SAI asks an interesting question: Blinkx might be in play, and News Corp. and Google are suggested to be interested.
Interesting. Disclosure: technically, all three companies are our distribution partners and News Corp. employed me briefly in 2005. Anyway, here goes:
Should News Corp. Buy Blinkx?
Technically, by virtue of being a media company, News Corp. would probably not even know where to start with a technology company like Blinkx. Of course, like all new technology firms, Blinkx is choosing a free, ad-supported route, and in this vein, News Corp. would be able to deliver on that promise.
In fact, News Corp. has bought some technology, namely, Strategic Data Corp., to better optimize its own ad inventory. However, it did so out of necessity because it owns the world’s largest social networking site MySpace which commands more pageviews than any other site out there. It should be noted, of course, that MySpace is also #2 in online video after industry gorilla YouTube. I have long argued that MySpace would be better served positioning itself as an entertainment/media hub (news to Ash: it already does that) and bolstering its video offerings (again, it already does this).
But because not all video is created equally and currently video is largely indexed by metadata (which is not very efficient), it is not crazy for News Corp. to want to buy Blinkx to better manage all of that GREAT video content on MySpace TV. Pardon the shameless plug, but I just linked to our 9 - count ‘em - 9 channels on MySpace TV.
The point is: with MySpace and FIM doing $900M in revenues, Rupert Murdoch knows that giving MySpace’s 75M unique users better search tools to find its burgeoning video content can help it catch up to YouTube in terms of video streams and hit its own internal revenue targets.
What about Google?
Google does not really have a video search tool, let’s face it. Its YouTube property still searches largely by metadata. Google is surely, surely using some of YouTube’s screening systems (you know, the ones that scan for porn and block that) to see how it can internally address video search… but the concept of buying video search is not out of the question because Google is now largely interested in Buying over Building (Blogger, Picasa, Feedburner, YouTube, Doubleclick, Grand Central, etc.).
I am a media guy, I understand technology, but not enough to tell you if Blinkx is the technology Google or News Corp. should buy… After all, what if the tech flops (I’m not saying it will) and then News Corp. can’t go with better technology? Maybe there is a reason media companies like to be license technology and not buy it.
Then again, at $200M, it’s throwing a coin in the air.
I will say this, limiting video search to metadata is - to quote Ford Fairlane, aka Andrew Dice Clay - like “masturbating with a cheese grater, slightly amusing, but mostly very painful.”
All right, sorry for that very wrong imagery and statement, but like I said, I’m not an engineer, I’m in showbiz.
Paid Content refers to a NYT article on CBS which calls for the company that Bill Paley built to make digital acquisitions, which begs the question: should they go for a big purchase or make small moves?
Of course, answering that question alone without addressing the backdrop to that question yields an incomplete picture.
CBS has hit some rough patches, according to Paid Content:
The parent company is under a mini-siege of sorts about
a) its performance,
b) Leslie Mooves’ salary,
c) Katie Couric’s disastrous tenure at the company,
d) layoffs (even on the digital side, as others are ramping up) and other issues (…)
e) CBS’s need for an acquisition is becoming apparent. Some CBS executives privately agree.
All right. I want to dive in and comment on e) but let’s run through this list quickly.
a) Its Performance
We’re not sure if they are referring to its financial performance or its stock’s, either way:
As per the NYT:
“Without the cushion of Viacom’s other properties, CBS has been more exposed to the struggles of the advertising market. In 2007, it earned $1.25 billion, down from $1.66 billion the year before. CBS stock closed at $21.40 on Friday, compared with $30.99 a year earlier.”
While no company or manager can control what happens to the stock price, I think big media will see a lot of revenue loss over the next few years. Print-centric media companies shrank, why would TV or radio-centric media companies be any different in the next wave of the Web’s growth?
After all, 1994-2003 saw text-based media explode online, 2003 is about audio/video-heavy media.
CBS is seeing this sooner and faster due to its exposure to TV and radio. However, they are strong in outdoors, the challenge there is the upside there won’t account for the downside in more traditional media.
So all hope signals point to online… which explains why:
“On Monday, the company’s interactive unit will officially open a fully staffed office in Menlo Park, Calif., in Silicon Valley, to stir innovation and content development.”
