Suggestions
Beau Bryant
Media & Creator Economy Executive (Warner, Fullscreen, WME)
Beau Bryant is the Principal at Pseudonym Projects, a company based in Beverly Hills, California.12 Here are some key details about Beau Bryant:
Professional Background
- He has nearly 20 years of experience in media and the creator economy.1
- Previously, Bryant held executive positions at major media companies:
Current Role
As Principal at Pseudonym Projects, Bryant likely leads the company's operations and strategic direction. Pseudonym Projects appears to be involved in media and creator-related ventures, given Bryant's background.
Education
Bryant attended Bucknell University, though his specific degree is not mentioned in the available information.1
Expertise and Interests
- Bryant has extensive experience in talent management and programming in the digital media space.
- He seems to have an interest in technology and its impact on society, as evidenced by his sharing of content related to topics like "enshittification" and its effects on human history.4
Additional Information
- Bryant is listed as both the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer for Pseudonym Projects in business records.2
- The company's address is listed as 450 N. Roxbury Drive, 8th Floor, Beverly Hills, CA 90210.2
While these details provide an overview of Beau Bryant's professional background and current role, it's worth noting that the information available is limited and primarily focused on his career in the media and entertainment industry.
Highlights
People dump on big media for being too slow to make the transition to streaming. But cable networks routinely delivered 40% profit margins while Netflix hovers between 10-20%.
Innovator's dilemma is tough in general, but even harder when the business you're supposed to become will (in success) have half the margin of your legacy business.
In hindsight, one could argue that the ultimate mistake was trying to compete on Netflix's terms vs just evolving the cable bundle to look more like a streamer. Big media could have allowed Netflix+Amazon+Apple to be the streamers and focused on 1) keeping quality content in the cable bundle (not just sports) and 2) updating the UX for the streaming era. Many execs argued for this strategy and were ultimately shouted down for not being 'innovative'.
But if there was no Disney+, Max, Peacock, Paramount+, etc and all that content continued to go first window to cable, we'd probably have 20-30M more cable subs than we do now, and consumers would have largely transitioned to modern streaming UX via Comcast and Spectrum or vMVPDs like Fubo and YouTubeTV. Big media would have been spared all the costs of the streaming wars, kept 80%+ of cable subs from churning, and have more leverage when negotiating these crucial sports packages today.
Coulda, woulda, shoulda. Also worth noting, this pov could be wrong and cable was impossible to save. Or maybe Disney+, Max, etc will be better off having gone through this decade of tumult once their streamers reach scale & profitability.
Still, it's nearly impossible to imagine the streamers will ever be as profitable as peak cable.
YouTube changed the world in many ways, but it's still under-appreciated how revolutionary the creator rev-share is...
The TV value chain was MVPD -> Network -> Studio -> Talent, with above-the-line talent keeping about 5% of global TV revenue.
The YouTube value chain is much simpler: YT -> Creators, with creators keeping 55% of revenue.
That's an 11x increase (5% -> 55%) in the share of total revenue going to the creative class when comping TV vs YT.
It's hard to overstate how much of a structural game-changer YouTube has been for the entire video landscape.
