Posts Tagged ‘content management’

h1

We’ve been busy…

September 29, 2009

You haven’t heard much from us lately.  We’ve always been out on the forward edge of rich media functionality doing things that now are “cool” before they were cool.  We’re continuing that tradition.

A few months ago, we rolled out some experimental functionality to several non-real estate enterprise customers.  The response was awesome enough that we have been “heads-down” to roll out a production version of it with the changes that they came back with.  It’s a set of deep changes for us so we want to be sure that we have all of the bases covered and the functionality fully tested before rolling it out to other companies.

Note that some of the work that we are doing has occasionally impacted our live environment for reasons that we’ll discuss when we launch in December.  Though we haven’t seen any new impacts, we apologize in advance for any issues. 

The new functionality that we will be releasing aren’t small changes or simply putting a new shine on an old product…it will totally shift how you think about and deliver rich content to your customers via your web sites. See you soon….

h1

Restating Our Vision: What We Are About

May 17, 2009

We’ve taken a different approach to syndicating online content than most vendors. Our method brings the viewer back to the broker’s site to consume content rather than our site(s) or a third party site. It can best be described as syndicating the opportunity and brand rather than the content. The content is consumed on your website where the chances for customer capture are most rewarding for you.

Incidentally, Google will also index the syndicated content on your site rather than ours which is quite a different approach than most vendors.

You’ll be seeing a lot more about this theme soon.

h1

First Version Of Our Multimedia Social Network API To Release This Week

August 19, 2008

We’ll have the first customer ready application programming interfaces (or APIs) for our social network later this week just in time for our new release. If you have used the social network at http://social.vidlisting.com, you know that you can do things like organize content into folders, or give permissions to other users/cliques for specific content or groups of content.

This means that you’ll be able to either build rich multimedia applications or website functionality using the social network as your content management tool.  To be clear, the API set will only be available to Corporate level members but will provide a growing set of features that we hope will be seen as a value add. We’ll keep it really simple at first – just two simple but useful interfaces.

Manage Content Hierachically – Folders are a collection of items organized into personalized hierarchical groupings. Therefore, the first API will represent the simple sub-collections within these groupings. 

In simple terms, the API will provide a feed of all content within any named folder in your workspace regardless of the source or type of that content (Vidlisting video, Real Estate Shows, Youtube Video, PDF, Office document, or link). This means that you or your web developer can make any of this type of content appear or disappear on your website by simply using the social network to drag and drop the content out of a social network folder.  It’s about the easiest way that we can think of for a non-technical person to manage content on their website.

You’ll also be able to choose if everyone with whom you have shared a virtual folder will also get an API key regardless of their member level. Even free members therefore will be able to put your content on their websites if you allow them to.

Convert Video Content: For me, this is the really exciting of the two APIs that we are releasing. Corporate members will be able to place video content on any internet accessible server to which they have authorized access and via the API be able to convert it into a variety of formats simultaneously using the ForSaleByLocals conversion cluster, and then place the converted content on the same server or any other internet accessible server to which they have authorized access. 

In short, you can move a video file into a directory on one of your own servers and then send a simple API command to one of our servers to process the file into multiple file formats, and finally send the converted file(s) back to that server or any other server (production server, file server, customer server, etc.)

In short, by making use of this second API, the Corporate level user will be able to outsource only the conversion capabilities of our conversion cluster and maintain 100% control of their own media within an entirely automated process. We think that this may well revolutionize how organizations view how they use and process video content by third party providers.

h1

Integrating Real Estate Video Content Distribution Across Blog Networks

November 23, 2007

I was using an application the other day that allowed me to insert any image from my hard drive into the document that I was writing.  Think of this as a process involving the following chronological points: consent to adding content, search (from within a known but variable set of content choices), addition of the chosen content to my document, and consumption by users of the document.

Consent => Search => Addition => Consumption

Blogs are much like documents and real estate blog networks can be (but not limited to) groupings of like blogs by geography, common themes (commercial, luxury, etc.), or organizations such as associations, large brokerages, or agencies. So why shouldn’t such real estate blog networks have a way to define a set of variable rich media content that meets the needs of their members in terms of geography, theme, and/or organization?  The members can then consume that content for themselves, easily add it to their blog for others to consume, or generate their own rich media content (such as videos, virtual tours, etc.) that can be consumed by other members of the blog network or externally. 

Let’s begin to explore this approach a bit more….

The diagram above shows a possible relationship among a single content distribution network and two blogging networks with different content management requirements. Not shown are the filtering of content made possible by the video syndication engine nor the search mechanism that makes finding that content simple.  The model also recognizes that some blog networks may choose to implement video syndication technology for all blogs within their network or make the implementation voluntary.  The implementation includes the searchable video content library.

There are really only four simple use cases in the above model.

Use Case #1: Blogger that inserts and consumes a subset of videos available to their blogging content. Loyalty and leads can be generated from a sizable and updated library of content that may be otherwise unavailable to the blogger, not easily searchable by other means, or may leave doubts as to whether the content can be used under copyright. Rich media content from the network eliminates these issues and can be inserted directly from the blog’s toolbar without the need to cut and paste.

