When Microsoft announced plans to bring the TV game show “1 vs. 100” to the gaming space two years ago, a lot of people rolled their eyes and groaned a little bit. Not me. I thought it was one of the company’s most interesting announcements of that particular E3. 1v100-dead  

The game was the centerpiece of an experiment called Xbox Live Primetime - a scheduled series of interactive games that represented the video game industry’s first serious foray into the turf dominated by TV. It was a hit, even setting a Guinness World Record for the most simultaneous contestants in a game show – 114,000. Now it’s dead.

After two seasons of the show, Microsoft has decided not to bring it back for a third.

“When we started on this journey, we knew we were creating an entirely new genre of entertainment that would be a continually evolving concept,” said Dave McCarthy, general manager of Microsoft Game Studios in a statement. “We’re very proud of the 1 vs 100 team and their accomplishments, and are excited to apply what we’ve learned to future programming.”

The concept was a unique one in the gaming industry. Rather than competing solely against Sony’s PlayStation or Nintendo’s Wii for gamer attentions, “1 vs. 100” aimed right at the heart of the networks, with scheduled live programming during prime viewing hours.

The game, which was modeled after the NBC series, aired two live two-hour episodes each week – where people played for real-world prizes, ranging from credits to download other content to cars. (30-minute ‘extended play’ sessions, which were formatted differently and meant as practice rounds for players aired at other times throughout the week.)

Sprint and Honda were among the show’s sponsors. And while in-game ads have always been controversial, they actually seemed to work here.

Microsoft partnered with Nielsen during the show’s second season to learn more about players and their ad-viewing habits.

Gaming, they learned, has a ‘prime time’ just like TV. Playtime is at a peak from 7-11pm. And 18-34 year olds made up 55 percent of the player base. Among Nielsen households, the ratings service found that 20-25 percent of the trackers were using their Xbox 360 instead of watching television during prime time.

As for those ads, they were pretty darned effective: “1 vs. 100” players averaged game times of more than 70 minutes. And they weren’t abandoning the game when the ads played (after every 10 questions).

Here’s hoping Microsoft doesn’t abandon the Xbox Live Primetime format with the cancellation of “1 vs. 100”. It was a revolutionary concept that could have taken gaming to the next level – and it’s one that consumers were apparently embracing.

  • Comments Off
  • Comments Off

Technology and investment group HackFwd describes what it's like to work with them in a flowchart. In a nutshell: start with inspiration, work hard, impress people, work hard, and reap the rewards. And then start all over again.


  • Comments Off

Microsoft has always led the video game pack when it comes to online integration of its console services. But it recently turned a particularly impressive corner. Xbox-live  

For the year ending June 30, sales of online products, such as movies, TV shows and downloadable game levels, were higher than revenue generated by subscription fees. Together, the company estimates that revenue for the Xbox Live service topped $1 billion.

Approximately 25 million people subscribe to the “gold” (or paying) level of Xbox Live, bringing in revenues of roughly $600 million. A new Bloomberg report suggests the business generated over $1.2 billion in sales last year – and Xbox chief operating officer Dennis Durkin confirmed to the service that product sales led the way.

Assuming the numbers are right, that’s a better than 35 percent improvement over the previous year – and it solidifies Microsoft’s place in the industry. (Sony, which for years, publicly ridiculed Microsoft for asking customers to pay $50 per year for the service, recently launched its own pay service.) 

  • Comments Off
Inception

The dream is real. We're down to the last few weeks before Chris Nolan's Inception hits theaters and jump starts the summer movie season. I suggest you don't watch any more footage from the movie so that you can experience it in the best way possible. Peter of SlashFilm showed me these awesome building-sized ads for Inception found in New York City that I have to show you guys. One of them (via Tumblr) has water flowing out windows to make it look like a dream. The other one (via Twitter) also plays with reality by bending back the entire wall of the building. Absolutely brilliant marketing for a brilliant movie that certainly deserves it.

I just love seeing marketing that actually integrates the concept of the movie into the design and I also love that they're not using floating heads to sell it. Every bit of marketing we've seen for this has been top-notch!

Inception Ads in New York City

Inception Ads in New York City

These photos aren't the greatest quality, but that's all I can find online right now. If you also live in NY and can snap a better photo or seen any better shots of these ads, please let us know so we can update the post! If you haven't seen them, watch the first teaser trailer and second teaser trailer for Inception at those links as well as the theatrical trailer. We have a few Inception interviews that'll be hitting in the next few weeks.

Inception is both written and directed by acclaimed Oscar nominated British filmmaker Christopher Nolan, of Memento, Insomnia, Batman Begins, The Prestige and The Dark Knight. Nolan wrote the screenplays for Memento, Batman Begins (with David Goyer), The Prestige & The Dark Knight (both with Jonathan Nolan). Warner Bros is bringing Inception to theaters starting on July 16th this summer. Only a few weeks are left!

Discover More: Cool Stuff, Hype, Photos

  • Comments Off
  • Comments Off
  • Comments Off
  • Comments Off
  • Comments Off

Why not put my 2 cents in ? Here are a few notes that hopefully a couple politicians will take note of:

1. Carried Interest Taxes

Of course it should be taxed at normal income rates because that is what it is.  But the bigger issue is the misrepresentation that it will negatively impact investment. That firms will not put as much capital to work because of the higher tax rates. To this I have one word, “nonsense”.  What else do you think people who run Funds are going to do, work at Dairy Queen ? Get a job at a bank ? Fund managers get in the game because its an opportunity to make huge sums of money.  No one is going to look at their business and say “Since I might make only $60mm instead of $80mm , I’m out. ” Doesn’t matter if its 60mm, 6mm or 600k.  Fund managers always come from somewhere else because starting and running Funds  is a chance to make a lot more money.  They left jobs paying income taxes and they can deal with paying income taxes on their fund earnings.

2. Banks Loaning  Money to Startups does not Create Jobs

One of the keys to failure in starting a business is borrowing startup funds.  Why ? Because startups never work on a schedule and loans always have to be paid back on schedule. It’s a huge mistake to borrow money from a bank to get a business going, yet our politicians seem to think that more bank lending to startups is a key to creating new jobs. It’s not. In fact, banks are smart enough to realize that unless they can pawn the loan onto someone else, like the Small Business Association, there is no good reason to loan a startup money.  Bank loans to startups are job killers, not creators.

3. The Y-Combinator Model is the key to Massive Job Creation

The best way way to create jobs in this economy  ? Follow the Y-Combinator model and make all equity investments up to 250k dollars and held for at least 3 years tax free when sold. If you aren’t familiar with how Paul Graham and his competitors do things, you should be. They truly are the ones creating jobs.  Speaking for myself, I have invested 250k or less in 8 or so businesses (some are still in process) in the last 12 months.  Now I personally would have done it with or with out a tax break, but the way our economy works, with everyone hacking tax regulations, a tax break will push more people in this direction. The more NON RECOURSE money available to startups, the more startups and jobs created and the more likely a huge employer emerges.

Not only is there a chance a large company is built, there is a chance that the “next big thing” emerges and catches fire, leading to hundreds of thousands of jobs or more being created.  I’m hoping that our politicians realize that LUCK is the key to getting unemployment back under 5pct. It’s going to take luck for someone to create the idea that we all missed and use angel funding from a source like Y Combinator to turn it into a company(s) that accelerate the economy much like The Internet and the PC Revolution did.  If my memory serves me, Michael Dell, Bill Gates, Marc Andreeson weren’t out looking for loans from banks to start their companies.  They used relatively small amounts of friends and family money. Make those investments tax free and we stand a chance to see the next generation Dell and Gates emerge.

(and no, this isn’t contradictory to my carry interest position. The investors should get the tax break, not the people who take a percentage of the profits (the carry interest) the investors would otherwise get paid).

3a. The Mobile Boom Could be a Unique Economic Catalyst if:

The boom in mobile devices and applications is reminiscent  of the mid 80s when we had software developers and applications popping up left and right.  Faster processors and regular operating system improvements created the same vibrant software ecosystem back then that we are seeing right now (Windows is to Mac in 1985 as Android  Apps is to IPhone/IPad Apps in 2010). Which in turn created new jobs and even new industries.

Now is the time to encourage more of the same through tax breaks for small investments and extended holding periods in startups.  We may also want to consider encouraging the creation of new Investment Banks that take small to medium size companies public.  There has been so much consolidation and contamination in Investment Banking that no one wants to waste time on the $5mm dollar IPO. Yet that is just what the economy needs to create jobs.

The public markets were once designed to showcase and raise capital for up and coming, exciting companies. Now the only IPOs seem to be  chinese companies and the re-flating of highly leveraged Private Equity deals. Selling stock to the public can not only create capital for the company, but it creates visibility as well. When we made the decision to take Broadcast.com public in 1998, we recognized that it was an important capital raise for us, but that it also was an important marketing event as well.  Creating national recognition and public shareholder participation through IPOs is a missing link in revitalizing the economy. And who knows, maybe we will get lucky again and there will be a small  bubble in a new technology  that takes us out of the depths of this recession and accelerates recovery.


  • Comments Off

About this blog

I’m a plannery-type, always reading something, glued to a screen when I’m not sporting or drinking. These are some of the interesting/fun/pretty things I’ve read and wanted to share with you. If I’m moved to expressing an original thought, then it might show up here as well. Enjoy! Subscribe! Win!

Photostream