Tech News

The quick, unusual lifetime of Quibi

“Everything that is left Now we would like to sincerely apologize for your disappointment and, ultimately, disappointment, "wrote Jeffrey Katzenberg and Meg Whitman, closing an open letter to Medium. "We can't thank you enough for being with us every step of the way."

The founding members confirmed the rumors and used Quibi just over six months after the start of the service to bed.

Starting a business is an incredibly difficult task in almost any circumstance, but even in a world riddled with high-profile flaws, the streaming service's swan song was remarkable for both its dramatically short lifespan and the amount of money the company made could collect (and spend) during this time.

A month before the commercial launch, Quibi announced it had raised an additional $ 750 million. This second round of funding brought the yet to start The funding for the streaming service is up to $ 1.75 billion – roughly the same as Belize's gross domestic product. Give or Take $ 100 Million.

"We completed a very successful second raise that gave Quibi a strong cash runway," CFO Ambereen Toubassy told the press at the time. "This $ 750 million round gives us tremendous flexibility and the financial resources to develop content and technology that consumers will use."

Quibi's second round of funding brought funding for the yet-to-be-launched streaming service to $ 1.75 billion – roughly the same as Belize's gross domestic product, $ 100 million give or take.

From a financial perspective, Quibi had reason to be hopeful. His donation ambitions were only exceeded by the aggressiveness with which the money was supposed to be spent. Earlier this year, Whitman pointed out the company's plans to spend up to $ 100,000 per minute of programming – $ 6 million per hour. The executive proudly contrasted the staggering amount with the estimated $ 500 to $ 5,000 an hour YouTube developers spent.

For Whitman and Katzenberg – known for their respective reigns at HP and Disney – money was the key to success in an already crowded market. $ 1 billion was a drop from the $ 17.3 billion Netflix was supposed to spend on original content in 2020, but it was a start.

Following in the footsteps of Apple, which recently announced it would spend $ 1 billion to launch its own fledgling streaming service, the company hired A-list talent from Steven Spielberg to Guillermo del Toro and Ridley Scott Reese Witherspoon and Jennifer Lopez and LeBron James. If your name had any impact in Hollywood boardrooms, Quibi would be happy to write you a check, apparently regardless of the specifics of the content.

Quibi's strategy was primarily defined by its limitations. Hoping to attract younger millennials and Gen Z, the company's content would not only be mobile, it would only be mobile. There would be no Smart TV app, Chromecast or AirPlay compatibility. The prices were low compared to the competition, but similarly off-putting. Get an ad-supported subscription for $ 4.99 after a 90-day free trial. And boy, howdy, was there any commercial? Ads on ads. View all the way down. If they pay another $ 3 a month they will go away.

Technological Restrictions and Terms of Use Small print banned Screenshots – a basic understanding of how content will go viral in 2020 (although, to be fair, one will be shared with other competing streaming services). Amusingly, the inability to share content led to videos like this from director Sam Raimi's confusingly serious "The Golden Arm".

Emmy winner Rachel Brosnahan lies in a hospital bed after refusing to remove a gold prosthesis. It is certainly an allegory, but not one that is purposely made to laugh. Many of the videos that eventually made the rounds on social media were viewed as oddities – strange artifacts from an emerging streaming service that made little sense on paper.

Most notable, however, were the "quick bites" that gave the service its confusingly pronounced name. Each program would be served in 5-10 minute pieces. The list included films purchased by the service that were divided into “chapters”. In particular, the service did not purchase the content directly. Instead, after seven years, the rights should go back to their creators. In the meantime, after two years, content partners were able to put the chunks back together into a film in order to distribute them.

Related Articles