Here’s what Snapchat views as its biggest risks in the years ahead

Image: snap inc.

Snapchat essentially got its start by eliminating risk. Want to send a nude to a lover or a goofy face to a friend? Don’t worry, it’ll disappear in 10 seconds.

But now, as a startup that just filed to go public, the risks look pretty damn real. The word “risk” appears 87 times in Snap Inc.’s Form S-1 filed Thursday.

Here they are in summary, with our background and more plain English explanations:

1. Keeping its users happy

Our ecosystem of users, advertisers, and partners depends on the engagement of our user base. We anticipate that the growth rate of our user base will decline over time. If we fail to retain current users or add new users, or if our users engage less with Snapchat, our business would be seriously harmed.

Snapchat is reminding the public that one day it may not be the hottest app to the kids. In fact, we’ve already seen a slowdown in the app’s growth. A Bloomberg report from June 2016 revealed Snapchat had 150 million daily active users. According to S-1 filing, that came more than 7 months later, Snapchat has added only 8 million daily active users.

A lot of companies look outside the U.S. to boost growth. For Snapchat, that doesn’t look like the rosiest prospect.

But while its army of Snapchat users is much smaller than Facebook’s at more than 1 billion daily active, Snapchat touts its engagement 25 minutes per user.

2. Playing in Google and Apple’s worlds

Snapchat depends on effectively operating with mobile operating systems, hardware, networks, regulations, and standards that we do not control. Changes in our products or to those operating systems, hardware, networks, regulations, or standards may seriously harm our user growth, retention, and engagement.

Snapchat calls itself a camera company, but it doesn’t exactly own the entire camera. It relies on Apple iOS and Google Android to host its app, the “flagship product.”

3. Relying on Google for a lot

We rely on Google Cloud for the vast majority of our computing, storage, bandwidth, and other services. Any disruption of or interference with our use of the Google Cloud operation would negatively affect our operations and seriously harm our business.

If Google, one of the most valuable companies in the world, were to shutdown its storage system, Snapchat could be in trouble.

4. The fickle advertising industry

We generate substantially all our revenue from advertising. The failure to attract new advertisers, the loss of advertisers, or a reduction in how much they spend, could seriously harm our business.

Snapchat has been clawing its way into advertisers’ budgets. It faces stiff competition from Facebook and Google, who are in what amounts to a duopoly for digital ads. The two tech giants together represented 99 percent of the U.S. ad revenue growth in the last year.

Meanwhile, each of these companies are trying to pull spending from TV budgets.

Snapchat is also admitting in its risk factor that it’s not at least not yet pulling in a lot of revenue from products. In the end of last year, Snapchat began selling Spectacles, its video-camera sunglasses for $130 per pair.

5. The need to keep making new stuff while maintaining the old stuff

If we do not develop successful new products or improve existing ones, our business will suffer. We also invest in new lines of business that could fail to attract or retain users or generate revenue.

Snapchat needs to keep making its stuff cool, while also making sure its existing stuff works as well. Otherwise, it won’t make enough money to justify the hype.

6. A long list of powerful competitors

Our business is highly competitive. We face significant competition that we anticipate will continue to intensify. If we are not able to maintain or improve our market share, our business could suffer.

It’s not a one-horse race. Current competitors are formidable foes that also “focus on mobile engagement and advertising,” according to the filing.

Here’s Snapchat’s full list of enemies:

  • Apple

  • Facebook, along with Instagram and WhatsApp

  • Google, along with YouTube

  • Twitter

  • Kakao

  • LINE

  • Naver, including Snow

  • Tencent

Snapchat also writes that it competes with companies in “print, radio, and television sectors to underlying technologies like default smartphone cameras and messaging.”

These competitors, with their wealth of resources and massive user base (for some), also have the potential to mimic Snapchat’s technology. Snapchat is already all too familiar with the game.

7. Making money is… hard

We have incurred operating losses in the past, expect to incur operating losses in the future, and may never achieve or maintain profitability.

Snapchat has already been ridiculed for bleeding money. Its cash for 2015 was $640.8 million. In 2016, it was down to $150.1 million.

