Seeking Alpha

Dan Rayburn

View as an RSS Feed
View Dan Rayburn's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Level 3 Cuts Jobs, CDN Group Still Growing; Should Do $45-50 Million [View article]
    Level 3 classifies many different products under the "content markets group". I am only talking about revenue received for the delivery of content via their CDN product for small object delivery, video streaming/downloads and software downloads.
    Dec 9 09:52 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Sun Launches JavaFX to Try and Compete with Flash & Silverlight [View article]
    Sling and Hulu don't use progressive download, they are streaming. And Netflix streams to the XBOX, it does not download. And Silverlight is not a set top box or a portable player, it is a software platform. You refer to Vudu as a service provider that uses P2P, except that they don't. You are comparing a whole bunch of different things together that make no sense.

    My guess, you work for since you mention them six times which is a crappy solution that no one uses, that does not even support Mac players and has a company website that has home foreclosure ads on their pages.
    Dec 7 10:34 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Limelight and Akamai Have No Threat by Amazon's New CloudFront Service [View article]
    Amazon says that when it comes to CloudFront specifically, they do not have better pricing for larger customers. When I asked about lower pricing for higher volume customers they went on record to say, "we are not making custom deals for CloudFront".
    Nov 21 11:17 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Netflix's New Digital Distribution Will Improve the Bottom Line [View article]
    The cost to Netflix to license and encode all of this content and pay Limelight Networks to store and stream all of these video is not cheap, let alone the development costs for the player and interface. Today, it is not improving their bottom line, far from it. They are spending a lot of money to make this happen and will have to continue to sink a great deal of money into this for some time to come. Not a bad thing, as they are planning for the future, but it is not improving their bottom line anytime soon.

    This is the main reason why to date, Netflix will not break out any of their costs around their digital distribution offering.
    Nov 20 10:24 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 2009 Should Be a Good Year for Level 3's Content Delivery Business [View article]
    On the title comment, takes these posts from my blog where they originally appear at and sometimes changes the title of the post at their own discretion.

    I asked that this title be changed from the original title which was too generic. I was not implying that Level 3 as a company would have a good year, as I only track Level 3's CDN business, which is what this specific post is about.
    Nov 13 09:44 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • YouTube Is on a Roll [View article]
    On a roll? You have to be kidding.

    If the American Idol website only made $13 million last year, and this newly announced deal with YouTube does not include any American Idol content and will feature lesser known programming, why is this a big deal? YouTube won't make much money at all.

    And running movies on YouTube that no one wanted to see in the movie theatre or rent, is no big deal either. None of the MGM content is going to be first-run content that appeals to the masses.

    And the CBS deal with YouTube is no big deal either. All of the CBS content is "short clips", "mini-previews" and "promotional videos" - terms used by CBS to define the content on YouTube.

    And look at the number of views the CBS videos on YouTube have gotten. Many clips that have been up for 6 months don't even have 20,000 views total. The average clip length is between 2-3 minutes long.

    "With adding plenty of mainstream content too...." What mainstream content has YouTube added? You say "too" as if YouTube is doing what Hulu is doing, but that could not be further from the truth.
    Nov 11 10:48 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Is the YouTube User Experience So Poor? [View article]
    Najdorf, I think your comment is interesting as the part about YouTube being free is something people use as excuse. "Yes, the quality is poor, but it is free, so it's not that bad".

    But to that I say, CNN video is free. So so ESPN. And many, many others. And they all do a much better job than YouTube with a lot less traffic. Why should the fact that something is "free" be an argument for providing a poor user experience, especially when that company is trying to figure out how to make money?
    Nov 5 09:46 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Netflix May Dominate The Online Video World, But With What Business Model? [View article]
    Again, Apple and iPods have nothing to do with Netflix. iPods don't stream content, it plays content that has been downloaded. And all Netflix has said is that their streaming service for the PC will support Mac's at some point. Nothing Netflix offers has to do with downloads to an iPod.
    Oct 12 11:26 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Akamai: Why Charge More for Streaming Video Delivery vs. HTTP Delivery? [View article]
    "Wow, should akamai follow the lead of all its competitors?"

    No, Akamai should follow the lead of how customers want to buy services. All that matters is that customers like the pricing model and signs contracts. If they don't, then you have to realize it and change your strategy. And you can't wait a year to do it.

