The Current Source Quits Youtube

[EEVblog]

Just announced on Twitter:

[madsbarnkob]

I must admit that his conclusion is heart breaking for someone trying to achieve the same.

In this socialblade compare it is clear that despite he has almost 3 times as many subs, his views and earnings are comparable to mine: https://socialblade.com/youtube/compare/UCSukTlgTEWiL-sl0UeYeJvQ/the%20current%20source

I understand his frustration fully, it is many hours put into something that you hope to pay itself back, which is why I do not aim for that, it simply seems too far away.

[gnif]

Sad to see another channel go. I am also producing some content for youtube these days and slowly building my subscriber base (> 500 now ), however, I am not holding out hopes to ever support myself from this. I do get some income via patreon for the open-source projects I work on, but it's not nearly enough to even consider it as a primary source of income. I do it mostly for fun

[EEVblog]

I understand his frustration fully, it is many hours put into something that you hope to pay itself back

Which is why the "old days" of Youtube were better. No one was making a living from it, it didn't even enter a creators mind, you just did the videos for the fun of it.
Now the number of big channels is insane, and everyone expects (hopes) to become financially successful at it.

[tggzzz]

He makes reference to "frequency of upload". If that implies that yootoob prefers lots of uploads, then that's a shame.

I would far rather a channel have a small number of excellent videos than a large number of me-too videos exemplifing the "least publishable unit" concept.

[EEVblog]

He makes reference to "frequency of upload". If that implies that yootoob prefers lots of uploads, then that's a shame.

Yes, that's ho the algorithm is currently jigged. Upload frequency and watch time are the two key metrics.

[tggzzz]

He makes reference to "frequency of upload". If that implies that yootoob prefers lots of uploads, then that's a shame.

Yes, that's ho the algorithm is currently jigged. Upload frequency and watch time are the two key metrics.

Watch time is relatively sane, although I'd be interested in the proportion that watched to the end.

Upload frequency works against my interests, since it encourages video diarrhoea.

[EEVblog]

Upload frequency works against my interests, since it encourages video diarrhoea.

Depends on the content type.
News and other commentary channels for example can upload every day and it's the content people signed up for.
Even engineering channels can upload every day if that's the style of content, e.g. live shows, project progress videos etc.

[tggzzz]

Upload frequency works against my interests, since it encourages video diarrhoea.

Depends on the content type.
News and other commentary channels for example can upload every day and it's the content people signed up for.
Even engineering channels can upload every day if that's the style of content, e.g. live shows, project progress videos etc.

News channels, yes.

Other channels, less so. Far too many video channels are unedited talking heads, where the heads hum and har too much, take forever to get to and interesting point, and it is impractical to skip through it to see whether there are any interesting points. Your channel avoids the latter by having a table of contents with time.

For an example of a terse, informative video channel where the video is key, have a look at the Pace basic soldering lessons, https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL926EC0F1F93C1837
It is no coincidence that the audience's time is money, and that the distribution was difficult.

Written articles have to be considered (i.e. not constructed on the fly), can be speed read, so I can read 10* more articles than videos.

My eye/brain time is very limited. Guess where I am going to apply it!

[EEVblog]

News channels, yes.

Other channels, less so. Far too many video channels are unedited talking heads, where the heads hum and har too much, take forever to get to and interesting point, and it is impractical to skip through it to see whether there are any interesting points. Your channel avoids the latter by having a table of contents with time.

For an example of a terse, informative video channel where the video is key, have a look at the Pace basic soldering lessons, https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL926EC0F1F93C1837
It is no coincidence that the audience's time is money, and that the distribution was difficult.
Written articles have to be considered (i.e. not constructed on the fly), can be speed read, so I can read 10* more articles than videos.

My eye/brain time is very limited. Guess where I am going to apply it!

And you are welcome to. But it's called YOUtube for a reason. People get to know and want to see/hear the person they follow. You don't really get that from a blog article or strict concise info video. It's the reason why even the best produced corporate videos completely die on Youtube.