Ironically, the CBS Interactive brass gets the Web quite a bit, but it’s true that they have been overly cautious, too. Being cautious is a bad thing in booming times and a great thing in corrections. The problem for CBS is that the correction is coming offline and online continues to charge ahead… so indeed, CBS does need to make some bold moves. But what are those moves?
Last year, we suggested an outright merger with Yahoo! With MSFT’s $45B gamble, those bets are off (hmm… are they?).
b) Leslie Moonves’ Salary
Last week Henry Blodget wrote: “CBS CEO Moonves Gets 29% Raise, Just Reward For Job Well Done“.
Clicking through, I realized he was being sarcastic by pointing to the seemingly inverse relationship between Mr. Moonves salary and CBS’ performance. While I appreciate Henry’s position, the truth is that CEO pay is determined on a number of things, frankly.
It’s also about the demand and supply for talent. As the CEO of CBS, Mr. Moonves could probably command a much larger salary elsewhere, if CBS’s Board wants to pay him $100M because that is what it takes to retain him, I am not sure CBS or Moonves should be blamed. For the record, he did not make $100M but rather $37M. Is that a lot of money? Yes. But the company made well over a billion dollars in profit and $14B in revenues. Of course, I’m an executive so my perspective is going to be different than that of an analyst or journalist.
But my point is: running a shrinking business in a mature market is not something most executives would embrace, to lure the best (or retain them), guess what? It takes a generous compensation program.
c) Katie Couric
Don’t care personally, but indeed, this is becoming an albatross and if indeed she is that horrific (I don’t watch TV), it’s time to try something else. I recognize she might not be best suited for news, but surely there is plenty of things she can be doing for CBS in other capacties (infotainment, mainly).
d) Layoffs
Layoffs are always demoralizing, especially when a company is making over $14B in revenue and remains profitable. But what about a case - like this one - when the company is shrinking? This is a tough question.
My gut says Jack Welch’s “the lowest 10% should leave” is not a bad thing… so while I don’t want to dehumanize the layoff dynamics and their effect, I think it’s unfair to question the layoffs.
Of course, I do wonder why layoffs are taking place in online areas… which is what both Paid Content and NYT refer to. But just bear one thing in mind: many traditional media companies are not necessarily well structured in new media; divisions and structures are sometimes borne out of legacy organizational systems and sooner or later a correction or adjustment is called for. If this is the case, then I don’t think it’s fair to bash CBS on this point.
e) Acquisitions
The question remains: should CBS make one big hairy and ambition acquisition or should it buy a number of smallish companies and roll them up and/or foster their growth?
For the record, CBS has done both. In fact, it’s done everything including investments in Spotrunner, Joost and many others. In terms of acquisitions: Last.fm was a mid-sized / big one; Wallstrip was a small one.
What would you do if you were Quincy Smith and company? Buy? Merge? Sell?
ACQUISITIONS:
You know what, I admit a small acquisition won’t move the needle, but a major acquisition won’t either. Who would they have bought?
- Bebo? Is a company that marketers love really well-served by serving advertisers social networking inventory? Nope.
- Facebook? Too expensive to buy. Nothing to see, here (perhaps a merger? See below).
- Gawker Media? That might be an interesting addition. But I think Gawker Media founder Nick Denton wants to become CBS, and not sell to CBS. Anywa, Gawker Media lags in video, CBS needs to look ahead and not look back.
- Speaking of video, one company that might position it for future growth is Blip.tv, but Blip.tv does not own any content… so that is a risky move because CBS might buy a great video platform with amazing bells and whistles but then lose all of the content therein. [Disclaimer: Blip.tv is a partner of WatchMojo.com]. In the same broad category as Blip.tv are Brightcove and Video Egg. Bright Cove also does not own any content and is way too expensive, having raised $80M in funding. Video Egg ain’t cheap either, with $40M of funding in the tilt.
- Then there’s all of the YouTube/MySpaceTV competitors: Revver, Veoh, Metacafe, DailyMotion, Break, etc. Mind you, CBS invested in Joost… so what message would that send? As well, Revver was on the auction block and I presume CBS looked at it and then balked. Again, none of those companies own any content, CBS needs to be stronger in web content. That would be the hedge for CBS going forward, of course, it also needs better distribution. I see CBS works closely with Veoh… but is Veoh big enough as a distribution source? [Disclaimer: WatchMojo.com syndicates video to all of the sites listed here]
- Craigslist.org? Not sure Craig Newmark would sell, no matter how progressive Quincy’s team might be. This is Big Media after all… but Craigslist.org would not unleash CBS’ digital revenues.
