VEVO Jumps Yahoo! Takes Second Place Behind Google in Video Viewers

VEVO Jumps Yahoo! Takes Second Place Behind Google in Video Viewers

comScore put out their January Video Metrix late on the 15th, after I had already compared the Nielsen January numbers to their December ones. Go figure. Anyway, looking at the report there's not a major difference so instead of going and editing that or re-comparing them, let's just look at them. Plus, it's Friday and I'm lazy. Even superheroes need a light day of crime fighting now and again.The comScore Video Metrix reported 171 million U.S. Internet users watched online video content in January for an average of 14.5 hours per viewer. That's almost exactly the same as December 2010 (14.6h and 172M viewers).

Top 10 Video Content Properties by Unique Viewers
Google's still on top. However, VEVO has been coming on strong for a few months and not took the second slot away from Yahoo! which is probably making VEVO say that exact thing (Yahoo!). Of course, Yahoo! is going to continue to shed video viewers since they closed their video presence. They lost some 4.5 million unique viewers since December. VEVO really only had to remain steady but did pick up half a million new unique viewers for good measure.

AOL and Viacom flip-flopped positions as well. Viacom seems to have stolen some three million viewers directly from AOL. I guess that new AOL Video division isn't as cool as they had hoped. I blame lack of good, interesting, unique content. FOX and Turner did the tango and ended up in each other's shoes as well. FOX lost viewers on the month, 3.5M and Turner gained 1.2M. Hulu held on in 10th even though they too lost over a million viewers. I wonder if they all went to Viacom?

___________________________________________________________________________
Top U.S. Online Video Properties by Video Content Views
Ranked by Unique Video Viewers
January 2011
Total U.S. – Home/Work/University Locations
Source: comScore Video Metrix
.

Property                           Total Unique    Viewing     Minutes per
                                     Viewers       Sessions     Viewer
                                      (000)          (000) 

Total Internet : Total Audience      171,180      4,887,682      870.8
Google Sites                         144,058      1,912,534      283.4
VEVO                                  51,025        121,013       91.9
Yahoo! Sites                          48,721        193,020       38.0
Viacom Digital                        48,141        119,634       61.1
AOL, Inc.                             44,525        167,754       22.5
Facebook.com                          42,058        122,623       15.4
Microsoft Sites                       38,142        149,641       62.0
Turner Digital                        28,205         88,721       26.6
Fox Interactive Media                 25,400         57,604       18.2
Hulu                                  24,958        127,042      236.4

___________________________________________________________________________

Top 10 Video Ad Properties by Video Ads Viewed
Americans viewed more than 4.3 billion video ads in January, with Hulu generating the highest number of video ad impressions at nearly 1.1 billion but lost ads on the month, about 147M to be exact. Ad frequency was also down. The new metric this month, which is rather odd, is total ad minutes which Hulu rocked with 434 million minutes. Do that math and you've got average ad length of 24 seconds (0.4 minutes).

Tremor Media Video Network ranked second overall (and highest among video ad networks) with 503.7 million ad views, followed by ADAP.TV (432 million) and Microsoft Sites (415 million). Microsoft took that spot from Brightroll (sorry Brad Pi(ggo)tt), who seem to have shed some astounding 200 million video ads for the month. Ouch! That's like, 41%. I'm sure we'll hear from them.

Time spent watching videos ads totaled 1.7 billion minutes during the month, or 3232 years.

In the year 3232... (video below just for fun)

Well it's just 9.9 minutes per viewer. Not bad for 14.5 hours of video content.

Video ads reached 45 percent of the total U.S. population an average of 32 times during the month. Hulu delivered the highest frequency of video ads to its viewers with an average of 44.6 over the course of the month. Maybe SpotXchange stole them as they jumped up to 6th place after being absent last month.

In fact, the whole bottom of this chart changed. ABC, CrossPoint, SpotX and Viacom are all new to the chart since last month. Gone are AOL, Google, TubeMogul and Undertone. Wow, what the hell happened?! Maybe comScore changed the way they do tracking. I'm sure that we'll hear from everyone as soon as this is published (like usual), which we like, because then we know they care (and more importantly, read!).

____________________________________________________________________________________
Top U.S. Online Video Properties by Video Ads* Viewed
Ranked by Video Ads Viewed
January 2011
Total U.S. – Home/Work/University Locations
Source: comScore Video Metrix                                                       .

Property                         Video        Total Ad   Frequency    % Reach
                                 Ads         Minutes    (Ads per    Total U.S.
                                 (000)        (MM)      Viewer)     Population
Total Internet : Total Audience    4,344,426    1,729      32.0         45.0%
Hulu                               1,080,902      434      44.6          8.0%
Tremor Media Video Network**         503,683      300       8.7         19.1%
ADAP.TV**                            431,908      259       8.7         16.5%
Microsoft Sites                      414,644      156      11.1         12.4%
BrightRoll Video Network**           348,381      208       4.9         23.5%
SpotXchange Video Ad Network**       318,832      205       8.7         12.2%
CBS Interactive                      211,593       60       8.6          8.1%
Viacom Digital                       193,685      104       8.1          8.0%
Crosspoint Media**                   185,127       60       7.1          8.7%
ABC Television                       154,716       64      22.3          2.3%

____________________________________________________________________________________
*Video ads include streaming-video advertising only and do not include other types of video
monetization, such as overlays, branded players, matching banner ads, homepage ads, etc.
**Indicates video ad network

Other notable findings from January 2011 include:

  • The top video ad networks in terms of their potential reach of the total U.S. population were: Tremor Media at 46.8 percent, BrightRoll Video Network at 41.9 percent and Break Media at 40.7 percent.
  • 83.5 percent of the U.S. Internet audience viewed online video.
  • The duration of the average online content video was 5.0 minutes, while the average online video ad was 0.4 minutes


Don't Miss Out - Join Our VIP Video Marketing Community!
Get daily online video tips and trends via email!


