Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Movies Television Entertainment

Quibi Versus the World (theverge.com) 45

An anonymous reader shares a report: Jeffrey Katzenberg insists that his new video-streaming service Quibi isn't competing against Netflix, Disney+, HBO Max, Peacock, or any of the other streaming services that have launched or are launching soon. Katzenberg and Quibi CEO Meg Whitman, who is best known as the CEO of HP and eBay, are publicly announcing Quibi at CES -- but not quite unveiling it -- after having raised $1 billion on the promise of a roster of Hollywood stars and supposedly revolutionary video-streaming technology that delivers portrait and landscape video at the same time. Everything on Quibi is designed for viewing on a phone, on the go, in 10 minutes or less. These chunks of video are called "quick bites" -- hence, "Quibi."

When Quibi arrives on April 6th of this year, it'll cost $5 a month for an ad-supported version or $8 a month for an ad-free experience. Katzenberg and Whitman formulated this idea nearly two years ago and have been relentlessly signing up the biggest names in Hollywood to be a part of it. And while there have been bumps along the road, including a raft of executive departures, everyone working with Quibi at CES talks about it as though it has already created the future of video -- like it already has millions of users. Training Day director Antoine Fuqua, who is executive producing a show called #Freerayshawn, says Quibi, before it has even launched, has created a "new language of cinema." It's like that.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Quibi Versus the World

Comments Filter:
  • the media industry is desperately trying to cash in and shove the 'next' thing down our throats. im sure one day they are going to find their footing but i personally don't exactly have any gaps in my media consumption that this fills
    • by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

      The media industry wants to be hip and cool (and exponentially growing) like the tech industry. They haven't realized that they're a successful, mature industry, and that most of that exponential growth in the tech industry these days is followed by super exponential crashing.

      • by spun ( 1352 )

        "Media" encompass everything from VR to clay tablets. Some parts of it are mature, some parts are fucking dying, some are brand new. "Better Homes and Gardens" and Vine are both media. It makes little sense to claim they are the same thing, or both "mature industries."

  • Venture capital is the dumb money at the table.

    Go "disrupt" somewhere else.

  • Netflix: your red logo fools noone. Communists!!11!!!!1!
  • by ThurstonMoore ( 605470 ) on Thursday January 09, 2020 @11:23AM (#59603204)

    Why would I pay for a service with commercials?

    • by spun ( 1352 )

      In case you have never heard of this thing called "Cable TV" what they do is rebroadcast network television, with commercials, for a fee. Amazingly, people actually buy it!

      • Why would I pay for that?

        • by spun ( 1352 )

          Everyone has to come up with their own reason to purchase anything. The fact that I do not choose to purchase, oh say hentai manga, does not mean that others have difficulty in coming up with reasons to do so.

          Personally, I'm with you and only purchase the higher tier, commercial free packages, but not everyone prioritizes their spending like we do.

  • Wait a minute ... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Misagon ( 1135 ) on Thursday January 09, 2020 @11:26AM (#59603224)

    Wasn't Whitman the person who accomplished practically nothing of value at HP but continuing to produce crap and publicly admitting it before splitting off the product part of the company (the real "HP")?

    Then why the hell is her tenure at HP mentioned in the summary as a merit?

    • by ravenscar ( 1662985 ) on Thursday January 09, 2020 @11:58AM (#59603372)

      The thing I've noticed in business is that, once you reach a certain level, no matter how badly you screw up there is always another company waiting in the wings to offer you a job. There were multiple people at my last company (a huge multi-national) whose resumes read like a Harvard Business School compilation of case studies on failures. Somehow they all went on to higher paying jobs with even more responsibility at other companies.

      In another example, in my first day of work at the company mentioned above, I reported to the EVP of Strategy. He mentioned that he used to work for the (now-former) CIO of my previous company. Apparently, this was when they both worked for another very large company in the same industry. I noted that this person was rumored to be "now-former" due to multiple sexual harassment suits. My new boss replied with "yeah, that sounds like ." This dude had a known reputation, yet somehow just floated around the industry in C-suite roles. Crazy.

