<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google still scratching head over YouTube profits</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/05/01/google-still-scratching-head-over-youtube-profits/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/05/01/google-still-scratching-head-over-youtube-profits/</link>
	<description>Nic Brisbourne's view from London on venture capital and exploiting change in technology and media</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 17:20:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: YouTube monetises like social media &#124; The Equity Kicker</title>
		<link>http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/05/01/google-still-scratching-head-over-youtube-profits/comment-page-1/#comment-2834</link>
		<dc:creator>YouTube monetises like social media &#124; The Equity Kicker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:00:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/05/01/google-still-scratching-head-over-youtube-profits/#comment-2834</guid>
		<description>[...] revenue two years on from the $1.6bn acquisition isn&#8217;t much - as I&#8217;ve said before, I wish the current results were doing more to justify the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] revenue two years on from the $1.6bn acquisition isn&#8217;t much &#8211; as I&#8217;ve said before, I wish the current results were doing more to justify the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nic</title>
		<link>http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/05/01/google-still-scratching-head-over-youtube-profits/comment-page-1/#comment-2558</link>
		<dc:creator>nic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 10:24:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/05/01/google-still-scratching-head-over-youtube-profits/#comment-2558</guid>
		<description>Tks Bizak - some interesting data</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tks Bizak &#8211; some interesting data</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bizak</title>
		<link>http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/05/01/google-still-scratching-head-over-youtube-profits/comment-page-1/#comment-2452</link>
		<dc:creator>Bizak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jun 2008 18:17:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/05/01/google-still-scratching-head-over-youtube-profits/#comment-2452</guid>
		<description>Bear Stearns estimates that 2008 revenues for YouTube will be $90 million, of which $22 million comes from InVideo advertisements. Using the Bizak Business Valuation Calculator (right) we can get a rough estimate of YouTube’s revenue valuation and EPV (Earnings per Visitor), which is the amount of money earned from each visitor to the site.
If you divide the yearly revenues by 12 you get a rough monthly revenue estimate of $7.5 million. We then enter these numbers into the calculator. At this point we’re assuming YouTube has zero costs but in actuality we know this to be false. 

Based on the Bizak calculations YouTube has an EPV of $0.12 and a Bizak Estimate (business valuation estimate based on revenues) of $360 Million. This valuation is obviously a lot less than the $1.65 Billion Google paid for YouTube, however YouTube is a premium brand that must be (and was) factored into the purchase price.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bear Stearns estimates that 2008 revenues for YouTube will be $90 million, of which $22 million comes from InVideo advertisements. Using the Bizak Business Valuation Calculator (right) we can get a rough estimate of YouTube’s revenue valuation and EPV (Earnings per Visitor), which is the amount of money earned from each visitor to the site.<br />
If you divide the yearly revenues by 12 you get a rough monthly revenue estimate of $7.5 million. We then enter these numbers into the calculator. At this point we’re assuming YouTube has zero costs but in actuality we know this to be false. </p>
<p>Based on the Bizak calculations YouTube has an EPV of $0.12 and a Bizak Estimate (business valuation estimate based on revenues) of $360 Million. This valuation is obviously a lot less than the $1.65 Billion Google paid for YouTube, however YouTube is a premium brand that must be (and was) factored into the purchase price.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Display ad problems &#171; The Equity Kicker</title>
		<link>http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/05/01/google-still-scratching-head-over-youtube-profits/comment-page-1/#comment-1899</link>
		<dc:creator>Display ad problems &#171; The Equity Kicker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2008 17:11:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theequitykicker.com/2008/05/01/google-still-scratching-head-over-youtube-profits/#comment-1899</guid>
		<description>[...]  &#160; &#160;   &#160;       &#171; Google still scratching head over YouTube profits    Display ad [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...]  &nbsp; &nbsp;   &nbsp;       &laquo; Google still scratching head over YouTube profits    Display ad [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
