RANT: Big New Youtube Google+ Changes Nov 2013

[TheWelly888]

^^
I agree 100% with what SixShooter says. I have installed Adblock on my Chrome browser and my YT watching experience improved greatly. It also allows me to look at newspaper web pages without my browser having to reboot every 5 seconds during uploading of the home page!

Only problem is that YT has a monopoly on internet videos and Vimeo has shortcomings (eg no capacity to add closed captions/subtitles)

I am missing being able to interact positively with YT content producers now that I deleted my YT channel.

[EEVblog]

So, you have an audience.  You quit your day job to make YT work for you (grats on that part your hard work and time paid off) but your audience, that you care so much about, is more than likely using ADP + noscript so all of your hard work is a few pennies per 10k views if that.

No, you are wrong, it's nothing like a few pennies per 10K views. I'm not allowed to say the exact figure but it's way higher than that on average

Frankly I do not see how you manage to make any living wage off of YT unless you have 5 million views each vid and you pump out a lot of vids.

Once again, youtube views alone is not enough to live off, that's why I have other revenue streams.
And like I said in my Ignite video, you need roughly 100K views per day to make a full time living from it. But depends entirely upon what your idea of a full time wage is.

I mean I had 8k view spread out over a bunch of videos and made $2.02.

That is likely because your channel is right down the food chain (i.e. not popular enough). The higher up the youtube food chain you go, the more slice of the higher paying ad revenue you get. It's not one value for all people, it's all about how youtube ranks your channel and a particular video, and how the big advertisers want their ad money spent.
If you stuck with youtube for long enough and your channel got popular enough, you would see very significant step changes in your revenue as you progress up the food chain.
Also, it is highly dependent upon the type of video and the keywords. Not all videos are equal, one video can make a lot more than another video with the same views, once again it's the spread of how the advertiser wants to spend their money.
But it's clear that never happened for you, so you've wrongly concluded it's the same linear extrapolation for everyone.

[timelessbeing]

I would also follow the EEVBlog wherever it went.

[JoannaK]

Honestly, the only reason I watch the EEVBlog videos on You Tube is because that's where they're hosted.

Agree ... Actually I agree the entire post.. but wanted to cut the quote. Since the files are there, I\ll use youtube. Not cause I want to.

Also there are quite many (under 100) channels I regularly watch on youtube, so even if Dave would move, I would keep on following at lease some of those on toob.

[EEVblog]

Honestly, the only reason I watch the EEVBlog videos on You Tube is because that's where they're hosted.

Agree ... Actually I agree the entire post.. but wanted to cut the quote. Since the files are there, I\ll use youtube. Not cause I want to.
Also there are quite many (under 100) channels I regularly watch on youtube, so even if Dave would move, I would keep on following at lease some of those on toob.

That's why I said it's likely I'd survive moving away from youtube.
At least in the short term, my website ad revenue wouldn't stop overnight. But long term is a different matter. A very large part of the industry deems social media success and influence to be popularity on youtube. If I don't exist at all on youtube, then to many of them I'm "off the grid" and hence lack the influence and visibility I currently do, and not backed up by publicly accessible figures etc. That could lead to a large drop in revenue over time.
For youtube to be booted as the "only game in town" would require almost every content producer to abandon ship, and that's simply not possible. There is no other video CDN system that can compete on the same scale.

[timelessbeing]

What about using another CDN in addition to YT?

[jancumps]

If the advertisers value you based on YouTube views, any additional source for the videos would have negative impact.

[Six_Shooter]

With all of the backlash against G+ it's pretty obvious, at least to me, that there will be a migration away from You Tube use. I'm sure you'll see less new channels being started on You Tube and started on other video sharing sites, it's just going to take time. Which site will that be? Who knows, it may not even exist yet. I don't see this happening very quickly, because people are so used to using You Tube, that it's almost ingrained in our society, much like Google has become. It used to be when we needed to look up information, we would go to an encyclopedia, or the library to look through the collections of books, now we "Google" something, just like it used to be "I'm going to share this video with my friends" has become "I'm going to You Tube this."