    • Yep. That's the one. She accomplished nearly zero innovation during her tenure at HP , declared herself a 'success" and fled out the door. She continued to draw and quarter what was once a stellar company.

      What's left is a carcass of a once great company.

      • by _merlin ( 160982 )

        I dunno, she didn't do anything spectacular at HP, but she was nowhere near as bad as Carly Fiorina. She kept HP alive and allowed the company to reposition itself. Being as bad as or worse than Carly is pretty difficult, though. Same at eBay - Meg was responsible for buying PayPal and Skype, and ramming PayPal down eBay customers' throats. That decision meant I stopped selling things on eBay. It seems that since then, eBay has made itself pretty much useless for people just trying to sell random stuff

  • by swell ( 195815 ) <jabberwock@poetic.com> on Thursday January 09, 2020 @11:28AM (#59603228)

    I thought we'd never find a way to access entertainment in this void. How many times have I asked myself 'where could I find some music?'; 'where might I access some fun video?'; 'where could I get something interesting to read?'

    Oh, these have been hard times for people desperate for some amusement, so thank goodness we will have Quibi to fill that void.

    • Except now when you ask "where can I find a specific song or video to watch" the answer will be "you can't unless you sign up to this monthly service"; and soon every single video and song will have it's own monthly service.

  • by Keiran Halcyon ( 550292 ) on Thursday January 09, 2020 @11:33AM (#59603262)

    This just reeks of how Tidal was pushed in 2015: a bunch of high-profile artists backing a platform meant to revolutionize the already-saturated and highly functioning marketplace just because they put their name to it. I guarantee you that they're pitching this to the artists as the 'pay-per-video version of twitter' so that celebrities can publish content in a monetarily-oriented way.

    Give it a year or two and see just how many of these ultra-high-profile artists are still in a happy partnership after they don't get the payout they feel they deserve, or fail to receive whatever shadow promises were made in the back-office to get their endorsement, especially when those follower numbers fail to grow like they do on Twitter or Youtube or other freemium platforms.

    • by Matheus ( 586080 )

      ...or Fyre... :)

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      "Highly functioning"? When YouTube is 12 bucks a month I wouldn't call that a functional market.

      • Highly functioning marketplace, not a weirdly operating player in the market. This isn't the early days of streaming, where a company like Netflix can come in and flip the market on its head just by doing it at commercial scale. This is a market with dozens of players, many of them major, and a new company is throwing around star power and money to try and make their offer stand out.

        That's why the comparison to Tidal is apt; Spotify and the others in the market weren't under developed or new to the scene
  • by ceoyoyo ( 59147 ) on Thursday January 09, 2020 @11:36AM (#59603288)

    Everything on Quibi is designed for viewing on a phone, on the go, in 10 minutes or less. ...has created a "new language of cinema."

    I'm sure that will piss off lots of artists and cinemaphiles. The reviews on this stuff are going to be hilarious.

  • by chipperdog ( 169552 ) on Thursday January 09, 2020 @11:36AM (#59603290) Homepage
    If I want to see 5-10 videos from Hollywood stars, how is this different than like Youtube?
    Content is going to be key, if they don't have anything people want to pay $5/month to view (with commercials), they won't succeed.
    The only thing I see is if they have content edited for portrait (like pan and scan type for traditional movies - but hopefully smarter, etc.) and landscape (full screen in traditional movies) and able to switch between them on the fly, that application of technology would be great, so watching in portrait mode wont give you a really small scaled widescreen, but something that will follow the active areas of the frame..
    • There is already more content on YouTube than I "can" watch. At least, in the time I want to spend watching short videos. This service will crash and burn for that reason alone.

