| General > General Technical Chat |
| Are we becoming old, cranky scrooges in these forums. |
| << < (17/21) > >> |
| EEVblog:
--- Quote from: Someone on May 28, 2020, 07:53:13 am --- --- Quote from: EEVblog on May 28, 2020, 05:24:26 am --- --- Quote from: Someone on May 26, 2020, 10:52:00 pm ---Youtube has sucked up content producers because it was paying the best, simple as that. --- End quote --- Youtube existed for 6-7 years before anyone really made a cent from it. No shortage of creators then, in fact the entire platform was build by these creators earning nothing. Creators like me started because we wanted to share information and make a name for themselves doing so. For me personally, it was an extension of doing the same thing in print form with my magazine project articles and then my web site. --- End quote --- I've been around long enough to know that, and was there in the days of easy monetisation. Youtube aggressively built a monopoly by attracting the best content away from competing platforms with a simply better deal. Now with little competition the rates for content are too low to support building an income around it. Why that changed is multifaceted and not any single force. You've shared quite some detail on the economics for yourself, and why other platforms don't work. --- End quote --- Err, no, they didn't. They created an entirely new platform where you could Broadcast Yourself. Most creators didn't come from "competing platforms", they simply saw a cool new way to express yourself so they decided to do it for fun. Remember, all the early Youtubers didn't earn a cent, and didn't even know there was a future making money on the platform, they just did it for fun. There was never any competition for Youtube. You are completely wrong on the monetisation. Except for certain demographics like political or social justice type channels, and kids channels, revenue has never dropped. In fact you used to have to wait to be invited into the partner program to earn money, now it's instant from day one. The reason for as you say "rates for content are too low to support building an income around it." is because of the massive expansion of platform itself and the number of people joining. I've done a video on this and how my channel has grown continuously for a decade, non-stop, yet my channel ranking has dropped because of natural platform expansion. |
| Someone:
--- Quote from: SparkyFX on May 27, 2020, 01:23:08 pm --- --- Quote from: Someone on May 26, 2020, 10:52:00 pm ---"cranky scrooges" vs low post count demanders. There is an endless supply of eager/optimistic young people who will answer questions feeling like they are contributing. This group strongly overlaps with those with little to no real experience or ability (Dunning–Kruger etc). If left to run you end up with a forum full of questions and rubbish answers, which encourages more of the same behaviour. --- End quote --- Those are predicates that can be attributed by anyone to everyone. All it needs is the feeling of superiority. So ... we close the forum because "you should read that up by yourself" is the proper answer to all questions? Of course not, because referring literature, leading to the proper search terms, sources and such is also an important part of conversation. To understand that all you need to remember is that it took you time, effort of teachers/instructors, the need to solve problems to learn things too. --- End quote --- When the value to experienced people sharing interesting knowledge is gone, they leave too. So you're left with just the low rent material easily answerable with some basic research. Different people will value their time differently, at some point wading through the constant flow of content no longer becomes worth the effort. As experienced people leave its a positive feedback that increases the noise over time if not managed. There are boards I avoid on this forum, some that are outside my area of interests/knowledge, but some that are full of inane and repetitive questions. |
| Someone:
--- Quote from: EEVblog on May 28, 2020, 08:01:38 am --- --- Quote from: Someone on May 28, 2020, 07:53:13 am --- --- Quote from: EEVblog on May 28, 2020, 05:24:26 am --- --- Quote from: Someone on May 26, 2020, 10:52:00 pm ---Youtube has sucked up content producers because it was paying the best, simple as that. --- End quote --- Youtube existed for 6-7 years before anyone really made a cent from it. No shortage of creators then, in fact the entire platform was build by these creators earning nothing. Creators like me started because we wanted to share information and make a name for themselves doing so. For me personally, it was an extension of doing the same thing in print form with my magazine project articles and then my web site. --- End quote --- I've been around long enough to know that, and was there in the days of easy monetisation. Youtube aggressively built a monopoly by attracting the best content away from competing platforms with a simply better deal. Now with little competition the rates for content are too low to support building an income around it. Why that changed is multifaceted and not any single force. You've shared quite some detail on the economics for yourself, and why other platforms don't work. --- End quote --- Err, no, they didn't. They created an entirely new platform where you could Broadcast Yourself. Most creators didn't come from "competing platforms", they simply saw a cool new way to express yourself so they decided to do it for fun. Remember, all the early Youtubers didn't earn a cent, and didn't even know there was a future making money on the platform, they just did it for fun. There was never any competition for Youtube. You are completely wrong on the monetisation. Except for certain demographics like political or social justice type channels, and kids channels, revenue has never dropped. In fact you used to have to wait to be invited into the partner program to earn money, now it's instant from day one. The reason for as you say "rates for content are too low to support building an income around it." is because of the massive expansion of platform itself and the number of people joining. I've done a video on this and how my channel has grown continuously for a decade, non-stop, yet my channel ranking has dropped because of natural platform expansion. --- End quote --- You come with it from your (quite unusual) perspective, and plainly incorrect claims. Right now youtube is not allowing monetising of every account right off the bat: These things are constantly in flux and the rules change all the time. Payment rates are all over the place, your experiences are not typical of most content producers. Even if you maintained CPM rates that isn't true of others (or new entrants, or the majority). As an established and volume content supplier you are seeing quite different mechanisms than "regular" smaller channels. There were (and still are) many different video platforms with a range of different monetisation methods, youtube was never the only choice. There has been continuous competition of those platforms to retain content producers. Lols for putting up a video response.... right back to the discussion of trying to push chunks of off topic content rather than taking the time to present the relevant bit. |
| EEVblog:
--- Quote from: Someone on May 28, 2020, 08:33:14 am ---You come with it from your (quite unusual) perspective, and plainly incorrect claims. Right now youtube is not allowing monetising of every account right off the bat: These things are constantly in flux and the rules change all the time. --- End quote --- Forgot about that, that's very recent, but the threshold is still very low, way lower than it used to 7+ years back when it wasn't automatic, you had to be invited. --- Quote ---Payment rates are all over the place --- End quote --- That's always been the case, nothing has changed. --- Quote --- your experiences are not typical of most content producers. Even if you maintained CPM rates that isn't true of others (or new entrants, or the majority). As an established and volume content supplier you are seeing quite different mechanisms than "regular" smaller channels. --- End quote --- No, I'm not. Smaller content producers making the same content can expect similar CPM rates to me. It's not profitable, not because of what you claim, that monetisation has dropped, it's because of what I said that the market and competition is vastly bigger now, and that's not Youtube's fault, it's natural growth. --- Quote ---There were (and still are) many different video platforms with a range of different monetisation methods, youtube was never the only choice. There has been continuous competition of those platforms to retain content producers. --- End quote --- No, there hasn't for all practical purposes Youtube have retained a 99% monopoly since they started. That has changed in the last couple of years with Twitch for live streaming. I'm done discussing this. |
| Someone:
--- Quote from: EEVblog on May 28, 2020, 09:11:20 am --- --- Quote from: Someone on May 28, 2020, 08:33:14 am ---There were (and still are) many different video platforms with a range of different monetisation methods, youtube was never the only choice. There has been continuous competition of those platforms to retain content producers. --- End quote --- No, there hasn't for all practical purposes Youtube have retained a 99% monopoly since they started. That has changed in the last couple of years with Twitch for live streaming. --- End quote --- Pure hyperbole, 3rd party firms put youtube around the 70% share range (when excluding adult content). For a language neutral basis that share may be even lower. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |