5 ms·

I've said it before and I've said it again: ad-based content and pay content are incompatible business models. YouTube Premium fails because the content isn't

I've said it before and I've said it again: ad-based content and pay content are incompatible business models. YouTube Premium fails because the content isn't worth paying for. The content is not worth paying for because it's been designed from the ground up to sell ads. When a website designed to sell ads fails to sell content, that's not evidence that selling content doesn't work, it's evidence that selling content designed to sell ads doesn't work.

lostmsu 3y ago
This is spot on. People assume Vimeo is the only competitor to YouTube, but that's wrong. Reddit is a perfectly fine competitor to YouTube in a sense that people don't really need the content to come in form of video.
- xkbarkar 3y ago
  No, just no. Reddits poor quality commentaries that are mostly bots and teen trollers, do not compare to millions of hours of content from verified experts amd amateurs alike showcasing or explaining something of interest to the viewer. Thats like compairing backroom gossip to news. Sure both have their biases and inaccuracies, but at least one of them holds a resemblance of accountability as opposed to the other that can spew anonymous bogus crap at will. With zero consequence. Reddit has very poor quality content. And it keeos on getting worse. Its just too riddled with bots. Imagine youtubes comment section without the videos. Reddit in a nutshell.
  - dale_glass 3y ago
    Reddit is enormously variable. Yeah, stay far away from the most popular subs. The traffic is insane and there's no time to form any kind of community. But you can find very good quality subreddits. Small subs are often better, because the mods haven't burned out yet and people know each other. And there's gems like /r/AskHistorians. Moderated with an iron fist, quality content is the only thing to be found there.
judge2020 3y ago
I think you're just not the audience. Most Millennials and early Gen Z/Zoomers grew up with YouTube and have long-term connections with tons of creators, communities, and groups of channels to watch it for hours a day if not >20 hours a week. For these users, paying for the privilege to access that content in an a-la-carte way without distractions is immensely valuable. Anecdotally, most of my friend groups pay for it in one way or another (e.g. splitting the cost of the subscription by using Google Families, or using the discounted student plan).
- jszymborski 3y ago
  Ok, but one is far more likely to support a creator's patreon or personal website for exclusive content than pay for a heap of content that you are not enthusiastic about at best and is genuinely vile at worst.
  - SllX 3y ago
    No, I’m far more likely to just pay for the heap of content and watch/listen to the stuff I like than to pay for the Patreon of every single channel I watch and/or subscribe to. I’m at a point now where if I even slightly like a channel I’ll throw it in the subscription heap as a signal to YouTube to show me more of it. Conversely, there are two Patreons I support, one is on YouTube and the other is a webcomic.
  - Ruthalas 3y ago
    In contrast with the sibling post, I do exactly this- support a wide variety of YouTube creators on Patreon. I then use adblock and sponsorblock on YouTube. It seems like a good balance to me.
    - jszymborski 3y ago
      Sponsorblock is truly a godsend. I hear the word VPN 100x less a day than I used to.
- glogla 3y ago
  I am a Millennial and I do feel connection to some creators. I am sad that I won't be able to watch the content anymore if Youtube blocks me. I will miss them and I will miss other cool content, like recorded conference talks and tutorial and stuff. I did try Youtube without adblocker and it was unusable, and Google is horrible evil company that I am for sure not giving any money. I'll miss it, but at the same time, Youtube is horrible time thief. It is bittersweet but it will make my life better to be without it. If I spent the time I have over the years wasted on Youtube instead reading books, hiking or working out, I'd be a much better person today.
zippergz 3y ago
YouTube is the most valuable and worth paying for video content I watch. And I subscribe to several streaming services in addition to YouTube premium. YT is the last one I’d give up. Not kidding.
denkmoon 3y ago
YT premium is my only paid streaming and I'd simply stop watching youtube over going back to ads. I watch 2-3hrs of youtube a day and I'm glad that creators feel that YT premium revenue is a good source of revenue for them. Not their biggest, but a reasonable chunk.
- trogdor 3y ago
  I’m a full-time YouTuber. On a per-view basis, I earn slightly more from Premium views than from ad-watching views. (We’re talking tiny fractions of a cent, but they add up.) Also, demonetized videos are still eligible for Premium revenue.
  - spiderice 3y ago
    > demonetized videos are still eligible for Premium revenue. Wow, TIL. So you make more per view for a Premium subscriber. What about in total. What percent of your monthly profit is from Premium viewers vs Ad-watching viewers.
    - trogdor 3y ago
      > What percent of your monthly profit is from Premium viewers vs Ad-watching viewers. Around 5%
WheatMillington 3y ago
>YouTube Premium fails because the content isn't worth paying for. I beg to differ. As a hobbyist type, and also someone interested in semi trashy niche content (true crime), having access to a virtually unlimited catalogue of fresh content, a lot of it exceptionally good quality, makes it absolutely worth the money. If I could have any one subscription, it would be YouTube 10 times out of 10. And as someone who abhors advertising, I'm happy to pay.