The company also lost a whopping $514 million in 2016.

Snapchat just admitted it may never make money. Like ever.

8. Attracting talent

The loss of one or more of our key personnel, or our failure to attract and retain other highly qualified personnel in the future, could seriously harm our business.

Silicon Valley is a land of competition. Software engineers aren’t cheap, and they’re always looking for the best, most fun, and perhaps more importantly, most financially lucrative jobs. One day, Snapchat might not be the hottest place to work.

9. Young and unique

We have a short operating history and a new business model, which makes it difficult to evaluate our prospects and future financial results and increases the risk that we will not be successful.

Remember Snapchat is 5 years old. There’s still a chance that this whole thing just doesn’t work.

Image: andrew hutchinson/snapchat

10. Getting hacked

If our security is compromised or if our platform is subjected to attacks that frustrate or thwart our users ability to access our products and services, our users, advertisers, and partners may cut back on or stop using our products and services altogether, which could seriously harm our business.

Snapchat has been through quite a few user privacy scares. A hack in January 2014 leaked the usernames and phone number of 4.6 million users.

Snapchat has since added two-factor authentication for users and worked to eliminate third-party apps from being used to scrap data.

But that doesn’t eliminate the risk of being hacked again, especially when you rely on third-parties, like Google Cloud, to store your information.

11. Math is hard

Our user metrics and other estimates are subject to inherent challenges in measurement, and real or perceived inaccuracies in those metrics may seriously harm and negatively affect our reputation and our business.

Snapchat relies on a lot of third-party companies and internal software to track its engagement. As Facebook has been shamed, publishers and advertisers rely on these metrics to do business.

When you lose the publishers’ trust, you lose their attention.

12. Complicated stock stuff

We are not aware of any other company that has completed an initial public offering of non-voting stock on a U.S. stock exchange. We therefore cannot predict the impact our capital structure and the concentrated control by our founders may have on our stock price or our business.

People who purchase Snap stock will have no voting rights. That means the board at Snap, led by cofounders Evan Spiegel and Bobby Murphy, will be able to make all of the decisions. As Snap notes, that type of distribution of power or lack of thereof is not popular in the U.S. market so it’s very much tbd on what will happen.

But, in its carefully phrased S-1, Snap Inc. asserts that risk may also be its greatest strength:

“In the way that the flashing cursor became the starting point for most products on desktop computers, we believe that the camera screen will be the starting point for most products on smartphones.

This is because images created by smartphone cameras contain more context and richer information than other forms of input like text entered on a keyboard.

This means that we are willing to take risks in an attempt to create innovative and different camera products that are better able to reflect and improve our life experiences.

For potential stockholders, buying Snap is a bet on the future cards dealt by the two cofounders Evan Spiegel and Bobby Murphy. Some, like Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, have earned that confidence.

Be careful, Snapchat.

BONUS: Google Glass gives the Snapchat Spectacles the reality check it needs

Continue reading

University of Arizona sues 'Scumdevils' owners over apparel, use of 'WC' hand gesture – ABC15 Arizona (blog)

University of Arizona sues 'Scumdevils' owners over apparel, use of 'WC' hand gesture
ABC15 Arizona (blog)
"When looking at the Scumdevils' website, there is no question that their entire business is intended to try to make money from the University of Arizona's brand and reputation. UA works hard … Rocha said. "I was gonna start blogging, and it evolved

Continue reading

What Can The Cowboys Expect From Draft Pick WR Noah Brown? – Blogging The Boys (blog)

Blogging The Boys (blog)

What Can The Cowboys Expect From Draft Pick WR Noah Brown?
Blogging The Boys (blog)
To learn more about one of the newest Cowboys, we turned to Colton Denning of Ohio State blog and SBN sister site Land Grant Holy Land to find out just what makes Brown so special. Question: Noah Brown had some big moments in a Buckeye uniform this …

Continue reading

University of Arizona sues 'Scumdevils' owners over apparel, use of 'Wildcat' hand gesture – ABC15 Arizona (blog)