    • If I want to see 5-10 videos from Hollywood stars, how is this different than like Youtube?/quote?

      It will be recorded in portrait mode on purpose rather than the accident it is.

  • by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Thursday January 09, 2020 @11:39AM (#59603302)

    ”Jeffrey Katzenberg insists that his new video-streaming service Quibi isn't competing against Netflix, Disney+, HBO Max, Peacock, or any of the other streaming services that have launched or are launching soon.”

    He’s correct - it’s not even remotely competitive with any of these.

    • Didn't you watch the hype video? It's supposed to completely replace going to the Cinema or watching a show on your 75" HDTV.

  • People can barely hang on a full 15 seconds on TikTok. Then again, 8 of those 10 minutes are probably Peloton adds.

  • by SethJohnson ( 112166 ) on Thursday January 09, 2020 @11:50AM (#59603344) Homepage Journal
    There's a quick scene in Boogie Nights where the producer guy shows up at Jack Horner's house with a small group of what looks like teenage runaways during a party. The producer had already been pressuring Horner to abandon film in favor of video. Now he's announcing the future of porn is amateurs as opposed to the higher-priced 'stars' like Dirk Diggler. Horner resisted these changes, but eventually grudgingly did switch to video as a matter of economics.

    The captains of industry behind Qubi are showing up to the short-video party with 'stars' thinking the audience is unsatisfied with amateurs. It's a very expensive gamble on each piece of content for them. YouTube has leveraged the gig economy to enable video creators to financially back themselves on each content item with little cash risk for YouTube. The billions of views YouTube has racked up on its content suggests the producer guy in Boogie Nights was right about the amateurs thing.
    • by imidan ( 559239 )

      showing up to the short-video party with 'stars' thinking the audience is unsatisfied with amateurs. It's a very expensive gamble

      I mean, you've got to be right. The top earning YouTuber last year is an 8-year-old child who made $26 million by recording himself opening toys. Second place went to 5 randos doing sports tricks and throwing shit around. In what world are you going to do better than that by adding expensive talent?

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Pornhub and XHamster are full of exciting video that you can view in 10 minutes or less ...

  • by UnknowingFool ( 672806 ) on Thursday January 09, 2020 @12:40PM (#59603520)

    My view of Katzenberg’s career is colored by his history of pettiness. Is this new venture another jab at Disney? For those that don’t know the stories, here’s a recap:

    Robin Williams helped bring the renaissance of Disney with his genie character in Aladdin. However Williams had previously agreed to voice another animated character in a movie from another studio called Ferngully: The Last Rainforest. There wasn’t any conflict in production schedules for Williams, but both movies would be released in the same year. Disney specifically Katzenberg wanted Williams to drop out of the other movie and he refused. Disney under Katzenberg then went out of their way to interfere with the other film. When the other film found new facilities to rent, Disney had quickly snapped the space by paying more. This happened more than once. Disney tried to buy out the space they finally moved into and demanded an surprise “inspection” if they were going to buy it.

    After his firing by Disney and starting Dreamworks, Katzenberg made sure Dreamwork’s first animated movie was Antz whose premise was close to A Bug’s Life which Pixar was working on when Katzenberg left. He pushed the animators at all costs for finish it before Pixar finished their movie even though they started long after Pixar.

    • by t0rkm3 ( 666910 )

      It's more of Katzenberg just trying to cash in. I posted elsewhere that he already tried this and failed because of various dickish things they wanted to do, or demand of users at the time.

      I expect more of the same. (If I remember correctly, DreamWorks was also the first company to adopt the unskippable previews on DVDs.)

  • For all you that remember, Pop.com was going to be the bee's knees. It had a lot of cool people working on it, but they weren't willing to give up belligerent DRM and quality at a time when the internet was still slow as heck'n.

    Also a Katzenberg project, and probably with the same lifespan.

  • ... I get to witness the end of western civilization first hand.

2 pints = 1 Cavort

Working...