- a123b456c 3y ago
  You sound like you don't subscribe to youtube premium.
- godzillabrennus 3y ago
  This mirrors my sentiments. I love YouTube and pay for it.
- PartiallyTyped 3y ago
  I have YouTube Premium, it comes with YouTube music; I am perfectly happy paying for that as I consolidate music streaming with ad-free watching in my bed. It replaced apple music and spotify for me; plus it gives me access to all sorts of music that is only released there as videos. If I ever have to watch youtube with ads, I am going to just not YT at all.
- shitlord 3y ago
  If Youtube Premium actually blocked all the ads (including sponsored content), then I would pay for it. But it doesn't, so I have to use Sponsor Block anyway. Why pay for something that won't get the job done?
  - michaelbrooks 3y ago
    Sponsored content isn't controlled by YouTube though, it's controlled by the creator
    - herbst 3y ago
j-bos 3y ago
I'll drop a contrarian take. I love youtube premium. The content I "comsume" (yech!) is well worth the 12ish dollars. I could skip ads with a blocker, I could join every creator's patreon, I could watch/listen in firefox on my phone, I could yt-dl the videos for offline play.. But none of that is as convenient*cheap as a premium subscription.
- aio2 3y ago
  I agree with this. Subscriptions are one thing, but we are missing the obvious here: people don't want ads. No need to pay to remove them when you can just use an ad blocker.
  - j-bos 3y ago
    tldr: the commons seems undervalued by individuals You can just use an ad blocker, and don't get me wrong, I hate ads. But youtube ads don't load potentially malicious scripts (for now), and they provide the money that incentivizes this MASSIVE open self publisher friendly library of video data. So adblocker on youtube reminds me of leaving grocery carts in the middle of parking lots. Stores like Aldi solve this by requiring a quarter to use their carts, but that's incinvenient. Also reminds me of the open source funding challenge. The commons requires individual buy in and conscientious support, something that seems to be on the decline because(?) no one wants to carry free riders.
celestialcheese 3y ago
I couldn't disagree more. The majority of my usage, and the usage of _many_ others based on the view count for DIY stuff, is watching people fix or build stuff. Usually because I'm in the middle of a project trying to figure out how to do something, or because I'm thinking about a project and wanting to get an idea of how difficult it'll be. Youtube University basically. I pay for premium because it saves so much time, and I hate ads when I'm under a car trying to remember what bolt goes where. Also, from an economic model, Stratechery has a great article last week discussing this - worth a read. https://stratechery.com/2023/the-unified-content-business-model/ https://stratechery.com/2023/the-unified-content-business-mo...
- XorNot 3y ago
  The problem with this logic is whether or not your usage mirrors sustainable usage if you're selling content - and I'd argue it doesn't. The useful uses of YouTube are basically a side-effect of the real usage which is "get eyeballs on the screen to watch the screen more" - which is what you want when you sell ads, whereas you kind of want the opposite when you sell subscriptions - subscribed users who use the service as little as possible are cost efficient users.
lisasays 3y ago
The content is not worth paying for because it's been designed from the ground up to sell ads. Some of it is, but the vast bulk of it clearly was not. You knew that of course. I'd strongly consider paying for YT if it were an independent company. But as a part of Google - fuck no.
- HJain13 3y ago
  > I'd strongly consider paying for YT if it were an independent company YT wouldn't be YT if it was an independent company. Lack of competition in the field is a proof
  - xigoi 3y ago
    YouTube was bought by Google after it was already massively popular.
    - peoplefromibiza 3y ago
      YouTube was just 18 months old when Google bought it and it had just started to fend off very costly copyright claims. It was popular, but 2006 popular.
      - quags 3y ago
        YouTube was also unprofitable at the time. With out google backing youtube it may have gone the way of Napster.
  - lisasays 3y ago
    By this logic, Netflix shouldn't be Netflix (or in its current market position) either.
impulser_ 3y ago
YouTube Premium is the best thing I pay for each month (I actually don't pay for it it's included with Pixel Pass). It a little more than Apple Music and Spotify and you get that included into YouTube premium. YouTube has the largest music library out of any music streaming service. If you watch YouTube on a TV, YouTube premium is a must.
danpalmer 3y ago
I switch between paying for streaming services on a regular basis, but YouTube Premium is the one that I stick with all the time. Lots of high quality content.
mda 3y ago
"YouTube Premium fails because the content isn't worth paying for." Are you serious?
kuschku 3y ago
I've got youtube premium, nebula, curiositystream and I subscribe to various youtubers on floatplane. And I've got to be honest – youtube premium is not really worth it. All the other services have high-quality content, because they're designed from the ground up for paying users.
kerkeslager 3y ago
Okay, so a lot of people are responding that they love YouTube content, and some of them pay for it. Yes, obviously the largest crowdsourced video service in the world has some subscribers. But the fact is, they aren't enough subscribers to approach its ad revenue. If you don't address why that is, you're not really responding to my point.

lostmsu 3y ago

This is spot on. People assume Vimeo is the only competitor to YouTube, but that's wrong. Reddit is a perfectly fine competitor to YouTube in a sense that people don't really need the content to come in form of video.

xkbarkar 3y ago
No, just no. Reddits poor quality commentaries that are mostly bots and teen trollers, do not compare to millions of hours of content from verified experts amd amateurs alike showcasing or explaining something of interest to the viewer. Thats like compairing backroom gossip to news. Sure both have their biases and inaccuracies, but at least one of them holds a resemblance of accountability as opposed to the other that can spew anonymous bogus crap at will. With zero consequence. Reddit has very poor quality content. And it keeos on getting worse. Its just too riddled with bots. Imagine youtubes comment section without the videos. Reddit in a nutshell.
- dale_glass 3y ago
  Reddit is enormously variable. Yeah, stay far away from the most popular subs. The traffic is insane and there's no time to form any kind of community. But you can find very good quality subreddits. Small subs are often better, because the mods haven't burned out yet and people know each other. And there's gems like /r/AskHistorians. Moderated with an iron fist, quality content is the only thing to be found there.

judge2020 3y ago

I think you're just not the audience. Most Millennials and early Gen Z/Zoomers grew up with YouTube and have long-term connections with tons of creators, communities, and groups of channels to watch it for hours a day if not >20 hours a week. For these users, paying for the privilege to access that content in an a-la-carte way without distractions is immensely valuable. Anecdotally, most of my friend groups pay for it in one way or another (e.g. splitting the cost of the subscription by using Google Families, or using the discounted student plan).