Once people start breaking free of this mentality, it won't be seen as something to measure success by, personally I've never measured someone's success by how many views they get on You Tube, nor would I penalize them for using another source, but that's beside the point.

At this point You Tube just has a very strong market share of video sharing, but if they keep going the way they are, they will push more and more people away from the service and will be abandoned by everyone but the hard core users, remember MySpace?

[jancumps]

When that happens, how are we going to know if it is because of G+ ?

[Six_Shooter]

You won't, at least it won't be solely because of G+, it will be a combination of everything that keeps changing that doesn't need to, forcing people to move to other video sharing sites.

This latest G+ fiasco is just the tipping point.

[EEVblog]

What about using another CDN in addition to YT?

That would just dilute my views, comments, and cost me extra time in upload and management. It pays for a full time content producer to consolidate all this stuff in one place.
I grudgingly produce a podcast version of the show because some people still want it, but no one is really asking for an alternative host to youtube. A couple of people just want me to quit youtube in protest, which as I've explained is a very poor option.

[EEVblog]

With all of the backlash against G+ it's pretty obvious, at least to me, that there will be a migration away from You Tube use. I'm sure you'll see less new channels being started on You Tube and started on other video sharing sites, it's just going to take time.

Why would any new video content producer chose anything other than Youtube?
Virtually all video bloggers use youtube, so any newbie who wants to make a go of it will naturally chose youtube. You need a g+ account to do it? they won't care.

At this point You Tube just has a very strong market share of video sharing, but if they keep going the way they are, they will push more and more people away from the service and will be abandoned by everyone but the hard core users, remember MySpace?

I don't like the comparison with Myspace because it's chalk and cheese. Youtube isn't the huge success it is just because "it's Youtube", it's because it works on a huge technical level. CDN hosting for video is incredibly complex and expensive business (perhaps THE biggest problem in all of internet service hosting), and no one else can touch youtube in that regard. And it's not like someone can just start a site (e.g. Facebook) that competes and rent some cloud server space until they grow, the technical infrastructure is much more complex than a social media site like MySpace.

[Six_Shooter]

It's popularity cycles. At some point YT will fall out of favor will the masses, and it's already moving that way, which is why there are other video hosting sites popping up. If YT was the great success they want us to believe, no other sites would exist.

There seems to be enough people that don't want G+ accounts and so anybody looking to start a new channel (blogging or otherwise) that doesn't want a G+ account will go elsewhere.

I've always found that if one form of a certain type of item, real or virtual, can be created, another and possibly better version can also be created, regardless of how difficult it may be.

[EEVblog]

It's popularity cycles. At some point YT will fall out of favor will the masses, and it's already moving that way, which is why there are other video hosting sites popping up. If YT was the great success they want us to believe, no other sites would exist.

Not so. Other sites will always appear as there will always be people who think they can do it better. That's the same for every industry.

[wilheldp]

I consume a lot of online video content, and I have seen some major channels (namely Channel Awesome/TGWTG) moving to alternatives to YouTube such as BlipTV.  I don't like the Blip player because of inconsistent compatibility with Apple computers, but it is a viable alternative to YT.  A lot of YouTubers are also producing content on TwitchTV, and storing some of their videos as Twitch highlights instead of uploading to YT.

There's no doubt that YT is the 800 pound gorilla right now, but content producers looking to simply maximize ad revenue are actively seeking other providers.

[EEVblog]

I consume a lot of online video content, and I have seen some major channels (namely Channel Awesome/TGWTG) moving to alternatives to YouTube such as BlipTV.  I don't like the Blip player because of inconsistent compatibility with Apple computers, but it is a viable alternative to YT.

How so?
It doesn't even show the number of video views, have a rating system, or have audience interaction with comments.

