4 ms·
Because Youtube can only make sense to run within Google. Youtube's actual service of providing free HD streaming video in exchange for showing the viewers ads
by somesortofthing 5y ago
Because Youtube can only make sense to run within Google. Youtube's actual service of providing free HD streaming video in exchange for showing the viewers ads is not, has never been, and cannot be profitable. Totally free, unlimited HD video streaming is just too expensive. It can only exist as part of a huge conglomerate because the only purpose Youtube can serve is to attract people into the ecosystem it's part of. No other company has an ecosystem valuable enough to justify losing that much money on Youtube.
- mohanmcgeek 5y agoThe day Google shows a split up between YouTube ad revenue vs the rest, it's going to be an AWS moment. I don't know why people believe YouTube is a loss maker. My guess is that it makes up 25% of the ad income
- zokier 5y agoAlphabet has been reporting youtube ad revenue separately since last year or so: https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/3/21121207/youtube-google-alphabet-earnings-revenue-first-time-reveal-q4-2019 https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/3/21121207/youtube-google-al... In their latest (Q3/21) report they are hairs breadth away from Netflix revenue figures: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/digital/youtube-q3-2021-earnings-1235036727/ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/digital/youtube-q... Considering that Netflix is profitable with the immense cost of producing their own content, I don't find it far fetched that Youtube would be profitable too (albeit with very different cost structure).
- Nasrudith 5y agoFixed expectations from before Google bought them/it was stand-alone profitable perhaps? Although people got over the image of Amazon not making any money.