I wonder what the prices for TV and Internet TV spots are.

Ads in Internet videos work — at least on Hulu.  As a viewer, I’m forced to watch them because:

1. they’re too short (15-30 seconds) to walk away from, and
2. I can’t skip them like I do on my DVR.

I almost never see any commercials on TV.  With a 100% watch-rate for Internet TV spots versus my 0% watch-rate for TV spots, I’m a bit surprised that Hulu isn’t making enough money just on advertising. They’re planning to charge for some access starting next year.  Maybe they’re not charging enough for ads, or maybe the prices for TV ad spots are still inflated.

In addition to the 100% watch-rate, ads on Hulu have much better engagement data.  Marketers can track responses (clicks on the ad) and have demographics data for those clicks (if the user signs in to Hulu).

When do you think marketers will pay more for Hulu ads than TV ads?

Jennifer — my previous pick to win this season of Top Chef — was booted last night.  Boo.

I don’t necessarily disagree with the choice.  It was probably tough on the judges to pick someone to go home out of the final four.  They all seemed to be strong contenders, with no obvious weak link (unlike previous seasons).

But now it’s time for new predictions.  Here’s my take on the three finalists.

Kevin – Simple, but tasty, food.  Seems to always be solid on taste. I would probably eat at his restaurant regularly if it was in LA. Maybe not enough creativity to win against the brothers.

Michael — Probably the most talented of the season. His food is always interesting and highly inventive.  Eating at his restaurant would probably be an adventure (in a good way). High risk, high reward kinda guy. There’s a decent chance one of his creations won’t jive with the judges.

Bryan — Consistently solid.  Has some of the creativity of his brother, though not as flashy. Smart and thoughtful, in that he cares about taste and seems to have an understanding of what each challenge is all about. I imagine his restaurant as a great fine dining experience. Just enough creativity to be interesting, but grounded enough to have great tasting and highly satisfying food.

If I was a betting man (and I am), my new prediction is that Bryan will take it this season.  He seems to have the talent to wow the judges, and still present a really tasty meal. Plus he’s experienced and smart enough to not make a major mistake.  I can’t wait for the finale.

I just finished reading William Gibson’s Neuromancer.  I was in a scifi mood while looking to add a new novel to my Kindle for iPhone.  Since it’s such a classic, I thought I’d give Neuromancer a try.

I was not that entertained.  In fact, I was bored for most of it and it was a chore to get to the end.

I think if I read it in 1984 when it was first published, it would have been awesome.  But reading it after his revolutionary ideas have become so commonplace (eg., The Matrix), it wasn’t that exciting.

This criticism of Neuromancer is unfair, I know.  It was so ahead of its time that I can only imagine the thrill the reader would have felt reading it in the 80′s.  But reading it for the first time 25 years after it was published, and expecting it to entertain me as a scifi/cyberpunk story, it didn’t live up to my (unrealistic) expectations.

I’m not saying that Gibson isn’t a talented storyteller.  About a year ago, I read Pattern Recognition.  It was my first Gibson book. I picked it up on a whim at an airport bookstore. It’s a novel about advertising/marketing with a scifi/action/adventure twist published this decade.  That was a very entertaining read that I finished in two sittings.

I think I’ll give his latest, Spook Country, a read so my William Gibson experience doesn’t end on a down note. (BTW, the hardcover version of Spook Country is only $2.72 right now on Amazon.)

I’m looking forward to the start of the NBA season tonight.  The Lakers are the one sports team that I’m not a fairweather fan of.  Probably has to do with attending games at the Great Western Forum when I was a kid and growing up with them.

It’s nice that the Lakers are so strong again.  Last year, when they started 17-2, there was talk of eclipsing the Chicago Bulls’ improbable 72-10 record in 1995-96.  But they “only” ended up with 68 wins despite having Andrew Bynum go down in January and being pretty much out of commission the rest of the year.

This year, with the addition of Ron Artest, Bynum looking strong in the pre-season, and the Lakers coming off a dominant playoff run that culminated in the championship, the expectations are even higher.  As you’d expect, there’s again talk of that inhuman 72-10 record (LAT).

Winning 6 additional games to end up at 73-9 seems easy enough — heh — but I’m not going to make any predictions at where they’ll end up.  A key injury could be the difference between 50, 60 or 70 wins.  (I can’t believe I’m talking about 60 and 70 wins so casually.)  But that’s what the last 30 years of Lakers basketball has done to this city — nothing short of a championship is considered a successful season by LA fans.