About the Author -
Christophor Rick is a freelance writer specializing in technology, new media, video games, IPTV, online video advertising and consumer electronics. His past work has included press releases, copy-writing, travel writing and journalism. He also writes novel-length and short fiction as part of Three-Faced Media . View All Posts By -

What do you think? ▼
  • Brad Piggott

    Hey Chris -

    Angelina and I wanted to jump on with another quick anecdotal comment, and get some thoughts from you. Again, full disclosure - when not acting, I am partial to Brightroll, but if you look at the numbers - something doesn't make sense. BrightRoll ROCKED actual ( would love to see you detail out ACTUAL reach, as from and ad seller perspective, most agencies toss out potential) and potential " REACH " with less video ads viewed and a better, more consumer friendly frequency...wouldn't that be the best place to be, less ads seen by more people, on a greater bandwidth, than say www.hairfinder.com and puff.com....where Fake PreRoll autostart video ads go to thrive! Don't get me started on that topic.

    Also, along your " What Happened to Folks who used to be on ComScore's video metrix list " , a source tells me that some of them have had a philosophical difference with ComScore due to ComScore's continued growth and stricter guidelines in defining what can and cannot be counted as streams, inbanner, etc...many folks have migrated to Nielsen, hoping to align more with TV - makes sense, I get it, and the bigger GRP/TRP play - where what type of ad and where you run is less important, that bulk viewing and pricing akin to spot and national tv rates. I would also look to see " POTENTIAL REACH " begin to fade more and more as a metric in the future.

    BP

  • Christophor Rick

    I never understood why someone would care about potential reach. I could potentially build a rocket and fly to the moon, doesn't mean I'm going to do it any time soon (I did work for NASA...). Actual reach seems a far more solid metric to use. It tells me, as a potential advertiser, how many people are seeing the ads which is more important than how many MIGHT see the ads. It speaks to past and current performance of the ad network.

    Companies going to Nielsen, to me, is like people going back to tube-based TVs and brick phones from LED HDTVs and smartpones. Nielsen's methods don't strike me as all that accurate (see my comscore vs. nielsen comparison if you haven't) and unless they are now doing direct measurement of everything it means they're still using panels which I find to be highly unreliable because I can't imagine the cross section of people that are Nielsen families (I have never been asked to be one and I would certainly start skewing the numbers in favor of a more digital lifestyle), plus, the people in the panels might not be demographically equal to the actual audience. That would also skew numbers.

    But I digress, back to the topic at hand.

    Brightroll really did smoke the ads per viewer category, that's truly, impressively low, 4.9 and you reached 23.5% of the US Population. That makes me wonder why I don't have Brightroll serving ads to GDN. I think we're too small is the problem.

    What ad network is supplying ads to those two sites you mention? I would be interested in doing some research on that. A while back I had a (rant) article about auto-play, page bottom video ads not really being views. I can't remember who else wrote about that being bogus. Jim Louderback maybe?

    Give Angelina my love and keep on rockin in the new world BP :) Love your work on Californication of late hehe.

  • BP

    Hey Chris - just had a fantastic dinner at this new place in Chicago called " FRONTIER". So I am in a fabulous mood. I don't know if you have seen it on YouTube, but I am currently filming a live action version of the 1980's cartoon classic ...THUNDERCATS...couple of shots in Chicago...anyways....let me pontificate for two moments about what you will never see from me in my role as a purveyor of video and video advertising sales: 1) schilling my own company in a blog ( pretty much yours until I expand or you get bored of our witty banter ) without merit - i.e. ComScore data, detailed out and factually supportive in a biased, yes - obviously, yet positive, honest light. 2) Ever throwing anyone- competitor, friend or foe, under the bus. However...do me a solid...pull up your Firefox browser....go to those sites I mentioned....and roll over the ads as they auto start- refresh at will - and take a peek at the lower left hand corner of your browser window occasionally - and you will see who is running ads as autostart video units. How do I know they are Fake PreRoll you ask? Fair question - but I happen to be privy to, in most cases due to where business originates, the directives of the media planners and agencies laying out these campaigns - the value proposition, and what they have asked for and purchased, being USER INITIATED BROADBAND INSTREAM PREROLL - which theses ads are not. To the overall video advertising market, are these ads bad...No. Are they useful and part of the video ecosystem, absolutely...those that specialize in the video space should be ad unit agnostic. However, I can safely say- that unless these ads are added value and have no cost associated with them, or sold and positioned to the agency as inbanner display video units, and this is really me giving a gift " out " to the perpetrators - then what they are running, is in fact, not accurately what was sold.