Short Cable's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/109990/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/94290-divx-breaks-ground-in-supporting-flash-video?source=feed#comment-247721 247721 Sun, 07 Sep 2008 16:52:44 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/67359-is-the-breakdown-of-stage6-the-beginning-of-divx-s-end?source=feed#comment-123084 123084
Keeping the small piece may have been the deal breaker. I have a hard time seeing how a shut down is better than even the lowest price sale also. I can only think the legal liability, or conditions by Sony, and perhaps other content providers, were the deciding factors. I’m not sure how liability would differ from giving away and shutting down, but keeping a small stake would seem to be keeping all of the liability.

“If they were focused on growing the company, they would be using their cash to solidify their market opportunity instead of focusing on milking the existing business for cash to buy back stock.”

I agree with you there, but it does preserve value for the Institutions that are in control with 2/3 of the ownership. Most of them are looking at a loss so far, as am I.

The comparable business model here is Dolby IMHO. That seems to be underscored by the Main Concept buy. The value will be in the certification, not in a single codec, or video site. The new partners for DivX Connected are another sign, and partnerships to include additional codec such as VP6/7 might also be coming if that guess is right.

Consumers don’t want to know the details; they just want it to work. Brand recognition for consumer friendliness over proprietary codec superiority. Would it help Dolby to own a music sharing site?


]]> Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:33:46 -0500
Keeping the small piece may have been the deal breaker. I have a hard time seeing how a shut down is better than even the lowest price sale also. I can only think the legal liability, or conditions by Sony, and perhaps other content providers, were the deciding factors. I’m not sure how liability would differ from giving away and shutting down, but keeping a small stake would seem to be keeping all of the liability.

“If they were focused on growing the company, they would be using their cash to solidify their market opportunity instead of focusing on milking the existing business for cash to buy back stock.”

I agree with you there, but it does preserve value for the Institutions that are in control with 2/3 of the ownership. Most of them are looking at a loss so far, as am I.

The comparable business model here is Dolby IMHO. That seems to be underscored by the Main Concept buy. The value will be in the certification, not in a single codec, or video site. The new partners for DivX Connected are another sign, and partnerships to include additional codec such as VP6/7 might also be coming if that guess is right.

Consumers don’t want to know the details; they just want it to work. Brand recognition for consumer friendliness over proprietary codec superiority. Would it help Dolby to own a music sharing site?


]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/67359-is-the-breakdown-of-stage6-the-beginning-of-divx-s-end?source=feed#comment-122883 122883
What about Greenhall? The Cramer stunt, and now the Arrington leak make me glad he is gone, but there is no doubt he has good vision for the direction of technology. How about the theory that He is selling as a contributing factor to the big drop in the past week?

A high traffic video site could, in a few years, be a business equivalent to owning a network like the big three over the past 60 years was. Then again there is almost no barrier to entry except licensing from premium content owners. It isn’t hard to visualize hundreds of such sites barely surviving financially as the future. The later is close to the present state, and makes it easy to see why big money shied away from buying Stage6. Does ANY video sharing site make money now, or appear to have a clear path to profitability?

Google has the existing advertising business, and DivX has a hardware licensing revenue stream to help monetize their respective sites. Perhaps if the legal struggles do not kill it YouTube may be a profitable business one day, but the growth in traffic at Stage6 did not relate to nearly enough toolbar revenues, or device sales to make it profitable. In fact more success would have cost even more money.

The deciding cost though may have been the hindrance owning a piracy ladened web site created to signing studios to content distribution deals. Most DivX content, and thereby demand for certified products, comes from hundreds of millions of pirates that DivX cannot be sued for. The Stage6 users were a small part of that standing in the way of the vision of billions downloading or streaming legal content on DivX certified or Connected products one day.

Ancient Chinese curse:
“May you live in interesting times.”
]]> Thu, 06 Mar 2008 09:12:30 -0500
What about Greenhall? The Cramer stunt, and now the Arrington leak make me glad he is gone, but there is no doubt he has good vision for the direction of technology. How about the theory that He is selling as a contributing factor to the big drop in the past week?

A high traffic video site could, in a few years, be a business equivalent to owning a network like the big three over the past 60 years was. Then again there is almost no barrier to entry except licensing from premium content owners. It isn’t hard to visualize hundreds of such sites barely surviving financially as the future. The later is close to the present state, and makes it easy to see why big money shied away from buying Stage6. Does ANY video sharing site make money now, or appear to have a clear path to profitability?

Google has the existing advertising business, and DivX has a hardware licensing revenue stream to help monetize their respective sites. Perhaps if the legal struggles do not kill it YouTube may be a profitable business one day, but the growth in traffic at Stage6 did not relate to nearly enough toolbar revenues, or device sales to make it profitable. In fact more success would have cost even more money.

