startups attending this year, twice as many as in 2012, she said. Most are young, small-team app developers, with a smattering or more sophisticated firms looking for funds to grow existing businesses.

"The challenge for everyone is how to secure more funding," said Jeff Clavier, founder and managing partner of Softech VC, a U.S.-based venture capital firm. "At the moment, 99% of the startups are coming to us now, rather than us coming to them."

There is also a rise of entrepreneurs in Spain, surveys show, with increasing numbers of undergraduates preferring not to become civil servants—for decades, the preferred career path in countries like Spain, Portugal and Greece. They'd rather start their own businesses.

Still, despite the economic recovery hype, Spain's tech sector is far behind Europe's other startup powers. According to Venture Watch, in the first half of 2014, the U.K. attracted 658 million euros in IT startup capital, and France 353 million euros. Luxembourg, Belgium and Netherlands combined for 172 million euros. Spain received 81 million euros in the same period.

Experts cite several key challenges to overcome: a legal and bureaucratic system with byzantine paperwork requirements, and a low social tolerance for failure.

______________________________________________________

For the latest news and analysis,

Get breaking news and personal-tech reviews delivered right to your inbox.

More from WSJ.D: And make sure to visit WSJ.D for all of our news, personal tech coverage, analysis and more, and add our XML feed to your favorite reader.




Sent from my iPad

quarta-feira, outubro 08, 2014

There’s Something Going On In L.A. | TechCrunch

There's Something Going On In L.A. | TechCrunch

There's Something Going On In L.A.

Editor's Note: Mark Suster is a 2x entrepreneur and VC at Upfront Ventures. Follow his blog at BothSidesoftheTable.

"There's something going on in L.A."

It's the new refrain I hear from investors and even entrepreneurs these days. I hear it right after people decide to come by for a few days to "check out what all the fuss is about." I hear it when I visit LPs all across the country: "Yeah, I haven't been out there for a few years but I keep hearing that something is going on there."

So what is actually going on in L.A.? Is it true that the ecosystem has changed? Has it begun to mature or is it just better marketed than in was, say, five years ago? These are the questions I set out to answer with our master of analysis at Upfront Ventures, Glenn Poppe (who deserves the bulk of the credit for our work).

L.A. By The Numbers

When you peel back the onion, some surprising data presents itself. Let me start with the obvious baseline: Los Angeles is the third-largest technology startup ecosystem in the US. Since our city is the second-largest metropolitan area in the country, this is hardly surprising.

LA_3rd_largest_ecosystem_in_the_US

When answering the actual question "Is there something going on in LA?" in 2014, the data seems pretty conclusive. LA has now become the fastest-growing tech startup region by the number of companies being started. And those of us here have noticed this pace accelerating.

I know that many VCs instinctively recognized this, even without the data, because I've noticed the frequency of high-profile VCs (from Andreessen Horowitz, Benchmark, KPCB, and Sequoia) recently backing companies in L.A.; or spending time throwing dinners and events. Some very experienced VCs (David Lee, Chris Sacca, Erik Rennala) even relocated to Los Angeles.

LA_Fastest_Growing_Tech_Market

In fact, data released in this report by the LA Economic Development Council and the L.A. mayor's office showed that the city now has more people employed in high-tech jobs (368,500) than any other metro region in the U.S. They're accounting for 9 percent of all of L.A.'s jobs and 17 percent of total wages (that's obviously highlighting some other issues that need to be addressed).

They estimate that high-tech work contributes $108.3 billion dollars of regional GDP. What's perhaps different from other regions is that we have a large indigenous aerospace industry and a big high-tech import/export trade instead of a lot of software companies. But even this is changing.

Given how efficient markets are, when a large market like L.A. starts to blossom, it attracts capital pretty quickly. In the last full year for which data is available, L.A. attracted $1.5 billion in venture capital for its technology startups — and 2014 will shatter that figure.

Over the past four years, financing for L.A. tech companies has grown at a 30 percent compounded annual growth rate (CAGR), which is greater four times the U.S. average (at 7 percent).

In the last month alone (not captured in the $1.5 billion 2013 figure), there have been massive financings at Honest Company ($70 million), JustFab ($85 million), ZipRecruiter ($63 million) and whatever figure (lord only knows how much) Snapchat has actually accumulated.

LA_Prominent_Financings

What Has Given Birth to This New Movement in L.A.? 

Many people don't realize that the majority of the monetization of the Internet originated in Los Angeles but was perfected in Silicon Valley.

When my friend, and the father of L.A.'s tech startup community, Bill Gross, first demonstrated his company GoTo.com (renamed Overture) onstage at a TED conference he was actually booed (True story. You can hear many other amazing stories in this 1:1 interview). What was Bill Gross's heresy that rankled the tech elite? He presented a system where your search results would be ranked based on companies bidding for placement and where merchants would be charged on a "cost per click" basis.

Booed.

So much so that if you read "Googled" you'll see why Larry and Sergey stated they would never do paid search results. The monetization engine of the Internet that powers its most profitable business was invented and perfected in Los Angeles and is what you now know as Google AdWords. The patents that Overture held became known in small circles as Google's '361 problem. Yahoo acquired Overture for $1.63 billion (Upfront Ventures was an early Overture backer).

Yes, Google won. My point is that historically the ecosystem in L.A. has bred innovations in monetization and technology, but to date hasn't reached the kind of scale of our major NorCal brethren.

And it wasn't just Google AdWords that originated in Los Angeles. Google's AdSense did, too. AdWords, as you likely know, are the paid results you see when you do a Google search. Google AdSense delivers the results you sometimes see on non-search pages that show you ads that are seemingly relevant to the words on the page.

This method was perfected by Gil Elbaz and his team at Applied Semantics in L.A., and in what some have called "the most important acquisition ever made by Google," the search giant acquired Applied Semantics for $102 million before Google had even IPO'd.

What do Bill Gross and Gil Elbaz have in common that portends well for the future of L.A. tech?

Both graduated from Caltech, one of the most premier science institutions in the U.S. Both are massively funding other L.A. tech companies through what Fred Wilson once defined as "recycled capital." Both had talented senior executives that are now running (and funding) tech startups in their own right, like Gil's brother Eytan Elbaz or the countless graduates of Overture. Both Bill Gross and Gil Elbaz are building their next companies in L.A.

There's also no denying the role that Richard Rosenblatt has played in building the L.A. tech ecosystem. He built and sold iMall in Internet 1.0 for $565 million to Excite. He led and sold Myspace to Fox for $650 million. He built and IPO'd Demand Media. And while none has had the lasting power of the much bigger NorCal successes, I imagine his next moves will continue to be closely watched. And the younger L.A. entrepreneurs, who count Rosenblatt as a mentor, may leave an even more lasting impact.

LA_1.0_Begets_LA_2.0

But the "monetization heart of the Internet" doesn't stop at Overture or Applied Semantics. Over the past decade we've had high-profile exits at many companies that pioneered monetization techniques now used across the web, including Commission Junction, Value Click, ShopZilla, Price Grabber and LowerMyBills along with a newer breed including Invoca, Burstly, Shift, Retention Science and so forth. Many of the early winners sold for over half a billion dollars.

Success begets success. The rewards reaped by those who came in the 90's have 15 years later created new seed capital, blossoming new entrepreneurs and an ecosystem of experienced operators that nourished L.A. 1.0 and are cultivating L.A. 2.0.

But Is This Really That Surprising? 

All of this success raises the question whether the flourishing of Los Angeles is just emblematic of the long tech boom we've seen nationally. Of course it is — to some extent.

But this time there really is something happening in L.A. It's different. More substantive. Lasting. Structural. This time we won't stop at a half a billion, but we seem destined to create the kind of tent-pole successes that have brought lasting change to markets like Seattle.

LA_Big_Structural_Results

Of course most of you know SnapChat, Tinder and Whisper. And many people (who wouldn't be wrong) immediately associate the success of Los Angeles under the SoLoMo banner (Social, Local, Mobile). But they  forget that we have 2 relatively recent IPOs that are substantive companies: TrueCar (Upfront backed) and Cornerstone OnDemand. We don't seem to get credit as a community for SpaceX or recognition as one of the fastest growing communities for commerce: Honest Company and JustFab. You probably know that Disney recently paid nearly $1 billion to acquire Maker Studios (Upfront backed) and that's just the first inning for online video companies hatching out of LA.