University of Arizona sues 'Scumdevils' owners over apparel, use of 'Wildcat' hand gesture
ABC15 Arizona (blog)
"When looking at the Scumdevils' website, there is no question that their entire business is intended to try to make money from the University of Arizona's brand and reputation. UA works hard … Rocha said. "I was gonna start blogging, and it evolved

Continue reading

Study Abroad Students Blog Experiences – The Arkanas Traveller

The Arkanas Traveller

Study Abroad Students Blog Experiences
The Arkanas Traveller
Her blog posts were nominated for awards by Laura Moix, the assistant director for study abroad and international exchange. Halford's post, “A Love Letter to Australia,” received an honorable mention by the organization Blogging Abroad, in the Best …

Continue reading

Clean Power Is Too Hot for Even Trump to Cool

On Nov. 4, Walmart announced an aggressive plan to increase its investments in renewable energy, pledging to power half its operations from wind, solar, and other renewables by 2025 and to cut the carbon footprint of its operations by 18 percent over the same period. Ten days later, Microsoft made its largest wind-power purchase agreement ever, with a deal to buy 237 megawatts of electricity from turbines in Kansas and Wyoming to run data centers in Cheyenne.

In between those announcements, Donald Trump was elected president, in part by calling climate change a hoax and vowing to gut most of Obamas clean-energy policies and revive coal mining. If the actions of Walmart and Microsoft are any indication, a Trump administration will do little to dissuade companies from continuing to invest in renewables. I think fears of a negative impact of Trump on renewable energy are really overblown, says Thomas Emmons, a partner at Pegasus Capital Advisors, a private asset management firm focused on sustainable and alternative investments.

One reason is timing. The biggest economic incentives for clean energy are federal tax credits for solar and wind projects. Both were set to expire at the end of last year, prompting a surge in investments as companies raced to get in under the deadline. In December, Congress unexpectedly extended both credits (for solar until 2021 and for wind until 2019) as part of a deal to lift the 40-year-old ban on U.S. oil exports. Its not clear that Trump will try to persuade Congress to repeal the extensions. Wind power is especially popular across the Midwest, a Republican stronghold; in many cases its become cheaper than other sources of grid power.

Sixty percent of Fortune 100 companies have renewable-electricity or climate change policies, and 81 companies globally have committed to get 100 percent of their energy from renewable sources, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance. Companies tend to invest in renewable energy in one of three ways: sourcing clean power from wind and solar projects through long-term agreements; purchasing a stake in green power projects; or using renewable-energy credits to offset the dirtier power they consume.

Since 2008, U.S. companies have signed agreements to purchase more than $10 billion worth of wind and solar power about 10Gw, enough to run almost 2 million U.S. households for a year. BNEF expects that pace to increase over the next decade, with at least 50 U.S. companies signing long-term agreements to buy an additional 22Gw of clean energy. A Trump presidency does not lower our expectations for the growth of the corporate renewable-energy market, says Nathan Serota, a clean-energy analyst at BNEF. If anything, a less ambitious stance on renewables at the federal level could encourage corporations to pick up the slack even further. With the government providing less support, more businesses may decide the best way to ensure clean-power projects get built is to sign long-term purchase agreements. That way, renewable developers have a guaranteed customer, ensuring they can finance new projects.

These agreements are emerging as the preferred way to invest in clean energy. Locking in electricity prices for up to 15 years, the deals let companies hedge exposure to volatile natural gas and coal prices, which have historically determined wholesale power prices in the U.S. As wind and solar get cheaper, companies are able to lock in renewable power for less than the average wholesale power price, says Swami Venkataraman, senior vice president at Moodys Investors Service.

Companies are investing in sustainability, not because theyre making a political statement, but because they have a fiduciary duty to protect shareholders and make money, says Mindy Lubber, president of Ceres, a nonprofit sustainability advocate. Even if Trump rolls back Obamas commitment to the Paris climate accord and his signature clean-energy initiative, the Clean Power Plan (CPP), which directs states to lower carbon emissions from power plants, its unlikely to influence investment decisions. Renewable developers werent building a business model premised on the CPP, Serota says.

On Nov. 16, 300 U.S. businesses, including General Mills, EBay, and Intel, called on Trump to support the Paris accord. The sustainable investing trend has global momentum and big players such as Goldman Sachs and Bill Gates, said Amy Myers Jaffe, executive director for energy and sustainability at the University of California at Davis, in an e-mail. Corporate America has lots of millennial customers, and they want to buy from companies with sustainable supply chains and a commitment to renewable energy. I dont see that changing.

The bottom line: Companies should continue investing in renewables despite Trumps promise to roll back clean-energy initiatives.

Continue reading

5 Things ‘Star Wars’ Fans Don’t Understand About ‘Star Wars’

Does it seem like your world is split between people who are irrationally hyped for Star Wars: The Force Awakens and those who are irrationally angry about said hype? Well, there’s a reason for that. It has to do with nostalgia, cynicism, and our very complicated relationship with this franchise.

See, all human attitudes are subject to something I call the Belief In Santa Claus Cynicism Progression, or if you prefer, the Human Santapede. It works like this:

From birth to early childhood, you believe Santa Claus is real and magical;

In late childhood, you find out Santa isn’t real;

In your teens, you find out your parents sometimes can’t afford Christmas gifts;

In your college years, you hear that Santa was created by Coca-Cola for an ad campaign and decide the whole thing is commercialized bullshit;

In adulthood, you see the glow on a child’s face on Christmas morning and decide that Santa is real and magical after all.

Star Wars is like that — the more you dig into it, the uglier it looks, until eventually it … isn’t. What do I mean? Well, it starts with the day you realize …

#5. Star Wars Was A Cynical Mashup Of What Worked Before

Luke, Han, and Darth Vader were literally among the first names I ever knew. George Lucas was writing the first draft of Star Wars at the exact same time my parents were entering the pre-production phase on me — spring of 1974. When my little growing brain was figuring out the names of things a few years later, Star Wars was everywhere — my tiny little universe was Mommy, Daddy, Big Brother, Grandma, Grandpa, Luke Skywalker. I spent more of my childhood imagining how I would live in the Star Wars universe than I did imagining being an adult in ours. This is why I have no idea how to manage my life today, but I can guarantee every exhaust vent on this house has a fucking screen on it.

Toilets, too. Just to be safe.

When I was old enough to understand what a “movie” was — that it was just a thing people made up and not an actual alternate universe I was viewing through a rectangular portal — I was even more amazed. How can a human brain even conceive of something like Darth Vader, or The Force or … any of it? Yeah, I knew pretty early I wanted to create things, too — it seemed like a form of magic.

“Seemed” is in past tense for a reason — these days I know that the roots of Star Wars go back to 1912, when Edgar Rice Burroughs wrote a novel about a human having a swashbuckling space adventure called A Princess of Mars. It was the first mainstream hit that featured a now-familiar formula: spaceships, sword fighting, and magical fantasy shit like telepathy. A decade and a half later, this inspired a writer named Philip Francis Nowlan to create the swashbuckling space adventure Buck Rogers, which launched a wildly successful franchise that spanned radio, TV, film, novels, toys … you name it. The bad guys were called “The Han” and the main villain was a flamboyant dictator in a cape named Killer Kane:

And under the cape, what appears to be a polo shirt.

Seeing the success of Buck Rogers, a comic strip publisher called King Features Syndicate went to one of its writers and said, “Write us something like that. And we mean exactly fucking like it. Make it rain money up in this shit!” The writer, Alex Raymond, came back with Flash Gordon, a shamefully identical comic strip that debuted in 1934 and launched its own lucrative media empire. Flash’s swashbuckling space adventures involved fighting a flamboyant dictator in a red and gold robe with a long mustache named Ming the Merciless:

Merciless to his enemies, merciless to fashion.

Oh, and the live action Flash Gordon episodes would open with a slanted crawl, stating the “Chapter” and giving some backstory:

This is what George Lucas grew up watching. Flash Gordon was his Star Wars. An adult George Lucas, hot off the enormously successful American Graffiti, tried to buy the rights to Flash Gordon to turn it into a big-budget film franchise. They couldn’t come to terms on a deal, so Lucas just decided to just write his own version. That’s all it was.

I mean, you can’t feel bad for King Features Syndicate — it’s the exact process by which they created Flash. In Lucas’ knockoff, the hero was to be called Kane Starkiller, his friend was Han, the villain was to be an emperor with a long mustache and a red cape with gold trim. Lucas was just copying and pasting shit, later changing enough to avoid getting sued.

The rough draft of Star Wars was an incoherent rambling mess, borrowing entire scenes from other movies, mostly Akira Kurosawa samurai films (then again, Kurosawa had borrowed his from American Westerns). This is probably why Darth Vader looks a lot like he’s wearing samurai armor …

It’d be such a different movie with the antlers.

For the space dogfight that would mark the climactic battle at the end of the film, Lucas literally stitched together footage from war movies and documentaries, then just re-filmed them with spaceship models, shot for shot.

In other words, Santa Claus isn’t real. The wondrous fantasy universe I spent every spare moment daydreaming about as a kid turns out to be a young director’s crass, hacky grab for fame and fortune. Lucas had remixed two enormously popular franchises, tossing in the coolest moments from several other movies he liked, to create something that everyone in the industry agreed was a piece of shit. Oh, you didn’t know that part? Yeah, Lucas delayed the movie for six months so they could do emergency re-shoots, and even then most theaters were refusing to show Star Wars until studio arm-twisting and early box office returns changed their mind.

Of course, it defied the odds and became a phenomenon. At which point …

#4. It Soon Became A Vehicle To Sell Action Figures

George Lucas took a massive pay cut in his director’s salary in exchange for all rights to Star Wars merchandise and future sequels. The studio happily complied, saving a cool $350,000 against what they were sure would be purely imaginary merchandise sales (movie merchandise wasn’t a huge business at the time, and remember they thought the movie would bomb).

But George Lucas knew exactly what he was doing: Star Wars toys would wind up generating $27 billion(!) in revenue over the next few decades. Lucas knew that he was, in part, making a series of toy commercials. This is the reason Han Solo didn’t die in the middle of Return of the Jedi, as originally planned — in the words of Harrison Ford, “George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.” Even though these stories took place a “long, long ago” and all of these people are surely dead anyway.

It got to the point that Kenner was cranking out action figures of every single extra seen in the background of every shot (over 100 separate action figures for just the three movies). These were characters who didn’t even have names in the script — George Lucas quickly came up with their names and backstory when it came time to make the toys.

IG-88 was in one scene and had no lines. His original action figure has an eBay bid of 200 dollars.

This is Stage Two of my cynicism cycle. Not only is Santa not real, but behind Santa is a whole bunch of grown-up money concerns. (“So that’s why ‘Santa’ always gave the rich kids nicer clothes!”) See, today no movie studio would make that deal with a young director — merchandising is too important to the bottom line. And I mean, to the point that the merchandising now shapes the movie.

It turns out that one of the several thousand reasons Batman & Robin sucked is the studio forced Joel Schumacher to cram in as many vehicles and costumes as he could, so they could be turned into toys (the studio famously told him the movie should be “toyetic,” a word that should instantly give you a seizure). This is why today big movie franchises get so, well, crowded.

Want to buy everything Avengers: Age of Ultron-related from Toys R Us? That’ll be $1,025.32. Still no Black Widow stuff though.

This is why you need three or four villains in every superhero movie, and like two dozen Transformers designs for each of their sequels. It’s why the third Iron Man movie needed 10 different Iron Man suits …

You remember Sonic Blasting Iron Man, right?