- Glam Media? That would be a shot in the arm with regards to bolstering its female audience online… but here’s the problem: female audiences still watch TV… what CBS might be better suited for is getting access to a men’s audience. [Disclaimer: Glam Media is one of WatchMojo.com’s syndication partners, too]
- Digg? Not a fan of this one, frankly. Maybe a combo Revision3 / Digg? Even less of a fan of that. Revision 3 is way too niche: it’s too tech-oriented and relies on two hosts, largely. Given how Kevin Rose’s interest waned from Digg to Revision3, then to Pownce, I am not sure he’s buyable because he’s the main asset of Revision 3. [Disclaimer: if you look very broadly at all video content, then WatchMojo.com is more or less competitive to Revision 3, though I view them as rather complementary to our programming].
- Federated Media? Too tech-focused and they don’t own any of the content on the blogs they rep. Big media needs to own content to make it worth their while. Sorry, but that’s just the way media works.
- Gorilla Nation Media’s audience might be a better fit, but as an advertising representation firm, it faces the same challenges: You are buying a stack of contracts that at any point could be severed. Unless you own the underlying content, those contracts are not worth the paper they are printed on.
- Heavy.com? They have a men’s audience, for sure. But if CBS is to buy a destination, it needs to be an enormous destination, I am not sure Heavy.com would move the proverbial needle. In fact, in 2005, News Corp. bought IGN Entertainment, but IGN was doing over $70M in revenues on the strength of its Media Properties (IGN.com, RottenTomatoes.com, etc.), had a lot of technology (in-game advertising + digital distribution of movies, music and games). Moreover, IGN Entertainment was far and away the leader in terms of men’s 18-34 audiences.
However, if Fox Interactive Media has become a new media behemoth, it has more to do with MySpace’s burgenoning audience than with IGN’s properties. That being said: IGN Entertainment does give a lot of content and audiences that marketers look for. The challenge for IGN is that a major chunk of their inventory comes from their message boards, which are notoriously hard to sell and monetize.
This being said, when one looks at how instrumental MySpace and IGN’s acquisitions were, it’s fair to say that the ROI has hitherto been higher on the MySpace deal. I am surprised at this, I won’t lie. But this lesson would encourage CBS to look for a MySpace and not an IGN.
I am not that familiar with Heavy.com’s business, frankly, but I am not even sure if Heavy is an IGN.
- IAC is way too e-commerce oriented. Its search engine Ask.com does not really fit with CBS, either. So pass.
- There’s Meebo, but at $250M or more in value… I am not sure if CBS would even know what to do with it. And, who are we kidding: do marketers really even want to advertise in instant messaging communications? That one makes sense in theory but in practice? Not sure.
- There’s the barrage of search video tools: Blinkx, Pixcy, etc., but CBS remains a media company; it should be technology-centric, I think. What I mean by that is that its content should be compatible with all tech platforms to make it was widely available as possible.
- There are a number of ad networks: Tribal Fusion, Specific Media, Casale Media, Adconion etc. I think the obsession over ad networks will pass. Moreover, a lot of media companies will build and launch their own, which is a mistake as well. I am not sure if CBS should plunk down $100-$500M on an ad network. Advertising.com rescued AOL’s butt because AOL was transitioning from a walled garden to a normal website but the fact remains, that says more about how poorly AOL was doing than how great Advertising.com has done (for the record: it has done great).
Valueclick is publicly traded, but expensive.
If it was interested in ad networks, it might as well skip over display ad-based ones and dive into video networks such as Tremor Media or Broadband Enterprises. Again, I am not sure being in the ad network business is the best capital allocation move.
- It could - much like how NYT invested $29.5M in Wordpress - make a bid for Six Apart (makers of Movable Type) or even Wordpress. But, again, I am not convinced it makes sense for a media company to own a platform without the underlying content. News Corp. buying MySpace made sense because the content on those sites become News Corp. property, or at the very least, MySpace gets a license to profit from it…
- Slide? At the company’s last $500M pre-money valuation, I think CBS would gain street cred in one block on SF by buying Slide but see Wall Street punish it. Hey, just being honest here folks: that is one expensive widget company with moutain-fulls of unsellable inventory!
