Fliqz and Kaltura bring video capability to the masses, make Brightcove’s prices look insane

Web video platforms like Brightcove, Move Networks and Maven have a problem: They have all built business models targeting the handful of content companies willing to pay tens of thousands of dollars a year to push video on their sites. As a result, the platforms are angling for the same big fish in a relatively small pond; each must find ways to outdo the next by investing in new features without adding much to their price.

For Brightcove and its competition, two much smaller companies called Fliqz and Kaltura are here to bring the pain. These start-ups, while lacking the depth of features of their larger counterparts, offer video hosting, content management and streaming capabilities to websites at dramatically lower costs. Fliqz does it with proprietary self-serve software that gets video up and running on a site in around 30 minutes. Kaltura has a few plug-and-play extensions for wikis and blogging platforms, but its integration into regular websites is slightly more elaborate.

Both Fliqz and Kaltura have a few large enterprise customers, but with prices ranging from free to a few thousand dollars a month, they are going after the small and medium-sized websites that Brightcove and its ilk have all but ignored.

Fliqz’s model revolves around its simplicity. You go to its site, select a subscription level that reflects the size of your audience, pay for it and then add a few lines of code. Its substantial ease of use and quick deployment has enabled it to bring in around 17,000 customers, most of whom are using the ad-supported free version that grants them 500 streams a month. Along with relatively large sites including Dogster, Flixster and Autobytel, Fliqz counts religious organizations, dating services, parenting sites and travel agents among its users.

While Kaltura is still relatively simple, its vision is more expansive: For one thing, its technology is open source, so it has the potential to become much more powerful than Fliqz without spending tens of millions of dollars. While this means that anyone could use it for free, Kaltura is counting on revenue from value-added resellers that build features on its platform, and from sites that don’t want to worry about services like hosting and maintenance. For another, Kaltura’s video capabilities come with an impressively simple web-based editing tool, a sort of “video wiki” that lets anyone with permission add content to a video and remix it. With this tool and a recently announced partnership with Wikimedia, Kaltura hopes to add collaborative video to Wikipedia, which could get quite interesting.

More significantly, if Kaltura does manage to attract development, it has the potential to lead the charge to a commoditized market. Though this is already starting to happen, a powerful open source alternative could be serious trouble for the Brightcoves and Mavens of the world. This is an especially large issue for Brightcove, which has raised a hell of a lot of capital but has yet to find an exit, even as it raises yet more money to expand into Japan. Maven, on the other hand, managed to get acquired by Yahoo, so it’s Yahoo’s problem now.

Fliqz, which is based in Emoryville, CA, has raised a total of $6.2 million in two rounds and says it will soon start looking for $10-15 million more. New York’s Kaltura has also raised two rounds. The first was $2.1 million. The size of the second was not disclosed.

Next Story: India’s VC investment sees second-highest quarter on record
Previous Story: After months of Obama saturation, web users find change in McCain

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , ,

Photo of Dan Kaplan

About the Author, Dan Kaplan

Once upon a time, Dan considered himself a magazine journalist with dreams of "The New Yorker" and a couple of well-reviewed but only mildly successful books. Then one day, life, as it is known to do, decided it was time for rebirth. Like so many things before it, this rebirth was conceived on a mostly-empty plane to Reno. Now, instead of magazine writing, Dan would plunge into the world of New Media and write for Matt Marshall's blog.

It's funny how it goes.

  • Another player in this market is Twistage (http://twistage.com/) who our company uses. We used to use videoegg and evaluated fliqz and kaltura both of which are great services but we opted for twistage and couldn't be happier. Their custom service is incredible.
  • The guys at viewmy.tv build Internet TV platforms and social networking platforms.
  • brc
    If you seriously think Fliqz and Kaltura are competitors of Brightcove and Move Networks, I don't think you understand the market. They operate on different business models, and they've chosen to do that for good reason.

    You don't say "WOAH! Lexus has a big problem- Kia is now making a really cheap car that can get you to work just like the Lexus." So why would you use that same type of reasoning when it comes to online video?
  • I'm not sure you read closely enough. I point out that Fliqz and Kaltura are going after markets "that Brightcove and its ilk have all but ignored,", but Fliqz and (especially) Kaltura represent a trend towards the commoditization of the space. I'd say this is a serious challenge, any way you look at it.
  • sarah
    Brightcove didn't ignore this market. They went into it originally and then realized they were losing money hand over fist with every passing day. They decided to change strategies and go after the bigger fish. I don't ever see them making good to their investors, though. They've made so many mistakes in business models so far with I'm sure more to come.
  • Thomas
    First Fliqz says they are going to be "profitable" in a year, now they say they are looking for $10mln?