Here’s a video of the 1987 ring ceremony presided over by Chick Hearn.  Chick looks so young here — he’s definitely missed. (via LAT Lakers Blog)

Speaking of LA’s basketball expectations, there’s the flip side. The Clippers have the #1 pick in Blake Griffin and a bona fide star in Baron Davis, but nobody cares about that team.  All expectations are that they will ruin the careers of those guys and have an early summer vacation yet again.  It’s striking the difference in expectations between the two LA teams who play in the same arena.

Screenshot of U2 webcast on YouTube

There were so many things right with the U2 live webcast on YouTube tonight that I have hope for the world again.  If you didn’t get a chance to see the webcast, click on the screenshot over there on the right — it’s been annotated with the things that struck me.

Some thoughts:

1. How many albums do you think U2 sold tonight?

Based on the Twitter stream at #u2webcast, it looks like it was truly a worldwide audience.

Brilliant example of leveraging the Internet to gain more fans and sell more albums.  See, smart musicians in conjunction with smart organizations show us that the Internet is tool that is good for music.  (Are you paying attention RIAA?)

I wonder what were YouTube’s share of the benefits.  They must have spent a bunch on bandwidth.

2. Google is still a smart company.

Kudos to YouTube/Google for putting the Twitter stream front and center on the webcast page.  They could have easily left out Twitter and just let YouTube commenters have the forum, but I’m sure they got much more exposure and reach by putting Twitter ahead of the YouTube comments.

3. On a personal note, this webcast brought back memories of my introduction to U2 via Achtung Baby, the first time I listened to Joshua Tree (and then listening to it over and over again), the anticipation (and honestly, slight disappointment) of Zooropa, and the U2 concert I went to at Staples Center years ago.  Happy memories.

That U2 concert is easily in the top 2 live concerts of my life. The other was Radiohead at the Hollywood Bowl.  I think U2 puts on a better show, but the Radiohead concert was downright transcendent for me (probably because of the weed).

I’m a fan of the Bravo show Top Chef.

Just discovered that head judge Tom Colicchio has a blog about the show and posts after each episode. To my surprise and delight, his posts are authentic and insightful, giving us fans something to tie us over until the next episode. Great job Bravo for the show blogs! And great blogging Tom!

Now for some predictions.

My sister has posited in past seasons that you can guess who the eventual winner is based on how often the producers interview the cheftestants (love that word). I’m talking about those short reality TV interviews within the episodes. As for my sister’s theory — maybe. I wonder if anyone has counted up the mini cheftestant interviews to see if the theory is correct. In any case, that theory is in the back of my mind every time the cheftestants do their reality show interview.

My guess is the final 3 will come down to Bryan, Mike V., and Jen. Kevin and Mike I. are strong candidates too, but don’t see them as strong as the three I’ve picked.

In the beginning, I thought Mike V. was the strongest, then I switched my bet to Bryan. But now, I think Jen is going to be the eventual winner. She seems to be the most consistently exceptional. Plus, she’s got a lot of interview time. ;)

PS: If you haven’t been watching, you can catch a few episodes of Top Chef on Hulu. Unfortunately, Bravo only allows a couple episodes on at a time, and not every episode gets on Hulu. Boo. +1 to Bravo (really, NBC) for the blogs, -1 for the Hulu decision.

I’m rereading Seth Godin’s The Bootstrapper’s Bible via DailyLit. I read the book 3 years ago from cover to cover before we launched Killer Aces.

I’m not sure how much I absorbed back then, reading the book before having started a company.  Rereading it now, I see that some of the Bootstrapper’s Manifesto has stuck with us.  Some of the lessons we had to learn the hard way for ourselves.

Anyway I have three thoughts to share.

1. If you’re an entrepreneur building a new business, do yourself a favor by reading Seth’s book. Even if you have VC funding, this book is applicable. It could just as accurately be called The Underdog Company’s Bible.

There’s no excuse. You can get the book for free as a PDF download or an email series from DailyLit.

2. Rereading the book after I’ve had a couple of years experience is eye opening. I’m absorbing more of the lessons because I can immediately think of actual business issues we’re dealing with now or have dealt with in the past.

Being able to apply the concepts to actual, real world problems makes them so much more meaningful versus trying to learn the lessons in abstract.

So go reread those old business books. There are probably new lessons you can pick up now that you have more real world experience.

3. DailyLit is a great way to read books for time strapped executives. Actually DailyLit is great for anyone that (a) has no time to read and (b) lives in their email inbox anyway.

It’s hard to find an extra hour everyday to read, but it’s easy to spend 5 minutes reading just another email.  It’s also good for people like me who can’t put a book down at the end of a chapter. The end of the email is the signal to move on and work on something.