5 ms·

I don't know about that. They gave it like four years and spent a lot of money promoting it and it was still microscopic. They could have tried other things, bu

by chc 5y ago

I don't know about that. They gave it like four years and spent a lot of money promoting it and it was still microscopic. They could have tried other things, but if Ninja couldn't draw viewers, do you really think a bunch of obscure streamers nobody watches having drops would have made a bigger difference? At some point you have to stop throwing good money after bad.

cletus 5y ago
Throwing money at Ninja is really an example of poor execution. What makes Twitch successful is not any one streamer. It's an ecosystem. Raiding is huge on Twitch for streamers supporting other streamers. You don't build a forest by planting one very large tree. A forest is everything from the tallest tree to the undergrowth. > do you really think a bunch of obscure streamers nobody watches having drops would have made a bigger difference? I absolutely do. You see this on Twitch whenever a popular game has drops and the viewer numbers go through the roof. Sure there are a bunch of AFK viewers just wanting the drops but this is a game of numbers. Some are real people. Some will stay. On the streamer income side, I really don't think you can overestimate how huge of an impact Twitch Prime has on Twitch.
- stormbrew 5y ago
  > Throwing money at Ninja is really an example of poor execution. Really agree with this. They should have been trying to pull as many streamers on the verge of success on twitch as they could (newly qualifying partners mostly) rather than trying to get already established talent to come over for big money. I do think they also tried this, I knew of some mid-tier streamers who moved over as well, but they probably could have done more. Ninja was clearly a last ditch effort to save the platform rather than a calculated plan.
- chc 5y ago
  It is true that on Twitch, when a popular game has drops, the viewer numbers go through the roof. But I don't think you can extrapolate that an unpopular platform could pull viewers away from Twitch by having a bunch of unpopular streamers do drops. You'd probably influence which streamers on Mixer got viewers on Mixer, but would it get people to drop Twitch? I strongly doubt it. More to the point, no other platform has succeeded here either. Whatever that Facebook streaming thing is is a non-factor, YouTube streams exist but seem to be used primarily as a way for YouTubers to do events rather than a real Twitch competitor, etc. I'm not sure a Twitch competitor can be viable until Twitch does something to drive people away. The network effect is strong.
pferdone 5y ago
Ninja just recently [0] talked about why he thinks Mixer failed and it was not due to its potential. He specifically mentioned stuff like: needing a hotmail account to register, when you register you had some random name assigned to you and had to go into your profile to change it afterwards, etc. Small stuff basically, but it added up and Microsofts corporate structure prohibited quick adjustments. [0] https://youtu.be/FxBpRQaPIPw https://youtu.be/FxBpRQaPIPw

by chc 5y ago

cletus 5y ago

Throwing money at Ninja is really an example of poor execution. What makes Twitch successful is not any one streamer. It's an ecosystem. Raiding is huge on Twitch for streamers supporting other streamers. You don't build a forest by planting one very large tree. A forest is everything from the tallest tree to the undergrowth. > do you really think a bunch of obscure streamers nobody watches having drops would have made a bigger difference? I absolutely do. You see this on Twitch whenever a popular game has drops and the viewer numbers go through the roof. Sure there are a bunch of AFK viewers just wanting the drops but this is a game of numbers. Some are real people. Some will stay. On the streamer income side, I really don't think you can overestimate how huge of an impact Twitch Prime has on Twitch.

stormbrew 5y ago
> Throwing money at Ninja is really an example of poor execution. Really agree with this. They should have been trying to pull as many streamers on the verge of success on twitch as they could (newly qualifying partners mostly) rather than trying to get already established talent to come over for big money. I do think they also tried this, I knew of some mid-tier streamers who moved over as well, but they probably could have done more. Ninja was clearly a last ditch effort to save the platform rather than a calculated plan.
chc 5y ago
It is true that on Twitch, when a popular game has drops, the viewer numbers go through the roof. But I don't think you can extrapolate that an unpopular platform could pull viewers away from Twitch by having a bunch of unpopular streamers do drops. You'd probably influence which streamers on Mixer got viewers on Mixer, but would it get people to drop Twitch? I strongly doubt it. More to the point, no other platform has succeeded here either. Whatever that Facebook streaming thing is is a non-factor, YouTube streams exist but seem to be used primarily as a way for YouTubers to do events rather than a real Twitch competitor, etc. I'm not sure a Twitch competitor can be viable until Twitch does something to drive people away. The network effect is strong.

pferdone 5y ago

Ninja just recently [0] talked about why he thinks Mixer failed and it was not due to its potential. He specifically mentioned stuff like: needing a hotmail account to register, when you register you had some random name assigned to you and had to go into your profile to change it afterwards, etc. Small stuff basically, but it added up and Microsofts corporate structure prohibited quick adjustments. [0] https://youtu.be/FxBpRQaPIPw https://youtu.be/FxBpRQaPIPw