    Which is it?

    I agree with sarah about chasing unprofitable customers..
  • Pual Banister
    I think that they both do operate on different business models but they share a common interest. Brightcove have established huge clients which mean from now on, with large sums of money changing hand each time, they are going to stick to the big fish as this has what has worked for them.
  • Jason
    Being profitable in a year and having the ability to scale fast to get to a billion dollar company are two completely different points. They probably will be profitable in a year - they are growing faster than any other provider in the space
  • Thomas
    Now they are going to get to a billion dollar company?? Ummm sure.....

    Look Fliqz started a trend towards lowball pricing.....and as more competitors follow suit, then we are going to see lower and lower prices which means lower and lower revenues...

    $4.95 video hosting anyone? Show me the billion $ from that.

    All of these companies have shown adroitness at raising money, I'm not sure that any of them have shown a profit
  • Jason
    None of them have shown a profit.. your right about that.. Fliqz is targeting the mass market and at the way they are scaling, i wouldnt doubt them being a billion dollar revenue company in 3-5 years. From what I have heard, there average customer is worth 2388.00/ year and are doubling quarter after quarter.. look at their client list, MLB.com, Facebook.com, Rockyou.com, military.com, Monster, Flixster, VH1 . They claim to have about 16,000 people on their network already. Do the math.
  • Thomas
    Yeah yeah I've seen their client list and when you go to half or most of those sites, those sites mostly have youtube videos posted on them....

    I have yet to see much in the way of fliqz videos on any of those sites, they may have their toe in the water but the big lifting is handled by the likes of brightcove.

    Some contests on those sites have used fliqz...etc...pilot type stuff...

    At the end of the day, who controls the profit margin?

    The companies that supply the bandwidth -- which is not fliqz -- fliqz buys the bandwidth.

    As prices fall to zero, the bandwidth suppliers (bitgravity) will hold all the cards...

    And now that youtube has high quality streams, what is to prevent youtube from rubbing out most of the competitors in the video market?

    Not much, other than so far the lack of inclincation. Trust me, to the extent the revenues develop, the inclination at youtube will develop as well...!

    Thomas
  • Jason
    People want branded solutions.. fliqz is a white label type provider.. the market doesnt want youtube branding
  • Thomas
    As I pointed out above, as soon as youtube decides there is money in providing "white label" video, they will do so.

    Additionally there is no barrier to entry for other entrants to the market, be it kaltura or anyone else to get into this "white label video" market.

    And finally you point out that "none of them are profitable" and you allege that fliqz is taking in $2800/customer.

    Ok, so adding that together means they are losing money at that $2800/customer...(Since none of them are profitable, right?)

    S o, the more customers they have (growth), the more money they will lose, and the more financing they will need.

    Losing money on every customer and trying to make up for it in volume sounds like the pets.com story.

    Who knows what the actual financials are but the track record is these video customers have an enormous appetite for VC money; if the business was wildly profitable, that wouldn't be the case.

    I don't think that unprofitable companies have much intrinsic value at the end of the day...

    Show me the profits, and I'll be a believer.
  • As long as Fliqz and Kaltura can sustain, they would cause a big stir in the market. If their VCs are Investment Banks, they would be in trouble with their insane offerings.
  • I used to use Brightcove but you would be stupid not to switch. Competition is sometimes good for innovation as I feel Fliqz and Kaltura offer more substantial benefits in the long term.
  • MonkeyMail
    Mulitcast Media [www.multicastmedia.com] is not only profitable but has been in the market for over 8 years. These are the guys directly beating up on Brightcove. I fail to see how anyone would think that becuase a coulple IT guys got some VC money and convinced a few customers to "try it out" that Fliqz and Kaltura are something to watch out for.
    "Fliqz’s model revolves around its simplicity. You go to its site, select a subscription level that reflects the size of your audience, pay for it and then add a few lines of code. Its substantial ease of use and quick deployment has enabled it to bring in around 17,000 customers, most of whom are using the ad-supported free version that grants them 500 streams a month."
    Now...exactly how hard is it win business this way? Oh...and what did you say the margin is here? Shaking in my boots..........
  • Jenny
    Interesting discussion... Fliqz alleges they are "growing" by leaps and bounds yet if you go to alexa: http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_detai...

    And click on "Rankings" you'll see they've gone from ~2,000 to ~50,000 over the past few months.

    That means they've lost 90% of their page views... yet this is a growth phase?

    Yeah, that's why we all believe what CEO's say

    Jenny
  • edhardy622
    My girlfriend bought me a pair of Chestnut color UGG boots short for Christmas.
    http://www.uggboots365.co.uk