The deciding cost though may have been the hindrance owning a piracy ladened web site created to signing studios to content distribution deals. Most DivX content, and thereby demand for certified products, comes from hundreds of millions of pirates that DivX cannot be sued for. The Stage6 users were a small part of that standing in the way of the vision of billions downloading or streaming legal content on DivX certified or Connected products one day.

Ancient Chinese curse:
“May you live in interesting times.”
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/66195-serious-drama-and-lots-of-stupidity-behind-stage6-shutdown?source=feed#comment-119651 119651
So either spin-off or shut down DivX gets no cash.

Shut down ends their continued potential liability for copy right infringement.
Shutdown or sale may have been helpful, or even conditional in negotiations with major content owners like Sony.

Spin-off would have burnt through $27 million in about a year if growth continued, and revenue stayed low.

Spin-off would have given up control without ending liability from continued losses or copyright.

I'm disapointed in the shutdown, but it isn't hard to see how a deal like the one you lay out would be rejected. The part of these numbers that are in the third quarter 10-Q are inaccurate. If there is so much value, net the liability risk, why were there no buyers?

An Ideal situation would be for Greenhall and company to just start up a new site. DivX would likely licence the web player for next to nothing if DivX could share or have toolbar revenues from the installs.]]> Wed, 27 Feb 2008 08:56:20 -0500
So either spin-off or shut down DivX gets no cash.

Shut down ends their continued potential liability for copy right infringement.
Shutdown or sale may have been helpful, or even conditional in negotiations with major content owners like Sony.

Spin-off would have burnt through $27 million in about a year if growth continued, and revenue stayed low.

Spin-off would have given up control without ending liability from continued losses or copyright.

I'm disapointed in the shutdown, but it isn't hard to see how a deal like the one you lay out would be rejected. The part of these numbers that are in the third quarter 10-Q are inaccurate. If there is so much value, net the liability risk, why were there no buyers?

An Ideal situation would be for Greenhall and company to just start up a new site. DivX would likely licence the web player for next to nothing if DivX could share or have toolbar revenues from the installs.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/41750-google-sees-bright-future-for-television?source=feed#comment-119194 119194
Is it denial?

MP3 on P2P networks have closed a large percentage of music stores in my town. I honestly do not know of a single music only retailer still open, but there might be one somewhere (the flea market?).

The most popular site for BitTorrent piracy recently announced their 4 Billionth download in only 3 years. Most of those were premium movies and TV.

can I get it in HD?
Can I watch it on a large screen?
Can I easily watch it on my computer with someone else?
Can I TiVo it?
Can the Internet scale like TV?

Actually the answer to every one of those is YES, just not YET for internet solutions the MPAA aproves of. If consumers can steal their products more easily than buy them they are in trouble. It has the same feeling as the early days of Napster.

The internet may not replace TV, but Digital Multicast OTA and the internet might replace Cable for TV service, while WiMax and Fios replace them as an ISP.]]> Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:24:09 -0500
Is it denial?

MP3 on P2P networks have closed a large percentage of music stores in my town. I honestly do not know of a single music only retailer still open, but there might be one somewhere (the flea market?).

The most popular site for BitTorrent piracy recently announced their 4 Billionth download in only 3 years. Most of those were premium movies and TV.

can I get it in HD?
Can I watch it on a large screen?
Can I easily watch it on my computer with someone else?
Can I TiVo it?
Can the Internet scale like TV?

Actually the answer to every one of those is YES, just not YET for internet solutions the MPAA aproves of. If consumers can steal their products more easily than buy them they are in trouble. It has the same feeling as the early days of Napster.

The internet may not replace TV, but Digital Multicast OTA and the internet might replace Cable for TV service, while WiMax and Fios replace them as an ISP.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/63562-can-divxs-safe-harbor-protect-it-from-stage6-pirates?source=feed#comment-115029 115029
Had DivX prevailed and been given the judgment in the preemptive action that was dismissed it would have also been a win for Google. The Judge took the safe way out.

I would think the music industry actually has the most to lose in these cases. Surely a deal to legally distribute the videos wrapped in advertising and/or for a small charge would be a better long term solution for everyone. Even if the studios win it all they still lose to P2P. They need to make a solution that makes them some money, easier for their customers than piracy somehow.

Excellent write up.
]]> Thu, 07 Feb 2008 09:01:43 -0500
Had DivX prevailed and been given the judgment in the preemptive action that was dismissed it would have also been a win for Google. The Judge took the safe way out.

I would think the music industry actually has the most to lose in these cases. Surely a deal to legally distribute the videos wrapped in advertising and/or for a small charge would be a better long term solution for everyone. Even if the studios win it all they still lose to P2P. They need to make a solution that makes them some money, easier for their customers than piracy somehow.

Excellent write up.
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/53570-divx-and-xbox-360-a-potential-win-win-for-everyone?source=feed#comment-109055 109055
Not only suported, but certified. And now they are going to make content availiable. Very sound strategy for Sony as far as BluRay, and the Game Console sales.

How many extra $40 to $60 games would they have to sell to cover about $1 for DivX certification on each console?

