4 ms·
Also it's not good branding. I immediately thought this was LiveLeak, which is a different site than LiveVideo. But you're right - there are lots of players w
by bduerst 7y ago
Also it's not good branding. I immediately thought this was LiveLeak, which is a different site than LiveVideo.
But you're right - there are lots of players who carved out niches on the market to be profitable, since hosting video content is expensive. Vimeo, Twitch, even LiveLeak, cater to specific content while the generalist Youtube burned money for over a decade. When all the other generalists were pivoting, LiveVideo plowed ahead with something that wasn't profitable. This post-hoc rationalization and finger pointing feels like sour grapes.
- nostromo 7y agoThis was 2006. LiveLeak wasn't a thing yet when LiveVideo launched.
- PunksATawnyFill 7y agoGoogle's branding is the worst, however. They had to buy YouTube, in part, because Google Video was such a failure. Nobody saw Google Video as something to put video INTO; everyone assumed it was a search engine for online video. They haven't improved. Google's app store is still called "Google Play," which doesn't tell anyone it's an app store. It sounds like something gaming-related, and that's it. Google Plus... need we go on?