- There’s TheStreet.com, though I am not sure if it’s big enough or whether CBS really wants to get that deep into finance and investments. Bear in mind Wallstrip was all about investing… so this would be a doubling down on one category. Moreover, at a market cap of $250M, it would eat a lot of money the company could spend elsewhere.
- CNET remains very tech-oriented but it has embraced a lot of lifestyle properties, too. In fact, CNET would be a good fit with 100M uniques, $400M in revenues etc. In fact, trading at $1.2B, it’s not that expensive. CNET would give CBS some web DNA and CBS would open up swarms of traditional advertisers to CNET. This could be the best move yet: unlike most other options, CNET owns a lot of content. It also owns a lot of URLs such as TV.com that with CBS’ help could come to life.
Updated: Oh, wow, they listened to me: it’s official.
MERGERS
- CBS could in fact merge with Yahoo! I wrote about this and frankly, this remains an option.
- It could merge with Facebook; won’t happen. At a market cap of $14B technically Facebook is worth roughly the same as CBS. This would be a bizzarro world deal where Facebook trades in growth for CBS’ $14B in revenue… but this one is so loopy.
- As crazy as it sounds, it could undo the merger with Viacom; won’t happen.
SALE
What about a sale to News Corp.? News Corp. owns FOX, it would love to own CBS. But for this to happen, it would mean Sumner Redstone and my old boss Rupert Murdoch would have to come to terms; won’t happen.
Incidentally, last Friday, GE lost 12% of its value, or $40B. It could have bought two CBS’s. By buying CBS, GE’s NBC Universal would own two of the three main networks, making this an impossibility.
That same obstacle is present in a sale to Disney, who owns ABC.
CONCLUSION
As you run down the list… you realize that all CBS is actually a great media company that just needs some tweaking. Yes, indeed: “Nobody likes negative growth, from the guy who shines shoes to the C.E.O. Everybody feels the pain” the truth is no one wants to blow something up either.
My two recommendations for CBS:
- Buy CNET for $1.5B - $2B (that would be a 25% to 66% premium), which would take its digital revenues from “$200M” to $600M. Combining CNET with Last.fm would also yield a lot of upside in digital music and video tie-in’s. But even then: for a company with $14B in annual revenues, does $600M mean much? Many analysts only give credit to a media company’s stock if digital revenues account for 10% of total sales. Even News Corp. or Disney do not claim that.
CNET remains one of biggest acquisition targets that represent meaningful revenue opportunities, and even that won’t move the needle. So what other options are there?
OR
- Merge with Yahoo!
Actually, there’s also one more option:
GO PRIVATE?
One way that no one will care about a) Performance or b) Les Moonves salary is if it were not publicly traded. Moreover, Wall Street is being unreasonable: yes the company is shrinking, but it will take time for digital revenues to grow, anyway. However, if someone came along and took CBS out at $20B, I think a lot of shareholders would buy that (or I guess, sell for that).
It then allows CBS to d) clean house if they so choose to (and will have to). Kate Couric becomes moot in the grand scheme of things… but most importantly, it will allow CBS to roll up a number of smaller web properties, content producers and tech applications to bolster its overall portfolio. In 4 years - when video advertising will be $7.1B in the US (up from $1B) and all online advertising will be nearly $100B in annual expenditure - it can then be go public again…
This might very well be the best course of action. The question remains: does private equity have the stomach for a $20B debt purchase? With $16B in annual revenues… I think so.
All righty, that was a great use of 40 minutes of my time. Back to work.
Daily Motion is escalating the battle for #3 in their space (after YouTube and MySpace TV).
Online video advertising is growing, quickly.
Online video advertising is where search advertising was in 2000-01: a major part of the web ecosystem desperately looking for a business model.
Unlike search - where traditional media companies failed to invest and even new media companies gave up in favor of portaldom - a lot of companies are vying for online video supremacy. My read on it is that we will never have a Google of video. That’s right, even YouTube - incidentally owned by Google - won’t command the kind of revenue within its segment that Google does. The reason for that is lack of competition and monetization ability. On the former, YouTube has a lot of competition in the monetization race.
Either way, looking at the stats, the numbers are impressive:
An estimate of the US online video ad market for 2009 - set in 2004: $657 million | Source.
An estimate of the US online video ad market for 2009 - set in 2005: $1.5 billion | Source.