If you throw in Oculus into the mix along with TrueCar, Rubicon, Burstly, Beats and others, L.A. tech has seen more than $8 billion in exits in 2014 alone. As Adam Sandler would say, "not too shabby."

L.A. 2.0: This time it really is different.

From Infrastructure to Applications – The Three C's

In order to contextualize the opportunity that exists for the Internet outside of Silicon Valley, take inspiration from the history of technology evolution across many markets throughout history. In her well-regarded book "Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital: The Dynamics of Bubbles and Golden Ages" Carlota Perez outlines the history of many of our great leaps forward in innovation.

Each followed a predictable path of building out infrastructure followed by a bubble then a crash followed by a more rapid deployment of the technology throughout industry and society. No less than Fred Wilson has credited Carlota's work with having a major influence on his investment strategy at USV.

Application_Layer_with_Other_Industries

In order to have the great companies we now know today (Uber, DropBox, Airbnb, Snapchat, Twitter, Facebook and so forth) we first needed the "Internet rails" beneath us. We needed routers, switches, databases, caching software, load balancers, application servers, browsers, compression algorithms, streaming technology, low-cost storage, management consoles, programming libraries and on and on. We saw booms and bubbles in both telecom infrastructure and Internet infrastructure and now, of course, those two things are largely the same.

Once the railways are built most countries (except the U.S.) start to build better versions of their infrastructure. So you get high-speed railways in Japan, Germany, China, France — and now even connecting France and the U.K. So I'm not arguing that the "infrastructure building" phase of the Internet is over – to the contrary. We see big data storage solutions and processing platforms. We see improvements in wireless transmission and in real-time programming languages.

But.

With the foundation laid, the application layer is having its moment. It's no surprise to see billion dollar companies like Honest Company and JustFab in L.A. We are the largest textile and apparel center in the country and now we have a way to reach billions of people in this globally connected Internet. Deflationary Economics now favors us.

Is it any surprise to see Zulily in Seattle, Wayfair in Boston, ExactTarget in Indianapolis, TrueCar in Los Angeles, Groupon in Chicago or BuzzFeed in NYC? I think it's the era of the application.

And our belief is that consumer applications that ride on this Internet infrastructure layer fall into just three buckets we call "the three C's": content, commerce and communications. These are industries ripe to succeed in LA and NYC. These are industries that start to open up new commercial zones like Cincinnati (home to P&G/Kroger) and Chicago.

LA_The_Three_Cs

Content. It should be intuitive to most that L.A. is well-suited to take on the world of content meets tech as we've seen with Maker Studios, Fullscreen, AwesomenessTV and Big Frame. With all of those companies gobbled up the market is now focused on the next generation startups like Tastemade, MiTu Network, StyleHaul and so forth. We believe there is no denying that the future virtual reality (VR) world will be stimulated in LA where you have the great 3d special effects companies, content creators and movie studios.

Commerce: What is less known is just how important LA is as a commerce hub. Around $400 billion of imports & exports pass through the L.A. ports each year, which set the national high-water mark in 2012. Thirty-six percent of all apparel jobs in the U.S. are in Los Angeles. And L.A. is the largest retail & trade employment metropolitan zone in the country.  It's not accident we have so many great startups targeting commerce including Tradesy, DailyLook, NastyGal, Honest Co and JustFab just to name a few.

Communications: Of course comms companies are springing up globally including WhatsApp, Line, KakaoTalk, WeChat and the dominant platforms of Facebook & Twitter. But there's no denying that we have more than our fair share of great startups in this space that have emerged recently including Snapchat, Tinder, Whisper and textPlus (which while much smaller still has millions of monthly active users – Upfront is an investor).

Stuff you may not know about LA?

It's probably worth pointing out that LA is a town built upon entrepreneurship even if not always underpinned by technology. We're a land for people who left their stable East Coast homes in search of opportunity and a chance to start fresh. LA has more entrepreneurs as a percentage of its population than anywhere else in the country.