Use Case #2: Bloggers that generate rich media content as well as inserts and consumes a subset of videos that meet their blog networks content requirements. A key point of this use case is that the user generated content becomes available for consumption and lead generation not only within the user’s blogging network but also across other blog networks and where appropriate to external portals. It also can quickly become part of the various searchable video content libraries for different blog networks. Nothing prevents these bloggers from using traditional cut and paste videos within their blog posts as part of the content offered to their readers.

Use Case #3: Professional video content producers have a means to distribute content with a single upload.  The video syndication engine is what matches the content to the appropriate blog network’s library of available content.  This means that producers do what they do best – produce content. That content only goes to places where consent is welcome and has a high probability of being consumed.

Use Case #4: Readers of blogs now can build loyalty with individual blogs that have a wider selection of content that varies from other blogs in the network.

Hopefully, the value of this integration to organizations and bloggers in terms of consent, searchability, and ease of implementation is becoming more clear. Metadata matching can be a powerful Web 2.0 tool that helps to drive leads from content otherwise unavailable. We’ll discuss these sorts of symbiotic networks in more detail in future posts.

See also:

Loyalty Building Within A Content Network: Finding The Right Range Of Loyal Visitors
Posting Volume And Loyalty As Factors In Social Networking’s Hub And Spoke Distribution Model
Extending The Concept Of Distribution Hubs And Spokes To Include Value Measurements
Measuring Online User Loyalty And Interest Using Hard Data From Your Website Statistics
Linking Real Estate Content With User Context: Basic Concepts of Data and Metadata

h1

Posting Volume And Loyalty As Factors In Social Networking’s Hub And Spoke Distribution Model

October 27, 2007

We outlined some of our thinking about the similarities and differences of real estate video as currency in a content distribution network vs. ideas as currency in a social network. So, does the application of concepts such as consent, likelihood, and reputation within the “retransmission and return” model of hubs and spokes deal well with the issue of frequent posting (which we’ll uniformly call “high volume distribution” )?

The Impact of High Volume On Social Networking: If we agree with tenents of MarketingProfs about posting frequency, then consent and likelihood to accept or pass on the message will be negatively impacted once the posting frequency crossed some critical threshold. My interpretation of his ideas using our hub and spoke model is that there is a subset of social networks within which the quality of any given hub has a return value measured in loyalty rather than sheer propagation.  Loyalty then can be defined as a measure of aggregate consent and likelihood for a given hub to revisit or subscribe to the source hub. Interestingly, this means that these types of social networks actually have a model very much like a content distribution network. In these loyalty based networks, loyalty is measured more by the quality of first and second order hubs than any dependency on mass retransmission of ideas to more distant hubs. 

So, how does high volume change the quality of the loyalty based model? Again interpreting writings by MarketingProfs, Joel Burslem, and even Scoble,  a given hub’s consent lowers as noise grows, reader fatigue sets in, writing quality diminishes, and opportunity costs grow higher to spend time with the same writer.  Each of these factors dilutes the value of the currency (ideas) and therefore lowers the willingness of the hub to return value to the source (return as measured in loyalty or revisits/subscriptions). 

The Impact Of High Volume on Content Distribution: We’ve already established in prior articles that specialized content networks such as for property videos have a low affinity for re-transmission but a high return as measured in leads.   Does this change when content distribution hubs are receiving a high volume of content?  My thinking is “no” and that a high volume of content that meet a given distribution hub’s specific criteria actually increase return (as measured in loyalty) which in turn may have a positive impact on leads generated to the source hub.

Why the difference? Rich media content can distributed to first order distribution hubs where not only specific criteria can be applied to raise the mix of interested visitors but also can be regularly consumed without having to visit the source hub. This filtering ability on the first order hub distributes the impact of volume through use of criteria based distribution. An unfiltered approach with high volume would likely create a series of hubs with effects that would more resemble what occurs on the social networking side – fatigue, etc.

I’d also argue that a strong contrast with social networking exists in the way that returns can be distributed as well. Prospective buyers return to online locations where they can generally find what they are looking for. A first order hub with a large number of rich media listings geared to a subset of prospective would likely have most if not all current contenet consumed (or parhaps the volume bar would bedeemed to to the relevent content).  When the right mix of rich media is consistently distributed in volume to a given first order hub, this enables a return (as measured in loyalty) to the first order hub while simultaneously enabling a return (as measured in leads) to the source hub. This forms the basis of a win-win relationship between source and first order hubs. Raising the volume of rich media listings to a given hub would thereby increase the loyalty and drive more leads.  

Why Social Networking Is Close Behind The Content Distribution Model: Social networks still have relatively few outlets for syndication in the web 2.0 world. The vast majority of visitors still must visit or be redirected to the source (or the source feed) for both their initial introduction to a idea provider as well as their continuing updates. As networks such as Homescopes come online, visitors will be increasingly introduced to and be able to regularly consume ideas away from the source hub.  Like content distribution networks, the return (as measured in loyalty) can be to the first order hub but returns (as measured by leads) can be returned to the author.  To date, this is still is not happening on a grand scale but it wil be happening soon.  Conversely, we’ll see more content distribution networks that are more geared to generating returns based on loyalty such as InmanTV and BloodhoundTV.  Web 3.0 awaits….

Let’s conclude by acknowledging the existence of certain social networks based on the return of loyalty in addition to those based on the return of leads.  However, social networks can take a hybrid approach that is similar to rich media content distribution network to gain reach with ideas, return loyalty to first order information providers, and return leads to the source.  A lot more thinking has to go into this.