jszymborski 3y ago
Ok, but one is far more likely to support a creator's patreon or personal website for exclusive content than pay for a heap of content that you are not enthusiastic about at best and is genuinely vile at worst.
- SllX 3y ago
  No, I’m far more likely to just pay for the heap of content and watch/listen to the stuff I like than to pay for the Patreon of every single channel I watch and/or subscribe to. I’m at a point now where if I even slightly like a channel I’ll throw it in the subscription heap as a signal to YouTube to show me more of it. Conversely, there are two Patreons I support, one is on YouTube and the other is a webcomic.
- Ruthalas 3y ago
  In contrast with the sibling post, I do exactly this- support a wide variety of YouTube creators on Patreon. I then use adblock and sponsorblock on YouTube. It seems like a good balance to me.
  - jszymborski 3y ago
    Sponsorblock is truly a godsend. I hear the word VPN 100x less a day than I used to.
glogla 3y ago
I am a Millennial and I do feel connection to some creators. I am sad that I won't be able to watch the content anymore if Youtube blocks me. I will miss them and I will miss other cool content, like recorded conference talks and tutorial and stuff. I did try Youtube without adblocker and it was unusable, and Google is horrible evil company that I am for sure not giving any money. I'll miss it, but at the same time, Youtube is horrible time thief. It is bittersweet but it will make my life better to be without it. If I spent the time I have over the years wasted on Youtube instead reading books, hiking or working out, I'd be a much better person today.

zippergz 3y ago

YouTube is the most valuable and worth paying for video content I watch. And I subscribe to several streaming services in addition to YouTube premium. YT is the last one I’d give up. Not kidding.

denkmoon 3y ago

YT premium is my only paid streaming and I'd simply stop watching youtube over going back to ads. I watch 2-3hrs of youtube a day and I'm glad that creators feel that YT premium revenue is a good source of revenue for them. Not their biggest, but a reasonable chunk.

trogdor 3y ago
I’m a full-time YouTuber. On a per-view basis, I earn slightly more from Premium views than from ad-watching views. (We’re talking tiny fractions of a cent, but they add up.) Also, demonetized videos are still eligible for Premium revenue.
- spiderice 3y ago
  > demonetized videos are still eligible for Premium revenue. Wow, TIL. So you make more per view for a Premium subscriber. What about in total. What percent of your monthly profit is from Premium viewers vs Ad-watching viewers.
  - trogdor 3y ago
    > What percent of your monthly profit is from Premium viewers vs Ad-watching viewers. Around 5%

WheatMillington 3y ago

>YouTube Premium fails because the content isn't worth paying for. I beg to differ. As a hobbyist type, and also someone interested in semi trashy niche content (true crime), having access to a virtually unlimited catalogue of fresh content, a lot of it exceptionally good quality, makes it absolutely worth the money. If I could have any one subscription, it would be YouTube 10 times out of 10. And as someone who abhors advertising, I'm happy to pay.

a123b456c 3y ago
You sound like you don't subscribe to youtube premium.
godzillabrennus 3y ago
This mirrors my sentiments. I love YouTube and pay for it.
PartiallyTyped 3y ago
I have YouTube Premium, it comes with YouTube music; I am perfectly happy paying for that as I consolidate music streaming with ad-free watching in my bed. It replaced apple music and spotify for me; plus it gives me access to all sorts of music that is only released there as videos. If I ever have to watch youtube with ads, I am going to just not YT at all.
shitlord 3y ago
If Youtube Premium actually blocked all the ads (including sponsored content), then I would pay for it. But it doesn't, so I have to use Sponsor Block anyway. Why pay for something that won't get the job done?
- michaelbrooks 3y ago
  Sponsored content isn't controlled by YouTube though, it's controlled by the creator
  - herbst 3y ago

j-bos 3y ago

I'll drop a contrarian take. I love youtube premium. The content I "comsume" (yech!) is well worth the 12ish dollars. I could skip ads with a blocker, I could join every creator's patreon, I could watch/listen in firefox on my phone, I could yt-dl the videos for offline play.. But none of that is as convenient*cheap as a premium subscription.

aio2 3y ago
I agree with this. Subscriptions are one thing, but we are missing the obvious here: people don't want ads. No need to pay to remove them when you can just use an ad blocker.
- j-bos 3y ago
  tldr: the commons seems undervalued by individuals You can just use an ad blocker, and don't get me wrong, I hate ads. But youtube ads don't load potentially malicious scripts (for now), and they provide the money that incentivizes this MASSIVE open self publisher friendly library of video data. So adblocker on youtube reminds me of leaving grocery carts in the middle of parking lots. Stores like Aldi solve this by requiring a quarter to use their carts, but that's incinvenient. Also reminds me of the open source funding challenge. The commons requires individual buy in and conscientious support, something that seems to be on the decline because(?) no one wants to carry free riders.

celestialcheese 3y ago

I couldn't disagree more. The majority of my usage, and the usage of _many_ others based on the view count for DIY stuff, is watching people fix or build stuff. Usually because I'm in the middle of a project trying to figure out how to do something, or because I'm thinking about a project and wanting to get an idea of how difficult it'll be. Youtube University basically. I pay for premium because it saves so much time, and I hate ads when I'm under a car trying to remember what bolt goes where. Also, from an economic model, Stratechery has a great article last week discussing this - worth a read. https://stratechery.com/2023/the-unified-content-business-model/ https://stratechery.com/2023/the-unified-content-business-mo...

XorNot 3y ago
The problem with this logic is whether or not your usage mirrors sustainable usage if you're selling content - and I'd argue it doesn't. The useful uses of YouTube are basically a side-effect of the real usage which is "get eyeballs on the screen to watch the screen more" - which is what you want when you sell ads, whereas you kind of want the opposite when you sell subscriptions - subscribed users who use the service as little as possible are cost efficient users.

lisasays 3y ago

The content is not worth paying for because it's been designed from the ground up to sell ads. Some of it is, but the vast bulk of it clearly was not. You knew that of course. I'd strongly consider paying for YT if it were an independent company. But as a part of Google - fuck no.

HJain13 3y ago
> I'd strongly consider paying for YT if it were an independent company YT wouldn't be YT if it was an independent company. Lack of competition in the field is a proof
- xigoi 3y ago
  YouTube was bought by Google after it was already massively popular.
  - peoplefromibiza 3y ago
    YouTube was just 18 months old when Google bought it and it had just started to fend off very costly copyright claims. It was popular, but 2006 popular.
    - quags 3y ago
      YouTube was also unprofitable at the time. With out google backing youtube it may have gone the way of Napster.
- lisasays 3y ago
  By this logic, Netflix shouldn't be Netflix (or in its current market position) either.

impulser_ 3y ago

YouTube Premium is the best thing I pay for each month (I actually don't pay for it it's included with Pixel Pass). It a little more than Apple Music and Spotify and you get that included into YouTube premium. YouTube has the largest music library out of any music streaming service. If you watch YouTube on a TV, YouTube premium is a must.

danpalmer 3y ago

I switch between paying for streaming services on a regular basis, but YouTube Premium is the one that I stick with all the time. Lots of high quality content.

mda 3y ago

"YouTube Premium fails because the content isn't worth paying for." Are you serious?

kuschku 3y ago

I've got youtube premium, nebula, curiositystream and I subscribe to various youtubers on floatplane. And I've got to be honest – youtube premium is not really worth it. All the other services have high-quality content, because they're designed from the ground up for paying users.

kerkeslager 3y ago

Okay, so a lot of people are responding that they love YouTube content, and some of them pay for it. Yes, obviously the largest crowdsourced video service in the world has some subscribers. But the fact is, they aren't enough subscribers to approach its ad revenue. If you don't address why that is, you're not really responding to my point.