LA_Largest_Entrepreneurship

Intuitively, most people know that L.A. is also the heart of creative capital. L.A. is the largest metropolitan area in the U.S. for people employed in art, design and media and the local creative economy of L.A. generates more than $140 billion in economic output – more than the GDP of many countries. In fact, 1 in 7, or nearly 15 percent, Angelinos are employed in a creative field.

But what about tech talent?

Yeah, we got that, too.  It may surprise you to learn that L.A. graduates more engineers than anywhere else in the country. We also have more grad student enrollments each year in computer sciences than anywhere else in the country. So we produce them with deep knowledge and en masse.

LA_Largest_Graduates_in_Engineering

Of course many of these graduates have been employed for years in the video and music industries and a larger amount have even been pulled into aerospace and defense over the past 30 years. As a result, we have a large number of locally employed engineers with video experience that will fuel the next boom of the Internet (Americans watch 5.3 hours of television per day – and much of this video is now moving online).

Equally important is that we are now a rich source of hardware expertise and innovation that is increasingly becoming important as the hardware markets boom.

While our best Internet software engineers have historically been exported on a net basis to the Bay Area, I'm sensing that trend reversing. Companies like Snapchat have been able to import large volumes of Stanford grads lured to creating a next-gen Internet powerhouse in Venice, Calif., GQ magazine just dubbed it "the coolest block in America.").

You may also be surprised to know that not only does LA graduate more engineers than anywhere else in America but we also have more top 25 engineering programs than anywhere else in America with nationally acclaimed programs at Caltech, UCSD, USC, UCLA and Harvey Mudd.

LA_Most_Top_25_Engineering_Schools

The Road Ahead

The infrastructure phase of the Internet is over. It will still attract investments as it improves in terms of quality, speed and reach; but the application layer will rise in its import. The three C's will ride on the tracks that have been laid for us and L.A. has shown itself to be a prominent player in this application phase.

We have the engineers who are graduating from top engineering schools; we now have second- and third-time entrepreneurs fueled by recycled capital and mentors who have built startups to successful outcomes and have seen scale; and we have our emerging tentpole companies like SnapChat, Oculus, TrueCar along with large investments and teams from Google, Facebook and Microsoft.

LA_Great_VC_Community

I also surveyed the list of local VCs and while we are slim on total available local capital I also realized just how many new funds were created over the past decade and how much more modern the skills are of this generation of local VCs are than those of the past.

With the founders, the funds, the application layer of the Internet, the attractiveness of Los Angeles in terms of cost-of-living and climate I think it's fair to say that our moment in the sun has just begun.

LA_There_Really_is_Something_Going_On




Sent from my iPad

domingo, outubro 05, 2014

Brazil Grabs over Half Latin America's Ad Market - eMarketer

Brazil Grabs over Half Latin America's Ad Market - eMarketer

Brazil Grabs over Half Latin America's Ad Market

Total media ad spending in the region will hit nearly $40 billion this year

Economically, Latin America presents a mixed picture in 2014. Output is climbing steadily in most countries, but actual growth rates have declined since 2013; regional GDP growth last year was just 3.2%, according to the International Monetary Fund. As in previous years, Brazil will account for more than half of all regional ad outlays throughout the forecast period as ad spending there passes $20 billion, eMarketer predicts.

Our fifth annual "Global Media Intelligence Report" outlines how media and device usage trends are playing out in Latin America, along with how those trends are shaping up in regions throughout the world.

TV remains by far the most influential ad medium in Latin America; ZenithOptimedia calculated that 62.0% of total ad spending went to TV last year. That share is declining, but even in 2016, TV will claim an estimated 60.2%, while newspapers will grab 16.2%. By contrast, the internet will continue to account for less than one in 10 ad dollars in the region, at 8.9%.

Broadband penetration remains relatively low in most of Latin America. eMarketer estimates that just 11.7% of the population in the region will subscribe to a broadband service in 2014. In fact, fewer than one-third of households will have a fixed connection to the internet this year, compared with over 67% in Western Europe and 74.6% in North America.

Levels of internet use, too, are rather modest, though penetration is higher in cities and among young and affluent residents. Last year was significant, as the share of Latin America's population using the web at least once per month passed 50.0%. In 2014, regional internet user penetration will reach 54.4%, eMarketer predicts, with more than 330 million people online regularly. Nearly one-third of those web users will live in Brazil.