[wilheldp]

In the case of Channel Awesome, they host the video comments and rating system on their own site.  EEVBlog could probably do the same since you already have a fairly active forum, but they system has a high barrier to entry for new content providers trying to gain an audience.

[EEVblog]

In the case of Channel Awesome, they host the video comments and rating system on their own site.  EEVBlog could probably do the same since you already have a fairly active forum, but they system has a high barrier to entry for new content providers trying to gain an audience.

But that's the whole point. It's about being a competitor to Youtube, which it clearly isn't the same league if it doesn't have that basic stuff.

[wilheldp]

For the record, I'm not in favor of you dropping YouTube.  YT does have some technical issues that annoy me at times, but for the most part, it works well.  I don't like G+, but then again, I hardly ever leave YT comments.  I also already had a G+ account, so the switch didn't really affect me at all.

I was just providing an example of other content providers that have dropped YT in favor of an alternative.  I think they have greater control over the advertising on Blip, and they get a larger percentage of the revenue.  Of course, that is a guess on my part since I don't know their finances.

[timelessbeing]

I agree that YT isn't here to stay. The most important thing I've learned about technology is that it is always changing and unpredictable. There will be newer, more forward thinking ideas, and websites like YT will become a memory. You have to keep your mind open. For example, two trends I'm seeing are the convergence of technology, and new ways to interact with it.

[EEVblog]

I agree that YT isn't here to stay. The most important thing I've learned about technology is that it is always changing and unpredictable. There will be newer, more forward thinking ideas, and websites like YT will become a memory. You have to keep your mind open.

Sure, and if a suitable competing site comes along, I'll jump on it. But at present, there isn't really anything that competes that makes it worth the switch.
And as stated, given the huge logistical issues with video CDN, any competition isn't going to happen overnight, esp if everyone switches.
e.g. Vimeo and BlipTV might work fine in their current niche state, but do they have the infrastructure to handle the volume Youtube handles?

[Dark Prognosis]

So, you have an audience.  You quit your day job to make YT work for you (grats on that part your hard work and time paid off) but your audience, that you care so much about, is more than likely using ADP + noscript so all of your hard work is a few pennies per 10k views if that.

No, you are wrong, it's nothing like a few pennies per 10K views. I'm not allowed to say the exact figure but it's way higher than that on average

I said a few pennies because ADBlock Plus, and Noscript makes sure you do not get paid (a subject I noticed right off you did not even respond to).

Frankly I do not see how you manage to make any living wage off of YT unless you have 5 million views each vid and you pump out a lot of vids.

Once again, youtube views alone is not enough to live off, that's why I have other revenue streams.
And like I said in my Ignite video, you need roughly 100K views per day to make a full time living from it. But depends entirely upon what your idea of a full time wage is.

A living wage is that which I would not make doing a for pay job or say what I used to make in 1998 which was 21 an hour.  An almost godly wage back then and now I consider a simple living wage considering most people in the USA make $7.25 to $8.50 an hour (our federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour).

I mean I had 8k view spread out over a bunch of videos and made $2.02.

That is likely because your channel is right down the food chain (i.e. not popular enough). The higher up the youtube food chain you go, the more slice of the higher paying ad revenue you get. It's not one value for all people, it's all about how youtube ranks your channel and a particular video, and how the big advertisers want their ad money spent.
If you stuck with youtube for long enough and your channel got popular enough, you would see very significant step changes in your revenue as you progress up the food chain.
Also, it is highly dependent upon the type of video and the keywords. Not all videos are equal, one video can make a lot more than another video with the same views, once again it's the spread of how the advertiser wants to spend their money.
But it's clear that never happened for you, so you've wrongly concluded it's the same linear extrapolation for everyone.

Too many variables and all tricks to make sure they make the money and most people do not.