    The pricing model Akamai has now for many video CDN deals does not work in the market. How long do they continue to price things differently than everyone else when the market tells them they aren't buying it?

    "I assume that if their pricing strategy results in declining market share they will match."

    That's a big assumption. They had a rough last quarter and from many, many of the new deals I see in the market, they aren't winning them and are not changing their pricing model.
    Oct 12 11:24 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Netflix May Dominate The Online Video World, But With What Business Model? [View article]
    What does "video downloads" have to do with Netflix? Netflix's watch now service, XBOX 360 service and Roku service are all streaming based services, with no downloads. It's a completely different service offering than Apple's.
    Oct 10 10:57 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Akamai: Why Charge More for Streaming Video Delivery vs. HTTP Delivery? [View article]
    Did you read more than one post on my blog? Clearly not. It's been in other posts before. Not to mention listed on my public resume here:

    or multiple articles in the press where i have done interviews:

    I don't have to list every single company I have ever worked for in the past 10 years.
    Oct 7 12:58 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Akamai: Why Charge More for Streaming Video Delivery vs. HTTP Delivery? [View article]
    Again, the question is not why is streaming more expensive. I know why it costs more to deliver it. My question is why Akamai is the only CDN who tries to charge more for it? I see Akamai lose so many deals as a result of this and you'd think by now, they would realize that they can't charge more for something that others offer at no additional cost. That is the question. Why lose deals on purpose when you know your pricing model is not being adopted?

    When I talk about who the top three largest CDNs are, specific to video revenue globally, it is Akamai, Limelight and CDNetworks. We know this to be fact as all of those networks are public. Panther Express' revenue specific to video delivery in the U.S. is very_small. I know their revenue and speak to their management who has provided me with details in addition to the number of customers they have specific to video delivery. Panther Express would not be in the top 5 for U.S. based video delivery revenue. Akamai, Limelight, Level 3, Internap and AT&T all do more video delivery revenue in 2008 than Panther Express will. And I don't think there is anything wrong with that as Panther Express is not trying to be an Akamai or Limelight.
    Oct 6 05:04 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Akamai: Why Charge More for Streaming Video Delivery vs. HTTP Delivery? [View article]
    Clearly you didn't read my blog or my disclosure post that I linked to above. I quote:

    "As I have said on the blog before, of the 40 CDN companies I list, none of them have ever paid me any money for any work, ever, except Mirror Image which is public info. My work with Mirror Image ended almost a year ago."

    And that being said, show me one post anywhere on my blog where I wrote about Mirror Image.

    Lets stick to the facts.

    Oct 6 11:59 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Akamai: Why Charge More for Streaming Video Delivery vs. HTTP Delivery? [View article]
    It's too bad you can't stick to the facts and the question at hand. For starters, I don't work for any CDN, including Amazon. So your comment of me "stumping for my clients (such as AmazonCDN)" is your way of trying to discredit my valid question with a point that is simply a lie. I have disclosure, where is yours?

    In addition, why not comment under your own name? I find it amusing that so many people that comment are so sure of themselves and want to argue a question so badly to prove their point, but are not willing to put their name behind their words. You want to question my creditability, even though I make it clear on my blog that I don't work for any CDN, yet you post anonymously. Wonder why.

    Your comment that "however over the past 3 or 4 years there has been little to not innovation" is not just a bad "opinion", it's flat out factually wrong. In 2004 CDNs could not handle the type of large-scale live events, at high bitrates, like they do today. That is just one of many innovations. And was Flash Media Server deployed on CDNs three years ago? Nope. But I guess the advent of Flash streaming for CDNs does not qualify to you as an "innovation" even though Flash is so prevalent.
    In addition, as I have clearly wrote on my blog many times, streaming is more expensive due to the licensing costs, but the question I was asking was not why is streaming more expensive. The question I am asking is why Akamai is the ONLY CDN that charges more for streaming, even with Windows Media? You didn’t answer that question.
    Oct 6 12:20 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Akamai and the BBC: News Reporting on CDNs Getting Shoddy [View article]
    Sorry, I no longer track KIT Digital and have no interest in the company.
    Aug 22 07:27 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment