Pretty poor journalism, the article is written as if there were no alternatives to youtube for hosting. There are a couple of dozen companies in the video hosting/serving space from Brightcove to Viddler. Wikipedia even has a "List of video hosting services" page.
Our focus is on consolidating your web video. Many companies leverage YouTube, that makes sense. We help them kill the outbound link created by the YouTube embed on their site. You can host with us or YouTube and your video players will all look the same.
It is not very clear from your website so have a few questions:
- do you transcode on your servers to support different devices?
- it appears from the techcrunch article your PC based players are using RTMP. which essentially is a flash based solution(?). Is there a html5 based solution as well?
- Is there support for livestreaming or is this just progressive download?
- How are you different from these services: Brightcove/Ooyala/Panvidea/etc...
It's part of the product - customers are using it to transition from YouTube to a more professional (no outbound link, real-time data, customization, etc.) video platform (us).
What makes this company different ?