[EEVblog]

No, you are wrong, it's nothing like a few pennies per 10K views. I'm not allowed to say the exact figure but it's way higher than that on average

I said a few pennies because ADBlock Plus, and Noscript makes sure you do not get paid (a subject I noticed right off you did not even respond to).

Huh?
I responded to your (incorrect) statement that I would get paid pennies because of Adblock etc, I do NOT get paid pennies or anything close to the low value that you got paid, and I went to some length to explain to you why that you got bugger all, and I and others get paid fairly well (but not enough to live on for me). It seems that Adblock has little effect on my youtube income, although it's hard to get data on that if at all. Your problem of lack of income is more likely to be the reasons I mentioned, instead of being due mainly to Adblock etc. I would like to know exactly where you get your data from that shows how many of your viewers use Adblock and how much you actually lost because of it. To my knowledge no such data is available, but I stand to be corrected.
I've been using Adsense since before Adblock came along, and meager income was common back then for me too when my sites were not very popular.

A living wage is that which I would not make doing a for pay job or say what I used to make in 1998 which was 21 an hour.  An almost godly wage back then and now I consider a simple living wage considering most people in the USA make $7.25 to $8.50 an hour (our federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour).

I get around 25K-30K views/day, and at that level I could live off that if I absolutely had to, I would not starve. It is above the minimum wage. Like said in my Ignite thing, I recon you need about 100K views to day to make a really comfortable living by Australian standards.
Look here for any channel:
http://socialblade.com/youtube/user/eevblog
That Social Blade earning estimate has a large window, why? because there are many factors involved in how much anyone can and does earn.

Too many variables and all tricks to make sure they make the money and most people do not.

I think you are under some misapprehension about how Adsense works. Don't blame Google, blame the advertisers if they don't want to spend their ad dollars on a channel with poor keyword SEO, a few 10's of thousands of views, and poor interaction metrics. Google Adwords provides the intelligent mechanism to allow the advertisers to spend their money however they want. It's a well known fact in the industry that the big advertisers like to pay more to be featured on the top channels when it comes to blanket advertising. Different ballgame again for targeted keywords, and you may not have had keywords that anyone wants to spend any money on, or the money get diluted because of blanket use of the keyword.
Simply put, there are many variables that would explain why you paid bugger all, to say it's due mainly to Adblock is to ignore those facts.

[SpectrHz]

Bah, youtube. I have considered deleting my account, but I keep it since I like Daves videos, etc. As others here have said youtube popularity will wane and a new sensation will come along, and do the same thing Google has. It's depressing and a right annoyance that Google continues to rip the website apart, but so many like Dave can't just leave their majority veiwer base behind. Like when so many in Daves latest contest comments section were complaining that they had to use the forum to enter it, so there is clearly a lot of people who would be angry if he switched.

[Dark Prognosis]

Let me break it down for you Dave.  You would not need near as many views to make the same amount of money as you do OR you could have the same amount of views and make a ton more if it were not for Adblock plus and NoScript.  Don't deny it because everyone, including Google, has admitted how much revenue it has "stolen" from them and from them means from you as well.

That was my point.

edit:  So, if I had used keywords of say SEX, TOYS, CARS, SPORTS CARS, and my content had nothing to do with them they would have made more just not as much as if 70% of viewers weren't using adblocking software (no ads no pay)?

As far as where I get my data it comes from looking around the web and spending weeks listening to CEOs/CFOs and content providers.  I followed links to links that had links in them.  If you want just a one click point of reference it isn't going to happen for various reasons but even Google had enough of ADP, finally, and had pulled them off of the cell phone store.  They said, was back around 2007, they wouldn't touch them as they figured it was a non issue but that was 6 years ago and it is a HUGE issue now because if an ad is blocked they don't get paid either.

I use Noscript and Adblock Plus since they came out and the first place I block is google-analytics.com the next is anything with google in its name.  They get nothing from any site I visit, nor the people using that for money, and that hurts everyone but most people do the same.

Was sort of funny to see ADP advertise recently.