Henry Blodget says digital is booming, it's going to be HUGE

...wait, eh, where have I heard this name before?

[weeks]

Thanks to the newspaper business crashing, you have some "$3 billion a year of incremental ad revenue flowing toward you, without you even getting off your bum. Now all you have to do is fight like hell with all the other folks who have seen the future and want a piece of it," says Henry Blodget.

Fate of $42 Billion of 2007 Newspaper Print Ad Spending in 2017

* Surviving newspapers: $10 billion (25%)
* Magazines: $0
* TV: $0
* Outdoor: $2 billion (5%)
* Digital: $30 billion (70%)

[news.yahoo.com...]

[wheelie34]

"* TV: $0" good, I hate adverts

[King_Fisher]

TV Zero!? I dont think so!...KF

[lexipixel]

TV Zero!? I dont think so!...KF

Possible since $30B goes digital and we are at the 11th hour nearing media convergence -- t.v. will be digital and "digital (A/V based info)" will be t.v.... So I think you are both right.

Dictionary Definition of "television" circa 2017:

tel-e-vi-sion, (n.) mid-20th century to early 21st century device used for non-interactive display of low resolution audio/video data. see also: t.v., tube, telly.

[Syzygy]

From the AdWords Forum...

Google TV Ads Now Available to US Advertisers [webmasterworld.com]

Unlike Mr Blodget, Google obviously believes there some value yet in TV advertising...

[edited by: Syzygy at 8:18 am (utc) on May 3, 2008]

[Wlauzon]

I think he is full of it.

And define "digital" - since all TV is going digital in 2009, does that count? In fact, it seems like everything is "digital" nowadays - does that mean I will start seeing ads on my new refrigerator?

My satellite already has about 30 pure infommercial/shopping channels - is that part of the mix?

The problem with most (nearly all?) predictions like this is that they always extrapolate old data into the future. But 5 years from now digital newspapers might be the next Google.

[edited by: Wlauzon at 2:12 pm (utc) on May 3, 2008]

[g1smd]

I think what he is saying is that most traditional print-media advertisers will not be moving to TV advertising, and that, to me seems very logical. I see that as unlikely too.

For TV advertising, the barrier to entry is very high, and smaller businesses will likely use that money to instead boost their web presence and visibility.

[Wlauzon]

Quite true for TV ad prices - OK for the info spammers that are selling millions of $2 made in Slobovia knives for $39 (regular price $1,298).

But for new and smaller businesses you can get much more bang for the buck on the internet and related.

[lexipixel]

If you take a look at the new Adobe Media Player, you can watch full episodes of CSI, Lost, and many other shows that are streamed. There are "commercials" embedded in the stream.

Is it "internet" or t.v.?

That is my point on media convergence. What is, (or was), traditional broadcast "t.v.", (whether delivered over the air or through a cable or satellite), is now canned and piped over IP based networks -- digital audio/video that looks like t.v., smells like t.v., but is not "t.v.".... or is it ?

[weeks]

Is it "internet" or t.v.?

Right. Well put. That is literally the billion dollar question. It is not TV, and it's not internet as we typically talk about it here.

It is amazing to me that the "newspapers" in most areas are not working to be THE filter/channel and present good (sometimes local) stuff to their readers from the billions of links on the web.

[weeks]

This is what Henry is talking about. It's an HP ad I just happened to click on from The Wall Street Journal. I don't know why I did, but I went into something that is waaaaay more complex (and, yeah, probably better) than what we know as TV in terms of advertising.
[shopping.hp.com...]