3 ms·

I agree that if your hobby starts making more money than your actual job it's really attractive to think of a media startup then. It doesn't mean though that yo

I agree that if your hobby starts making more money than your actual job it's really attractive to think of a media startup then. It doesn't mean though that you just switch. You have to know how volatile it might be. You have to consider possibilities of outcomes. You have to calculate risks. If you want to let your hobby make money for you then you have to do it professionally. And for that you need major investments and a business model. Completely relying on views count is a bad business model. Being paid for writing actual code is different to talking about writing code in videos and being paid eventually.

onion2k 9y ago
I don't think you understand the amount of money we're talking about here. There are YouTube channels that started as side projects that have grown in to multi-million dollar profit businesses. Keeping that as a side project because "views count is a bad business model" would be completely crazy. Relying on YouTube is no different to relying on Google, or Amazon, or any service that people build successful businesses on. Yes, there's a risk having a single critical factor, but that doesn't automatically mean the risk is too great to still be worthwhile. The real problem here is that YouTube has an effective monopoly as the only working platform for monetized online video. If that's the business you're in then you have to use YouTube.
- unicornporn 9y ago
  > The real problem here is that YouTube has an effective monopoly as the only working platform for monetized online video. Vimeo has their VOD service. It works very differently, but still...
  - gkya 9y ago
    Vimeo and Youtube are two very different things, like a sniper rifle and a machine-gun is. Vimeo is primarily a video hosting service, whereas Youtube is a publishing hub.
    - unicornporn 9y ago
      > Vimeo and Youtube are two very different things, like a sniper rifle and a machine-gun is. That is actually a great simile. :)
- unfunco 9y ago
  YouTube creators have built those multi-million dollar businesses on top of a free service, you can't expect many rights when you don't pay to use the product, regardless of whether or not you're making money for the host. I can see both sides of the argument, but developing an application and paying to host it on AWS or GCP is different to creating A video and uploading it somewhere for free.
  - talmand 9y ago
    So you are somehow claiming that YouTube offered these services purely out of the kindness of their hearts and didn't receive any form of revenue whatsoever?
  - DanBC 9y ago
    How many youtubers are "multi million dollar businesses"?
    - unfunco 9y ago
      I imagine a there are a fair number of them, all of the top ten are earning over $10M per year. http://uk.businessinsider.com/highest-paid-youtube-stars-2017-12/#no-8-tie-ryan-toysreview-11-million-2 http://uk.businessinsider.com/highest-paid-youtube-stars-201...
  - Tannic 9y ago
    Oh come on. The videos generate ad revenue and youtube takes a great deal of that. It’s a revenue sharing “agreement” (read:monopoly takes its cut).

onion2k 9y ago

I don't think you understand the amount of money we're talking about here. There are YouTube channels that started as side projects that have grown in to multi-million dollar profit businesses. Keeping that as a side project because "views count is a bad business model" would be completely crazy. Relying on YouTube is no different to relying on Google, or Amazon, or any service that people build successful businesses on. Yes, there's a risk having a single critical factor, but that doesn't automatically mean the risk is too great to still be worthwhile. The real problem here is that YouTube has an effective monopoly as the only working platform for monetized online video. If that's the business you're in then you have to use YouTube.

unicornporn 9y ago
> The real problem here is that YouTube has an effective monopoly as the only working platform for monetized online video. Vimeo has their VOD service. It works very differently, but still...
- gkya 9y ago
  Vimeo and Youtube are two very different things, like a sniper rifle and a machine-gun is. Vimeo is primarily a video hosting service, whereas Youtube is a publishing hub.
  - unicornporn 9y ago
    > Vimeo and Youtube are two very different things, like a sniper rifle and a machine-gun is. That is actually a great simile. :)
unfunco 9y ago
YouTube creators have built those multi-million dollar businesses on top of a free service, you can't expect many rights when you don't pay to use the product, regardless of whether or not you're making money for the host. I can see both sides of the argument, but developing an application and paying to host it on AWS or GCP is different to creating A video and uploading it somewhere for free.
- talmand 9y ago
  So you are somehow claiming that YouTube offered these services purely out of the kindness of their hearts and didn't receive any form of revenue whatsoever?
- DanBC 9y ago
  How many youtubers are "multi million dollar businesses"?
  - unfunco 9y ago
    I imagine a there are a fair number of them, all of the top ten are earning over $10M per year. http://uk.businessinsider.com/highest-paid-youtube-stars-2017-12/#no-8-tie-ryan-toysreview-11-million-2 http://uk.businessinsider.com/highest-paid-youtube-stars-201...
- Tannic 9y ago
  Oh come on. The videos generate ad revenue and youtube takes a great deal of that. It’s a revenue sharing “agreement” (read:monopoly takes its cut).