According to JWT SONAR's "Digilats" report, internet users in Mexico logged the greatest time online per week in June 2013, at an average of 18 hours. In Colombia, users spent an average 17 hours per week, and in Argentina, Brazil and Venezuela, the average was 16 hours.

As the digital revolution gathers pace, advertisers are more inclined to invest significant sums on those platforms. In 2014, Latin America's digital ad market will be worth $5.47 billion, eMarketer estimates. Investments remain small by global standards; the worldwide total is projected to surpass $140 billion. But growth rates will remain high, with spending on digital ads jumping 28.7% in 2014, eMarketer projects, compared with a worldwide average of 16.9%.

It's here! Global Media Intelligence Report 2014

The "Global Media Intelligence Report" is eMarketer's largest and most comprehensive snapshot of the state of media usage and spending worldwide.

Download the free Executive Summary today.




Sent from my iPad

sábado, setembro 20, 2014

Why Major Labels Are the Best Thing That Happened to Artists... - Digital Music NewsDigital Music News

Why Major Labels Are the Best Thing That Happened to Artists... - Digital Music NewsDigital Music News

Why Major Labels Are the Best Thing That Happened to Artists…

In this article entertainment attorney Steve Gordon, author of the Future of the Music Business, explains why the decline of the major labels is a bad thing for artists.

I. The Decline

declinegordon

Source: Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)

The above graph shows that accounting for inflation, income from recorded music has declined approximately 65% from its high point in 1999.  Since the major labels (Sony, Warner and Universal and their wholly owned affiliates such as Atlantic, Capitol, Def Jam, Interscope, Motown, Epic and Columbia) distribute 85% of recorded music, they've been hit the hardest.

But so have the major indies such as Beggars Group, Mute, SubPop and Domino.  As a result they have less money to sign and support new artists.

II. Why This is Bad for Artists

Nobody ever accused the majors of being saints. In fact, they used to, and continue to do a number of really shitty things.  For example;

- strip the artists of their copyright interest in their recordings under "work for hire" clauses;

- reduce the artist's royalty with inflated or totally unjustifiable deductions such as an inflated 25% packaging deduction, and a 10% "net sales" deduction based on no expense at all;

- they reduce the artist's mechanical royalty for songs they write by 25% (the infamous "controlled composition" clause);

- they pay the artist a royalty equal to the royalty for normal retail sales (generally around 15%) for paid downloads, even though the labels do not sell any records to iTunes or other download stores, but rather authorize, that is, provide a license to such stores to sell downloads, and artists have traditionally received 50% of income from licensing income; and

- most artists signed to majors (and many indies) are receiving absolutely nothing from advances payable to the labels from Spotify and other interactive streaming services.

Yet for all these sins and others, the declining fortunes of the majors and leading indies is a bad thing for artists.  That's because the labels help artists, but not as many as before, by doing all these things:

- they get them on commercial radio, which is still a key to mainstream success;

- pay for tour support and arrange for them to play as opening acts for already established artists and stars;

- pay for production costs, including hiring star producers;

- pay for top line video directors and video production costs;

- book them on popular TV shows; and most crucially

- pay advances so an artist can quit their day gig and focus full time on music.

An Ad Age article published today, in which I am quoted, drives my point home.  The article is "Capitol Music Unit Holds First New York Upfront" and describes how Capitol Records organized an event at Manhattan's City Winery to introduce three of their new artists, and got brands such as HBO and advertisers such as Ogilvy and Mather to attend.

This is the kind of priceless marketing that most unsigned artists can't do on their own, and usually can't get anyone else to do for them — unless they have the financial means to pay for it.

In this case, Capitol paid the bill.  Yes, the label may deduct a portion of that bill from future income, but at least the event provided three new artists with a real opportunity for financial success.

Sadly, although the Internet allows unsigned artists to potentially reach a worldwide audience via aggregators who can get their records on digital music services, none of these players offer any of the benefits above.  Not the aggregators – such as TuneCore and CD Baby, both of which actually takes money out of the artists' pockets; not the digital services such as iTunes and Spotify, which will usually do nothing to promote an unsigned artist; and not social networks like Facebook, which like the aggregators will take money from an artist in exchange for "boosting" their songs.