]]> Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:39:40 -0500
Not only suported, but certified. And now they are going to make content availiable. Very sound strategy for Sony as far as BluRay, and the Game Console sales.

How many extra $40 to $60 games would they have to sell to cover about $1 for DivX certification on each console?

]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/59107-divx-disappointment-offers-tremendous-opportunity?source=feed#comment-109049 109049
They give it away for free. How much did you pay?

Since the codec suports HD I think you don't know what you are doing, or talking about.

To the author nice timing on this. The deal with Sony goes a long way to erase doubt, and the anouncement of a BluRay/DivX chip from panasonic at the same time makes you look prophetic.]]> Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:28:09 -0500
They give it away for free. How much did you pay?

Since the codec suports HD I think you don't know what you are doing, or talking about.

To the author nice timing on this. The deal with Sony goes a long way to erase doubt, and the anouncement of a BluRay/DivX chip from panasonic at the same time makes you look prophetic.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/59107-divx-disappointment-offers-tremendous-opportunity?source=feed#comment-108514 108514
Just a couple more +s:

DivX Recently aquired H.264 vendor MainConcept and should have that standard included in the certification by the end of the year. DivX devices are open and the codec transparency is consumer friendly. Several DRM ladened competitors just makes DivX certified more likely to become the MP3 of video. How is that DRM doing in music?

PS3 just became DivX certified, and Wii and xBox have added some support, also within the past few months. Game sales are nearing their peak just as DVD players did a year ago. Diferentiating features become more important as markets mature.

LG Viewty is the iPhone of Europe for the past few months. Just released in Asia. DivX could have near $500k revenue Q4 from Cell Phones, and that number is not unlikely to double Q1 2008 BEFORE the first Qualcom chips hit the market.

Unltimate market domination is far from assured, but plenty is going right for this Co.]]> Sun, 06 Jan 2008 11:08:24 -0500
Just a couple more +s:

DivX Recently aquired H.264 vendor MainConcept and should have that standard included in the certification by the end of the year. DivX devices are open and the codec transparency is consumer friendly. Several DRM ladened competitors just makes DivX certified more likely to become the MP3 of video. How is that DRM doing in music?

PS3 just became DivX certified, and Wii and xBox have added some support, also within the past few months. Game sales are nearing their peak just as DVD players did a year ago. Diferentiating features become more important as markets mature.

LG Viewty is the iPhone of Europe for the past few months. Just released in Asia. DivX could have near $500k revenue Q4 from Cell Phones, and that number is not unlikely to double Q1 2008 BEFORE the first Qualcom chips hit the market.

Unltimate market domination is far from assured, but plenty is going right for this Co.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/43304-divx-considers-a-profitable-break-up-but-are-there-any-long-term-benefits?source=feed#comment-97243 97243
The Qualcom, LG, Samsung announcements in the cell phone market, and D-Link with DivX Connected seem to be ample evidence that the licencing end is progressing nicely. The major risk here was being pigeon holed into the shrinking DVD player market. Microsoft using Sigma Designs DivX enabled chips for their media extenders may not mean a DivX logo on their products, but inclusion in devices that support multiple codecs is crucial for 'common media language' to reach fruition. Recent news making Wii into a DivX capable media streamer indicates that xBox and PS3 are not unlikely to follow suit.

The deal this week with Yahoo really creates room for speculation for the future spi-off of Stage6. Google grabbed a lead in net video by buying YouTube that Yahoo cannot ignore. By announcing the spin-off DivX posted a 'For Sale' sign on Stage6. Placing Greenhall as its head clearly stated that it was not a fire sale.
I would like to return to the profits and amazing margins that DivX posted in its first couple public quarters, but I hope that they do not rush the sale of Stage6. A partner/purchaser like Yahoo could make the explosive traffic growth of the past 6 months seem mild. ]]> Sun, 30 Sep 2007 22:05:31 -0400
The Qualcom, LG, Samsung announcements in the cell phone market, and D-Link with DivX Connected seem to be ample evidence that the licencing end is progressing nicely. The major risk here was being pigeon holed into the shrinking DVD player market. Microsoft using Sigma Designs DivX enabled chips for their media extenders may not mean a DivX logo on their products, but inclusion in devices that support multiple codecs is crucial for 'common media language' to reach fruition. Recent news making Wii into a DivX capable media streamer indicates that xBox and PS3 are not unlikely to follow suit.

The deal this week with Yahoo really creates room for speculation for the future spi-off of Stage6. Google grabbed a lead in net video by buying YouTube that Yahoo cannot ignore. By announcing the spin-off DivX posted a 'For Sale' sign on Stage6. Placing Greenhall as its head clearly stated that it was not a fire sale.
I would like to return to the profits and amazing margins that DivX posted in its first couple public quarters, but I hope that they do not rush the sale of Stage6. A partner/purchaser like Yahoo could make the explosive traffic growth of the past 6 months seem mild. ]]>