6 ms·

> She’s uploaded 117 subscriber-only videos so far, and each one only gets around 150 views on average. Her most viewed video has around 815 views. … Her bandwi

by yashap 5y ago

> She’s uploaded 117 subscriber-only videos so far, and each one only gets around 150 views on average. Her most viewed video has around 815 views. … Her bandwidth usage was within the top 1 percent of Vimeo users, the company said Well that’s telling. Sounds like a company that’s on the rocks trying to squeeze money out of a small number of users to survive.

throwaway27727 5y ago
Apparently her videos are multiple-hour long. So, caveats applied.
- yakak 5y ago
  It probably could be expressed in a more resource representative way, but being in their top 1% and therefore needing to negotiate a custom plan apparently only requires 2TB of monthly bandwidth.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
FrenchDevRemote 5y ago
To be fair more than 9 out of 10 of youtube users don't get +10K views too...
- ipaddr 5y ago
  100,000 views = will come out to 100 dollar payout on youtube.
- MomoXenosaga 5y ago
  I have to give it to YouTube they are keeping tons of obscure videos alive. For years.
tyingq 5y ago
Not that it excuses what's happening, or that it really puts her in the "top 1 percent"...but despite the low views, she could still be using a lot of bandwidth. Her videos appear to be tutorials that are pretty long, most of them 1 hour+: https://loish.net/tutorials/ https://loish.net/tutorials/ It wouldn't take many views/month to use a lot of bandwidth, assuming her customers watch the whole thing. That's perhaps not worth $3500/year, but I can see why she might need a higher end plan with such long videos. $25/month may not be enough to cover the bandwidth. What's confusing, though, is that their pricing page shows the highest-tier plan as $75/month, which is $900/year and described as "Unlimited live streaming - 7TB total storage". There's also the next plan down, at $50/month ($600/year), described as "No weekly Limits - 5TB total storage". So I'm curious where the $3500/year is coming from.
- foepys 5y ago
  With this amount of views you can just rent a cheap VPS with a few terabytes of included egress traffic, put up a very basic index.html, and stream those videos via the browser's HTML5 video player. This costs about $5 per month, maybe add $5 for more storage. I get that not everybody has the skills to do this and payments are handled by Vimeo but $3500 is outrageous.
  - dec0dedab0de 5y ago
    3500 a year is significantly less than hiring someone to do it for you.
    - foepys 5y ago
      Let's not kid ourselves that this requires a full-time position. I bet you can hire some agency to do this for you for a few hundred bucks.
      - robbedpeter 5y ago
        Pricing designed to exploit people who don't know what they don't know, when it boils down to 30 seconds or less of information about vps hosting - that's pretty crappy to do to people. It does create a market opportunity for small shops / agencies. Even charging $500 an hour for an initial setup would be fair, since you can template the server deployments and set up small business video hosting pretty trivially. Really, though, you could follow a one page tutorial using Linode or Digital Ocean and the like, and scale your hosting to their plans. Vimeo is not going to survive long being the "bad guy" in this market. They need a visionary, but they've got conservative plodders.
tootie 5y ago
I don't think that's true. Vimeo is very competitive in the B2B space which is more lucrative per customer and has relatively simpler engineering challenges compared to scaling up to billions of views required for low-margin B2C.
teraflop 5y ago
I wouldn't be surprised if "99th percentile of users" is calculated across all user accounts, including ones who logged in once a decade ago and never uploaded a video.
monocasa 5y ago
Wouldn't you expect that number of 1% for essentially any content uploading. Where out of every group of users, 80% don't interact at all, another 19% only comment, and the last 1% are the only ones that do anything more than comment?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
unfocussed_mike 5y ago
"top 1%" with these figures tells you more about the problems Vimeo have than anything else, surely. Even if they are all very long videos. It sounds almost like they've abandoned any attempt to find cost-savings through scale and they are heading towards being dependent on the services of an off-the-shelf developer-focussed competitor.
hannasanarion 5y ago
They left out a crucial detail: all of her videos are 4-10 hours long.

by yashap 5y ago

throwaway27727 5y ago

Apparently her videos are multiple-hour long. So, caveats applied.

yakak 5y ago
It probably could be expressed in a more resource representative way, but being in their top 1% and therefore needing to negotiate a custom plan apparently only requires 2TB of monthly bandwidth.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

FrenchDevRemote 5y ago

To be fair more than 9 out of 10 of youtube users don't get +10K views too...

ipaddr 5y ago
100,000 views = will come out to 100 dollar payout on youtube.
MomoXenosaga 5y ago
I have to give it to YouTube they are keeping tons of obscure videos alive. For years.

tyingq 5y ago

Not that it excuses what's happening, or that it really puts her in the "top 1 percent"...but despite the low views, she could still be using a lot of bandwidth. Her videos appear to be tutorials that are pretty long, most of them 1 hour+: https://loish.net/tutorials/ https://loish.net/tutorials/ It wouldn't take many views/month to use a lot of bandwidth, assuming her customers watch the whole thing. That's perhaps not worth $3500/year, but I can see why she might need a higher end plan with such long videos. $25/month may not be enough to cover the bandwidth. What's confusing, though, is that their pricing page shows the highest-tier plan as $75/month, which is $900/year and described as "Unlimited live streaming - 7TB total storage". There's also the next plan down, at $50/month ($600/year), described as "No weekly Limits - 5TB total storage". So I'm curious where the $3500/year is coming from.

foepys 5y ago
With this amount of views you can just rent a cheap VPS with a few terabytes of included egress traffic, put up a very basic index.html, and stream those videos via the browser's HTML5 video player. This costs about $5 per month, maybe add $5 for more storage. I get that not everybody has the skills to do this and payments are handled by Vimeo but $3500 is outrageous.
- dec0dedab0de 5y ago
  3500 a year is significantly less than hiring someone to do it for you.
  - foepys 5y ago
    Let's not kid ourselves that this requires a full-time position. I bet you can hire some agency to do this for you for a few hundred bucks.
    - robbedpeter 5y ago
      Pricing designed to exploit people who don't know what they don't know, when it boils down to 30 seconds or less of information about vps hosting - that's pretty crappy to do to people. It does create a market opportunity for small shops / agencies. Even charging $500 an hour for an initial setup would be fair, since you can template the server deployments and set up small business video hosting pretty trivially. Really, though, you could follow a one page tutorial using Linode or Digital Ocean and the like, and scale your hosting to their plans. Vimeo is not going to survive long being the "bad guy" in this market. They need a visionary, but they've got conservative plodders.

tootie 5y ago

I don't think that's true. Vimeo is very competitive in the B2B space which is more lucrative per customer and has relatively simpler engineering challenges compared to scaling up to billions of views required for low-margin B2C.

teraflop 5y ago

I wouldn't be surprised if "99th percentile of users" is calculated across all user accounts, including ones who logged in once a decade ago and never uploaded a video.

monocasa 5y ago

Wouldn't you expect that number of 1% for essentially any content uploading. Where out of every group of users, 80% don't interact at all, another 19% only comment, and the last 1% are the only ones that do anything more than comment?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

unfocussed_mike 5y ago

"top 1%" with these figures tells you more about the problems Vimeo have than anything else, surely. Even if they are all very long videos. It sounds almost like they've abandoned any attempt to find cost-savings through scale and they are heading towards being dependent on the services of an off-the-shelf developer-focussed competitor.

hannasanarion 5y ago

They left out a crucial detail: all of her videos are 4-10 hours long.