An estimate of the US online video ad market for 2010 - set in 2006: $2.3 billion | Source.
An estimate of the US online video ad market for 2010 - set in late 2006: $3 billion | Source.
An estimate of the US online video ad market for 2011 - set in 2007: $4.3 billion | Source.
An estimate of the Worldwide online video ad market for 2011 - set in 2007: $10 billion | Source.
An estimate of the US online video ad market for 2012 - set in late 2007: $7.1 billion | Source.
An estimate of the US online video ad market for 2012 - set in early 2008: $6.6 billion (all broadband at $12.2B) | Source.
It’s thus not surprising to see the sheer volume of money that is being invested in the space, here is an incomplete snapshot:
Judging from that, investors better be patient because only YouTube has exited, handsomely, to the tune of $1,650,000,000 (that’s $1.65B, in case you’re wondering). I’d like to remind everyone that more money does not equal more return, but I digress.
It’s worth noting, too, that YouTube raised less money than everyone else in its peer group but I highly doubt anyone in that group will be worth more, ever, than YouTube.
I am personally hoping that WatchMojo.com pulls the same feat in its peer group. I won’t say “jokes aside” because I am not exactly kidding, admitting that yes, indeed, we’ve raised - and spent - less than $5M to build our content and distribution, which is actually bigger than some of our peers. You might notice that I do not call the players in our group competitors because we are the bastard children of the broader video space: everyone is betting heavily on platforms and user-generated content and our category is definitely going against the grain.
Lastly, I think most of these players are pricing themselves out of exits:
- IPOs will be very hard: yes online advertising is growing quickly but I suspect traditional media (that owns rights to the content) will garner a big share of the online video ad pie. In this context, hitting $100M in revenues or more becomes very challenging, especially with the low-quality content most of these sites are trying to monetize.
- M&A becomes nearly impossible because you need to sell for more than you have raised, and judging by Revver’s fate (who raised $12.7M and sold for less than $5M) that becomes quite hard.
It’s a good thing I am no low-expectations mofo… just because we have not raised boatloads of cash (yet anyway) does not mean we’re not gunning for a big payday one day, but realizing that such a day might not materialize tomorrow, I respectfully think a lot of the companies in the broader video space and our content creation space in particular have dug too deep of a hole for themselves.
To each their own.
This is a work in progress, I am adding CMS platforms (Brightcove, Maven, etc.) and CDNs (Limelight, Akamai, etc.) as we speak. If you have more companies and funding amounts, or if I made a typo, leave the correction in the comments or email me at ash@mojosupreme.com.
Two more sources have been added to the MetaMojo.com video search engine, it’s essentially a meta search for video. There are a lot of great teams of engineers working on tackling video search, MetaMojo.com provides a platform for these, and with our hundreds of thousands of video watching users on WatchMojo.com, we provide a natural distribution point for these partners.
Today we add Blinkx and Pixsy, two sites that I am a big fan of.
The design and layout is still very rough and this project is, like most online, still very much in testing. We’re about 75% done with the migration to a comprehensive redesign and relaunch on a new publishing platform, expect more tweaks and a new interface when that launches, very soon.
Here’s an example of a search for George Bush, for example.
Related:
- WatchMojo.com Unleashes 4,000 Proprietary, Original Videos Online
- Blinkx Joins WatchMojo.com Syndication Networks
Some news out of our WatchMojo.com Web Video unit, Blinkx - who today launched a contextual ad network - is the latest distribution partner we’ve signed onto join our syndication network. We’re quickly building our web network to pretty much make out library of 4,000+ videos ubiquitous across the Web, and while it’s very premature, we’re also trying to expand in both wireless and out-of-home digital networks. More news on these to come.
Anyway, what this means is we now have some of our content on Blinkx, which is great, and we leverage their network, too. So if Blinkx powers Ask.com’s search engine, for example, then we get in front of InterActive Corp.’s audience, too, overnight.
A screen shot for example of our content on Ask.com’s search engine (this popped into my inbox this morning, via Google Alerts, I don’t really spend that much searching for “Car Imports Japan” but I digress):
Anyway, here is the release:
Blinkx Joins WatchMojo.com’s Original Web Video Syndication Network
World’s Largest Video Search Engine Blinkx is latest distribution partner to join original video producer WatchMojo.com’s syndication network, getting access to 4,000 professional, informative and entertaining video clips.
(PRWEB) June 25, 2007 — http://www.WatchMojo.com - a leader in short, informative and entertaining video programming for broadband platforms and out-of-home-digital networks - today announced a partnership with Blinkx, the world’s largest video search engine, whereby WatchMojo.com’s content will be hosted and distributed within Blinkx’s website and through its syndication partners across the Internet via full-screen, high quality playback.
The agreement provides Blinkx with original, high-quality online video content on topics including Cars, Fashion, Film, Food, Health, Music, Sports, Technology and Travel from WatchMojo.com’s library of 4,000 informative and entertaining video clips.
Launched on January 23, 2006, WatchMojo.com has scaled to become one of the largest producers, publishers and syndicators of original video content with 4,000 clips, ranging from 1 to 3 minutes each.
Since its launch, WatchMojo.com has also built one of the largest syndication networks of any online or offline video content company, reaching tens of millions of viewers with relationships with YouTube,MySpace, Joost, NBBC, Roo, GoFish, Canoe, Revver, Veoh, Blip.tv, Daily Motion, Yahoo!, Brightcove and many more.
By 2010, the US online video advertising market is estimated to grow to $3 billion while the entire online advertising marketplace will generate $60 billion. Today, television garners $75 billion in advertising revenue each year in the US.
In 2007 WatchMojo.com has aggressively adopted a multi-platform distribution model, by moving into wireless entertainment and the out-of-home digital video market. Wireless entertainment is slated to grow into a $77 billion marketplace by 2011 on the strength of mobile TV; the out-of-home digital market itself was a $7 billion marketplace in 2006 alone and is a rapidly growing segment.
About Mojo Supreme
http://www.WatchMojo.com is the Web TV unit of Mojo Supreme, a privately held digital media, technology and services company launched in 2006. The company’s other units include the MetaMojo.com search unit (which includes both a vertical search network and video meta search engine), the StreetMojo.com community for the sweepstakes, prize and contest market as well as a number of media properties in the following verticals: Cars, Education, Fashion, Film, Food, Gambling, Health, Music, Politics & Economy, Space, Sports, Technology and Travel.
About Blinkx
blinkx plc (LSE AiM: BLNX) is the world’s most comprehensive video search engine. Today, blinkx has indexed more than 12 million hours of audio, video, viral and TV content, and made it fully searchable and available on demand. blinkx’s founders set out to solve a significant challenge - as TV and user-generated content on the Web explode, keyword-based search technologies only scratch the surface. blinkx’s patented search technologies listen to - and even see - the Web, helping users enjoy a breadth and accuracy of search results not available elsewhere. In addition, blinkx powers the video search for many of the world’s most frequented sites. blinkx is based in San Francisco and London. More information is available at http://www.blinkx.com/videos/mojosupreme.
Contact:
Ashkan Karbasfrooshan for WatchMojo.com
514-827-2532
Ash(at)MojoSupreme.com
Tim Turpin for blinkx
OutCast Communications
415-392-8282
tim(at)outcastpr.com
###
Via PRWeb.com.
Related:
- YouTube and WatchMojo.com Make it Official.
- Joost What Does WatchMojo.com Have in Common with Viacom, CNN, Turner, Sony, CBS, NHL, Warner?
- WatchMojo.com Partners with GoFish.
- WatchMojo.com celebrates 1-year anniversary with move into wireless via Sprint partnership.
Little company announcement: the latest addition to the WatchMojo.com video syndication network is Blinkx (we have another Blinkx-related announcement to make in the next month, regarding another unit of Mojo Supreme).
In the meantime, check out WatchMojo.com on Blinkx.
Blinkx is the latest video network to join our roster of partners in the Web, Wireless and Out-of-home Digital markets that carries WatchMojo.com’s programming of informative and entertaining video programming.
Just like week they signed a deal with Ask.com so WatchMojo.com’s reach continues to soar precipitously.
We have 4,000+ clips and right now, there’s only 200 clips on Blinkx…
Do the math, use your imagination: expect everything - and I mean everything - to grow exponentially over the next weeks, months, years.
Related:
- YouTube and WatchMojo.com Make it Official
- Joost what does WatchMojo.com Have in Common with Viacom, CNN, Turner, Sony, CBS, Warner Music Group and the NHL?
PLAY
