4 ms·
>it'd be nice if they offered a way for creators to pay for YouTube hosting so they can continue to offer their channels ad free This. I work with a small art
by acomjean 6y ago
>it'd be nice if they offered a way for creators to pay for YouTube hosting so they can continue to offer their channels ad free
This.
I work with a small art organization, and we've started to put our artists videos online (we couldn't have an event this year). Youtube makes it easy. but like flickr they put ads in and there is no way to get rid of them. If we could pay for the service we probably would. I'm not sure how much it would be worth though.
- PragmaticPulp 6y agoVimeo serves the paid, ad-free video hosting niche. They're probably celebrating this latest announcement from YouTube. YouTube has the advantage of organic traffic and discovery, though. Nothing stopping you from uploading the video to both services for the best of both worlds.
- neurostimulant 6y agoVimeo is great but keep in mind that it's blocked in some countries, which could be problematic if you want your video accessible in those countries.
- ehsankia 6y agoThis is like being on Play Store vs distributing the app yourself. You're paying a cut for the eyeballs and distribution Youtube provides. The alternative would be for you to pay Google their share of money they would've made if they had ads enabled on your channel, which would be proportional to how many views your video gets. It makes sense since these channels have their own in-video ads which they make money from, and Youtube isn't getting a cut of that, it's similar to how app stores don't allow apps to have their own monetization which bypasses theirs. That being said, having the creator payback Youtube depending on the number of views creates very weird incentives... If they were harsher, they would've disallowed in-video ads completely and force channels to use Youtube ads.