So maybe the bad old record companies were not that bad after all.  Or maybe the new "opportunities" that the Internet provides are much worse for artists than the labels ever were.

III. Conclusion

Think of this, the great executives of the glory days of major labels, and the artists they were most closely associated with:

Clive Davis of Columbia, Arista and then Sony: Janis Joplin, Simon and Garfunkel, Santana, Aretha Franklyn, Whitney Houston and Lou Reed;

Ahmet Ertegün of Atlantic and then Warner: Ray Charles, Nat King Cole, Otis Redding, Crosby, Stills and Nash, and Neil Young;

Berry Gordy of Motown and later Universal: The Jacksons, Stevie Wonder, Marvin Gaye, the Temptations, The Supremes and James Brown;

Walter Yetnikoff of CBS Records and later Sony: Bruce Springsteen, Billy Joel, Bob Dylan, and Michael Jackson.

What name would you associate with TuneCore or Facebook?




Sent from my iPad

sexta-feira, setembro 12, 2014

Sued As A Young Startup? Don’t Surrender | TechCrunch

Sued As A Young Startup? Don't Surrender | TechCrunch

Sued As A Young Startup? Don't Surrender

Editor's note: David Soofian is an associate at Kaye Scholer LLP, where he regularly defends technology companies against allegations of patent infringement by competitors and trolls.

Patent trolls are on the offensive, using weak patents to go after young tech startups with the hopes of securing licensing deals. These trolls bank on the assumption that these young companies will pay without putting up a fight in order to avoid the high cost of a long drawn out litigation.

However, two recent changes in patent law are turning the tables and giving the accused the opportunity to attack the validity of these weak patents—the most valuable assets a patent troll has—without having to go through the cost of a full-blown litigation: (1) the Supreme Court's recent Alice opinion paved the way for early challenges to patents that try and monopolize algorithms or basic ideas; and (2) the America Invents Act created a quick mini-trial in the United States Patent Office for challenges to the inventiveness of a patent (e.g. did someone else invent it first, or was it obvious based on what others were doing at the time).

These developments can fundamentally shift the narrative in a typical troll lawsuit, by giving the troll something to lose (their patent) and giving the accused a quicker path to vindication.

Know Your Enemy: Patent trolling starts with investors looking to turn a (relatively) quick buck. They pool their money together and form a shell company to hide their identities. The shell company, typically with an advisor, then hits the open patent market to find a patent. There, patents are sold in packages designed for trolling—with detailed suggestions and strategies (e.g. infringement charts) on how to target specific companies / products with patent infringement lawsuits. The essential partner of the patent troll is the law firm that will act as the public face of the company by sending threatening demand letters and filing lawsuits. This law firm is often a small shop that works on contingency, aligning the interest of the investors with the interests of the law firm—spend as little as possible and bring in as much money as possible.

  • Demand Letters: Patent trolling typically begins with a first wave of letters that accuse companies of patent infringement and invite them to discuss licensing opportunities. Because the cost of sending a letter is negligible, the troll sends these letters out to a wide swath of companies. In this phase, the troll hopes that a small number of companies respond to these letters by taking an early license at a low price. Those early licensing fees can be put aside to fund the more expensive phase two—lawsuits.
  • Lawsuits: Lawsuits are expensive, even for trolls. But the upfront cost of merely filing a lawsuit is not prohibitively expensive, so often-times trolls will file waves of lawsuits against big companies with the hopes of pressuring them into licensing negotiations to settle the lawsuit. Like the demand letters, the troll will be able to use those early settlement payments to fund the lawsuits against the companies that fight back.

Fight Back: Being on the receiving end of a demand letter isn't fun, and the prospect of being caught up in an expensive lawsuit can be daunting. That is why many companies take an early license at a reduced rate to make the troll go away. But for many companies—especially young technology startups whose reputation is built on innovation and disrupting entrenched interests—the idea of settling out or taking a license is unacceptable. For those companies, their only choices are to persuade the troll to go away or to vindicate themselves in court. Luckily, recent changes in patent law have given these companies two new weapons with which to fight back and attack the validity of the troll's prized patent without incurring the costs of a full-blown litigation.

1. Consider Challenging the Eligibility of Software Patents: Recent cases have paved the road for early challenges to software patents as abstract ideas: in Ultramercial v. Hulu (later called Ultramercial v. Wildtangent), the patent was successfully challenged in the district court shortly after the case was filed (the case is now being reviewed for a third time on appeal); and in a case called Alice v. CLS Bank International ("Alice"), the patents were successfully challenged in the district court before extensive and expensive discovery took place. (Note: The author represented CLS in district court and during the initial appeal of the Alice case.)

The underpinnings of this "abstract idea" exception are rooted in the patent bargain. A patent is an exchange—the governments grants a monopoly over an invention for a limited time and, in exchange, the inventor makes their invention public by disclosing all of their secrets and details in a patent. The idea of the exchange is that it is worth stifling innovation in the short term by granting a monopoly, if society can benefit in the long term by getting free rights to use the invention after the patent expires. The abstract idea exception focuses on one instance when that bargain is unfair—when the invention that is being patented is an idea that is so fundamental and basic that it does more harm to society by granting a patent than the good of making that invention public.

Software patents became a favorite for patent trolls because, in effect, they allowed trolls to monopolize abstract ideas as long as they were implemented on a computer or the Internet. The trolls relied on the argument that an idea cannot be abstract if it involved a physical machine like a computer. But in hearing the Alice case on appeal this year, the Supreme Court rejected that argument by holding that an abstract idea is not patentable merely because it was implemented on a general purpose computer in a generic way ("each step does no more than require a generic computer to perform generic computer functions").

While the exact contours of this brand new decision are still being fleshed out, the important thing for companies to understand is that the case has opened up the floodgates to challenges of software patents as abstract ideas. To successfully make a case that an invention is nothing more than an abstract idea based on Alice, you and your lawyer should follow the following steps:

  • Strip away the technical jargon (e.g. ignore generic physical computer components such as "a communications controller" or "a data storage unit) and determine what is the "invention."
  • Determine whether the "invention" in an "abstract idea." In doing so, ask: whether the invention can be executed on a generic computer, in the human mind, or with a pen and paper; whether the invention is "fundamental" to, "long prevalent" in, or a "building block" of society; and whether the invention is an economic practice.
  • Assuming there is an abstract idea at play, look to the technical jargon that you previously ignored and ask yourself whether they add anything meaningful, or if the patent is really trying to cover nearly every possible way to perform the abstract idea on a computer or the Internet.

2. Consider Challenging Novelty and Non-obviousness in an Inter Partes Review at the Patent Office: A second way to attack a patent is to challenge whether it is innovative. The most commonly invoked requirements for a patent are that the invention be novel and not obvious. An invention is not novel if it was already public knowledge at the time of invention. Similarly, an invention is not patentable if it would have been obvious to someone in the field based on what was already public knowledge at the time.

The problem with this type of challenge is that it was traditionally only available late in the litigation process, after the accused had to go through most of the expense of discovery and expert reports (everything except for trial). But in 2011, President Obama signed the America Invents Act, which created a mini-trial in the Patent Office called Inter Partes Review ("IPR") where almost anyone can challenge whether an issued patent is really novel and not obvious.

Based on my experience helping to obtain four favorable IPR decisions, IPR challenges to novelty and non-obviousness at the Patent Office appear to have many benefits over making those same challenges in district court: (a) IPR challenges can brought at almost any time, making it a great option for an accused company to make an early challenge to a troll's patent; (b) IPR trials are quick, and are typically complete within 12-months of being instituted; (c) there is very little discovery; (d) the review is focused solely on novelty and non-obviousness; (e) the judges have technical backgrounds; (f) the words of the patent are interpreted according to a better standard (i.e. broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification); (g) the challenger's burden of proof is lower (i.e. preponderance of evidence); and (h) if the Patent Office agrees to the review, any pending district court case may be put on hold (i.e. stayed) while the review takes place.