All of those movies needed bloated, convoluted plots to accommodate all of these characters/vehicles/costumes. You can thank George Lucas for that. Because …

#3. George Lucas Created A New Business Model, And Hollywood Would Never Go Back

The question, “Why are all of the most popular movies big-budget special effects spectacles?” seems like a no-brainer. It’s all exciting, dazzling, light-hearted stuff that anybody can enjoy, right? Of course that’s what will rise to the top. But check this out: Here’s a list of the highest-grossing movies for each of the 10 years before Star Wars came along in 1977. I’m putting the genre first; you’ll see why:

1976 – Inspirational sports drama (Rocky)
1975 – Horror/Monster movie (Jaws)
1974 – Screwball parody (Blazing Saddles)
1973 – Heist movie (The Sting)
1972 – Serious gangster drama (The Godfather)
1971 – Musical (Fiddler on the Roof)
1970 – Romance drama (Love Story)
1969 – Action/Western (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid)
1968 – Serious sci-fi drama (2001: A Space Odyssey)
1967 – Comedy/Drama (The Graduate)

Now compare that to the last 10 years:

2015 – Action/Sci-fi (Jurassic World)
2014 – War drama (American Sniper)
2013 – Action/Sci-fi (The Hunger Games: Catching Fire)
2012 – Action/Sci-fi (The Avengers)
2011 – Action/Fantasy (Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2)
2010 – Animated comedy (Toy Story 3)
2009 – Action/Sci-fi (Avatar)
2008 – Action/Fantasy (The Dark Knight)
2007 – Action/Fantasy (Spider-Man 3)
2006 – Action/Fantasy (Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest)
2005 – Action/Sci-fi (Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith)

Not that I have any problem with sci-fi/fantasy action — that’s my genre, too! I’ll let them make action figures out of all this shit.

And hey, it’s not like great original films aren’t still being made — they absolutely are, and some of them are now in the form of TV shows. It’s just that the mega-blockbusters do matter. They’re the cultural touchstones, the shared experiences that bond our childhoods. They’re the movies you can bring up on the playground (and then, the break room) and know that everyone has seen them, the shared references becoming a second language. You know, like how when the Jared Fogle story broke, every single person immediately made the same joke.

But they don’t serve Subway in prison, so … oh, I get it. He’s getting a dick. In the butt.

Well, today if you’re making a movie that can stand at the center of the collective cultural imagination, you’ll need $200 million in production (split between big stars, elaborate stunts, and CGI effects) and another $100 million in promotion. And you’ll need a concept that is a very safe bet — usually a sequel, remake or spinoff. You can thank George Lucas for that, too.

It’s true Lucas didn’t invent the sequel craze (James Bond had already cranked out nine movies before A New Hope came along, even though scientifically Bond’s dick would have fallen off by then). But I do know this: There absolutely was a time when you could look at the top 10 movies of the year and not see a single sequel. That was the case in 1976, the year before Star Wars came out, for instance. But by the time Jedi hit in 1983, sequels had begun to dominate. Raiders of the Lost Ark, Back to the Future, Rambo, Batman, Die Hard, Star Trek … Hollywood was looking for franchises, the promise of a bunch of sequels helped justify the initial investment.


And that was crucial, because those initial investments were getting obscene. The average wide-release film budget in the 1960s was $12 million (adjusted for inflation). By the 1980s it had risen to $40 million. Today? Try $140 fucking million. Oh, and the marketing blitz that it takes to get enough people into the theater to make that money back can run an additional $40 million to $200 million on top of that. Just to get people in to a movie they probably already want to see.

I think, at some point, they were won over.

That right there is why they’re scared to make a blockbuster that doesn’t have built-in brand recognition, so they know they have a certain number of fans in the bank. That’s why the top 10 movies of this year (as of the writing of this article) are six sequels, a remake, a spinoff, and two originals. By the time the year is over, it’s likely only four of the top 20 movies will be originals (I’m going to take a wild guess that Episode VII and the last Hunger Games movie will both wind up there).

Now we reach the “Santa is just a crass corporate mascot” level of cynicism, the point at which you decide there is no magic, or wonder. It’s all just a soulless assembly line. You see The Hunger Games become a hit, and then watch the knockoffs flood in (Divergent, The Maze Runner) and you roll your eyes because it’s just so transparent, so cynical. You decide that it was never about trying to give us a fantastical journey that would elevate our imaginations; it was all about a series of buttons they could push to make money shoot out of our little wallets. “Oh, hey, I wonder if the young attractive guy/girl who’s down on their luck in the first scene will turn out to be the Chosen One?” Screenplays that are just fill-in-the-blanks.