IMAGE BY Shutterstock USER justasc



Sent from my iPad

terça-feira, setembro 02, 2014

Non-Tech Businesses That Created Their Own Tech

Non-Tech Businesses That Created Their Own Tech

Innovation by Necessity: 3 Non-Tech Businesses and the Technology They Created

Tech.jpg

The story of modern tech innovators typically follows a well-mapped path: A scrappy group of entrepreneurs gathers in a garage, warehouse or loft. They iterate and reiterate. Investors kick in funds. And then, eventually, our heroes either emerge with the next hot technological tool — be it an online marketing platform, a hip social-networking app, wearable tech, etc. — or they fold.

But what about innovators who end up making new technology because they have to have it for their non-tech business? Or those who are selling a physical product in the brick-and-mortar world, but don't have the critical software or app-based solution that their company needs to keep going?

In the case of the examples that follow, the answer is: They build it. Let's look at another side of technology innovation — the kind that happens because a business' future depends on it.

Invention based on necessity — Benjamin Franklin knew this well.
Invention based on necessity — Benjamin Franklin knew this well. He created bifocals when he realized he needed multiple kinds of eyeglasses to keep doing his work. Likewise, the following innovators solved practical problems by stepping outside the activities of their everyday business; they created the tools they needed to keep growing.

1. Re-Imagining Real-Estate Leads: Leads2Listing

leads2listing copy

Travis Thom and his fellow real-estate agents at Venture Realty Group in New Mexico, mined for new leads by cold-contacting owners of expired for-sale listings. However, it occurred to Thom, Venture's owner, that his company was spending too much time and money on an often-frustrating effort. What he needed was a way of bringing better leads to his staff for less outlay. He imagined a web-based tool that would attract homeowners who were more assuredly primed to sell.

Assembling a team of coders, Thom built just that. "I don't write the actual code," he said. "I knew just enough to know how it should function, and whether it was doable or not." Under his guidance, Leads2Listing emerged as a query-based agent's landing page, one that entices homeowners into envisioning what their property might be worth by getting them to answer a series of questions. Once they've entered their information, Thom and crew can then inform the potential client of possible selling prices, and they're starting with a prospect that's already warmed-up to the idea of listing their house.

Turns out plenty of other agents think Leads2Listing is a helpful tool as well. For $57 a month per site, agents in places such as Chicago, Denver, San Diego and Palm Beach are now using the tool Thom has built.

2. Mobile Coat Check, Mobile Tracking: CoatChex

3172003953_f9b85610e4_o Cropped

Indie entrepreneur Derek Pacqué started a mobile coat-check company in Indiana — keg-shaped racks that can be brought to venues — but soon found he had to build something to manage of all the rack's inventory. With his company, he designed and implemented an app that used photos and QR codes to track garments at each event. Hence, CoatChex was born.

And, as Pacqué told Entrepreneur, the potential of the software now exceeds even its night-of-event practicality. "We realized that venues want data on their customers," he said. "Data that comes from our app." With the information CoatChex collects, it's now working to help venues to further engage their clientele.

3. From Grain to Silicon (Valley): FarmLogs

Farmlogs team

What if the "need" in question was that your own family was trying to run its farm more profitably? That was the case for 25-year-old Jesse Vollmar, working on a fifth-generation Michigan farm where he grew up. He'd already used his knack for coding to build smaller-scale tools for the Vollmars' silos, but one day a neighboring farmer asked the young man when he'd make crop-management tools for everyone else.

"That was just a light-bulb moment,"
"That was just a light-bulb moment," Vollmar said. "This is something that was needed by the market. I'd already seen that we were struggling without it."

And so, with the help of his business partner, and a boost from Y Combinator, Vollmar went on to create FarmLogs. The software, currently free, monitors crops, costs, revenue, weather and other factors of farm operation. Today, it's in the hands of more than 5% of the row farmers in the United States, and it's used in 130 countries worldwide. As for Vollmar, he may now work in the world of tech, but he still goes back to the family farm. "It's kind of funny," he says. "We take our team touring all day, riding in tractors, learning all about how the work is done, firsthand."

What all three stories have in common is drive and an underlying concept: Innovate to survive as a business; invent to solve a challenge, to spur a brick-and-mortar operation on to the next level.

And whether it's finding new ways to lure home-sellers to an agent's office, or better managing inventory, or bringing big data to the farm, the world of tech invention often thrives on these moments of need — even if technology isn't the first business of the innovating owner.




Sent from my iPad