And just when you think it can’t get worse …

Continue reading

12 Financial Planners Share Their Best Tips For Making More Money – Forbes


12 Financial Planners Share Their Best Tips For Making More Money
While there are plenty of simple ways to earn money on the web, it's possible to earn a sizable side income with your own website. By starting a blog or niche website on any topic you're passionate about, you can start a business that can be monetized

Continue reading

Women in the Blogging World – Part 1 – WABI


Women in the Blogging World – Part 1
Market research company eMarketer says more than 4 million women who blog are moms. Some focus on parenthood – others on completely different topics. For one mom in Hermon, starting a blog was a way to reach out to others like her. Three kids plus …

Continue reading

ABC revamps streaming app with new digital slate, adds seven new shows

LOS ANGELES ABC is adding throwbacks like My So Called Life and a handful of new digital series to its streaming app as part of a major revamp.

The network announced the launch of seven new digital shows for its app Wednesday (check out an exclusive clip of Modern Family star Ty Burrell’s digital series below).

A look at ABC’s revamped streaming app.

Image: ABC

The app itself will also get a facelift. There will be a redesigned user interface exclusively foriPhone, iPad, iPod touch and Apple TV that improves discovery and navigation, ABC said.

Our team has completely reimagined the digital viewing experience for ABC fans,Karin Gilford, SVP of Digital Media at ABC Television Network, said in a statement.All of this allows us to expand beyond the bounds of our linear schedule and extend ABC storytelling to viewers across screens andplatforms.

Our team has completely reimagined the digital viewing experience for ABC fans.”

Here’s a full list of the new digital programming (plus an exclusive clip of Burrell’s show):


“After a life of obscurity, Burrell has finally made it big with a starring role in the hit series ‘Wingbot.’ Now he and his non-tourage of best friends Mel, Joel and Johnny get to enjoy some of the perks of being a TV star. Its time for these 40-something husbands and dads to cut loose mostly on weekends and during reasonable hours. Starring: Burrell, Joel Spence, Mel Cowan, Johnny Meeks, all as themselves.”

All My Gay Friends Are Getting Married

“A celebration of gay marriage through the eyes of only mildly bitter single girl, Michelle Collins, whos realizing that everyone is now getting marriedexcept her. Shell sit down with the couples as they recount how they fell in love and relive their epic wedding ceremonies.”

Forever 31

“Comedian Iliza Shlesinger and her friends struggle with the indignities of dead-end jobs, hangovers, dating, infidelity and all the rest of the absurdities of modern adulthood. Created by and starring Shlesinger.”

Tastemades ‘Get Cookin

“Sponsored by Hefty, three popular Tastemakers Erwan Heussaff, Lazarus Lynch, Megan Mitchell – arm viewers with the techniques, tips, and recipes to take their food game to the next level. In addition to showing mouthwatering recipes, these chefs will tell personal stories behind these dishes, why they matter, and why they should be the next things to devour.”

I Can Find $3,000 In Your Home

“eBay millionaire Linda Lightman believes that everyone has at least 52 items totaling at least $3,000 in their homes. Shes going to households around the country to find the treasure in their trash and show you how to make money with insider tips about the online resale value of your stuff.”

Newborn Moms

The comedic story of what its like to be a new parent struggling with sleepless nights, self doubt and swollen boobs. Created by Aurora Browne and Nadine Djoury, the series follows two moms, Rosie and Julia, as they reconcile the kind of mothers they thought they would be with the kind they actually are. Starring Aurora Brown (Rosie) and Nadine Djoury (Julia).”

On The Record

“Provides an intimate ‘story behind the song’ experience where songwriters perform an acoustic version of the song and share the inspiration behind it. The interviews will reveal the songs meaning, personal anecdotes of its evolution, and its impact on the artists life and career. The first installment in the series features Hollywood Records recording artist Shawn Hook discussing his hit singles ‘Wonderful Surprise,’ ‘Million Ways’ and ‘Sound of Your Heart.’ Future artists include Fancy and Yuna.”

Have something to add to this story? Share it in the comments.

Continue reading
Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy | Copyright Notice | Anti Spam Policy | Earnings Disclaimer | Health Disclaimers | Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy