3 ms·

Pay for YouTube. It’s worth it.

by artursapek 3y ago

Waterluvian 3y ago
If only YouTube gave the creators a reasonable share.
- tomschwiha 3y ago
  From my knowledge a lot of YouTubers get paid by advertisers and they don't even let the viewers know. The single view is not much worth - I estimate the streaming costs are quite high (think of all the bandwith you need for 4k/8k streaming with low latency). Sadly I couldn't find numbers for YT profit.
  - Euphorbium 3y ago
    Here is a solution: make high res streaming separate price tier, or remove it.
- kirab 3y ago
  They do, AFAIK creators get much more money from Premium viewers than ad-supported viewers. And not just relatively, sometimes in absolute numbers as well.
  - Waterluvian 3y ago
    That’s the kind of comparison YouTube hopes you do. Compared to patronage systems, it’s a pittance. You may as well try to pay your favourite shows directly rather than give your money to Google and have them redistribute it on your behalf.
    - artursapek 3y ago
      Google is providing a service here. I think people have gotten so used to the internet they forget the massive costs involved in running a website like YouTube.
      - Waterluvian 3y ago
        The cable companies wish to convey the same.
- jsnell 3y ago
  What revenue share split do you think they have right now? What share would you consider reasonable?
pacifika 3y ago
The payments will increase until we get ads with them
- dwighttk 3y ago
  The payments and ads will increase until morale improves
fullarr 3y ago
If you've been paying attention to the industry you'd know we're going to have ads on the paid tier also - Netflix - Hulu - Prime (coming)
- harry8 3y ago
  If you've been paying attention to the industry you'd know driving customers to bit torrent is suicidal.
- OtomotO 3y ago
  Which means I simply quit... I mean, I actually did already :)
- Fnoord 3y ago
  Netflix has it on their cheapest tier. Prime already has ads but for their own content only. I don't have Hulu. Either way, you can always just pirate stuff with Sonarr, Radarr, and a Usenet server account. Black Friday is coming then you can get huge discount on Usenet server account / block accounts, Torznab/Newznab server (you can use SpotWeb, too), VPN.
Fnoord 3y ago
Way too expensive (unless you are able to pay in a currency of a third world country which is what I do). They still do tracking on you. You still get sponsored ads by 'creators', so you'll need Sponsorblock as well. For Android, consider using "NewPipe x SponsorBlock x Return YouTube Dislike" [1] [1] https://github.com/polymorphicshade/NewPipe https://github.com/polymorphicshade/NewPipe
- artursapek 3y ago
  I don’t mind creators having sponsors. I skip past it if I’m not interested. How do you people expect all of this to be free?
  - Fnoord 3y ago
    (I've not once seen a sponsor I'd be interested in. Many of them are scams, US-centric, or just stuff I don't want/need and I certainly wouldn't be stimulated to purchase something because of a sponsorship.) I don't expect that. I, like everyone else in this world, have limited amounts of time and money, and I'd like to spend them wisely with the tools I have available.
tomrod 3y ago
When will YouTube pay me for watching ads?
- paulcole 3y ago
  Isn’t that what the videos are for? What you get in exchange for watching ads?
- jitl 3y ago
  Why would they do that? No reason. You get paid with the video stream. That’s your payment.
  - tomrod 3y ago
    Why do they get all the negotiating power in this arrangement? They should pay me to watch ads. I'd watch more videos. Win-win for them. Otherwise they have polluted their value prop -- to be a video sharing platform, and my content that I share, your content that you share, and all your watching patterns data, which has value, is stolen without recompense. Please. Don't "but you get something for FREE" me -- we're the product and that ain't right. Youtube should be a service -- pay for or not -- not a package delivery vector for ~~meme viruses~~ content-free and meaningless adverts.
    - jitl 3y ago
      If it costs YouTube 2 cents to stream a video to you, and they get 3 cents for delivering the ads with it, let’s say they could pay you half a cent and keep half a cent of profit for themselves. For that to be worth it, you’d need to watch 2x the videos (and ads) for them to break even on the deal, and more than 2x for the deal to make more than the current deal today (you watch 1x and they keep the whole 1 cent). Would actually watch 2x more content to earn those pennies? These numbers are made up, but explain a possible model of why YouTube doesn't try to induce more views with a monetary incentive. > Otherwise they have polluted their value prop > Please. Don't "but you get something for FREE" me -- we're the product and that ain't right. I think the economic deal is clear to you. You don’t get something for free. You’re paying by watching ads (same as OTA TV broadcast for the last 60 years) and with the collection of your habit data (modern surveillance capitalism). In exchange YouTube serves you videos. If you don’t like the deal, and they won’t negotiate with you, then you should walk away. Personally I pay the $14/mo to not see ads; YouTube doesn’t produce content directly but they incentivize the production of a lot of niche content creators who otherwise would never get a deal from Netflix etc, and the YouTube mobile app is the most reliable one I use (better than Netflix, much better than Hulu).
Winsaucerer 3y ago
It's so expensive. I have multiple people in the house, and I already pay for music with Apple. It's a big price to just get no ads and nothing else.
- mattrighetti 3y ago
  I pay $6.99 for the student plan which is not that bad. Since I got AdGuardHome on my network ads started to be very very very aggressive on YouTube so I just gave up and paid for it since I use it extensively during the day.
- DrReachAround 3y ago
  It's not "so expensive". It's a couple of cups of coffee from Starbucks, for 720 hours of content per month per person. Even if you factor in 8 hours a day of sleep you could watch it for 16 hours per day per person for one low price. That's about US$0.01 per hour.
  - Winsaucerer 3y ago
    I obviously don't watch anywhere near as much YouTube as you do. The price is higher than I pay for any other streaming service. I don't drink coffee, but a quick look suggests it's 4 to 6 cups of Starbucks coffee here in Australia. I remind again that this is the price I'd need to pay for my household, not just one individual (just like the other streaming services I subscribe to which is used by the whole household).
OtomotO 3y ago
I remember 2004, when ads on the web were incredibly annoying. There was (loud) sound, and half the information was buried under ads for certain pages. Me being a teenager back then, decided I've had enough after a late night gaming session with friends ended with a stupid website screaming in my ear to buy a new car. I installed an ad blocker and since then my web experience is (mostly) ad free. When I see ads I immediately know what NOT to buy. I feel I've already paid with my lifetime, so I am not going to add (haha) money on top
- otteromkram 3y ago
  How have you paid them with your lifetime (whatever that means)? Especially since you've been actively avoiding advertisements. Follow-up: If you like someone's YouTube content, how would you suggest they be compensated?
  - fileeditview 3y ago
    The catch is that you pay Google and not the content creators..
  - frabcus 3y ago
    Patreon of content creator that I like.
  - AuthorizedCust 3y ago
    > If you like someone's YouTube content, how would you suggest they be compensated? Not my problem to solve. Perhaps content creators or those who host their content can find less offensive ways of monetizing?
    - DrReachAround 3y ago
      Sure, they could charge you per view, which is being done indirectly now through ads. You're not entitled to free content no matter how much you think you are.
Xelbair 3y ago
I would if they didn't datamine me so hard. simple as. Also i get to chose what runs on my machines, not them. Wait, now that i think about it i wouldn't. I would rather give that money directly to few creators i watch, instead of them getting 0.01% of that.
RektBoy 3y ago
.
haunter 3y ago
I'd consider it if it was a part of Google One for the same price
jamesponddotco 3y ago
Sure, if they also stop harvesting my data after I pay.

Pay for YouTube. It’s worth it.

Waterluvian 3y ago

If only YouTube gave the creators a reasonable share.

tomschwiha 3y ago
From my knowledge a lot of YouTubers get paid by advertisers and they don't even let the viewers know. The single view is not much worth - I estimate the streaming costs are quite high (think of all the bandwith you need for 4k/8k streaming with low latency). Sadly I couldn't find numbers for YT profit.
- Euphorbium 3y ago
  Here is a solution: make high res streaming separate price tier, or remove it.
kirab 3y ago
They do, AFAIK creators get much more money from Premium viewers than ad-supported viewers. And not just relatively, sometimes in absolute numbers as well.
- Waterluvian 3y ago
  That’s the kind of comparison YouTube hopes you do. Compared to patronage systems, it’s a pittance. You may as well try to pay your favourite shows directly rather than give your money to Google and have them redistribute it on your behalf.
  - artursapek 3y ago
    Google is providing a service here. I think people have gotten so used to the internet they forget the massive costs involved in running a website like YouTube.
    - Waterluvian 3y ago
      The cable companies wish to convey the same.
jsnell 3y ago
What revenue share split do you think they have right now? What share would you consider reasonable?

pacifika 3y ago

The payments will increase until we get ads with them

dwighttk 3y ago
The payments and ads will increase until morale improves

fullarr 3y ago

If you've been paying attention to the industry you'd know we're going to have ads on the paid tier also - Netflix - Hulu - Prime (coming)

harry8 3y ago
If you've been paying attention to the industry you'd know driving customers to bit torrent is suicidal.
OtomotO 3y ago
Which means I simply quit... I mean, I actually did already :)
Fnoord 3y ago
Netflix has it on their cheapest tier. Prime already has ads but for their own content only. I don't have Hulu. Either way, you can always just pirate stuff with Sonarr, Radarr, and a Usenet server account. Black Friday is coming then you can get huge discount on Usenet server account / block accounts, Torznab/Newznab server (you can use SpotWeb, too), VPN.

Fnoord 3y ago

Way too expensive (unless you are able to pay in a currency of a third world country which is what I do). They still do tracking on you. You still get sponsored ads by 'creators', so you'll need Sponsorblock as well. For Android, consider using "NewPipe x SponsorBlock x Return YouTube Dislike" [1] [1] https://github.com/polymorphicshade/NewPipe https://github.com/polymorphicshade/NewPipe

artursapek 3y ago
I don’t mind creators having sponsors. I skip past it if I’m not interested. How do you people expect all of this to be free?
- Fnoord 3y ago
  (I've not once seen a sponsor I'd be interested in. Many of them are scams, US-centric, or just stuff I don't want/need and I certainly wouldn't be stimulated to purchase something because of a sponsorship.) I don't expect that. I, like everyone else in this world, have limited amounts of time and money, and I'd like to spend them wisely with the tools I have available.

tomrod 3y ago

When will YouTube pay me for watching ads?

paulcole 3y ago
Isn’t that what the videos are for? What you get in exchange for watching ads?
jitl 3y ago
Why would they do that? No reason. You get paid with the video stream. That’s your payment.
- tomrod 3y ago
  Why do they get all the negotiating power in this arrangement? They should pay me to watch ads. I'd watch more videos. Win-win for them. Otherwise they have polluted their value prop -- to be a video sharing platform, and my content that I share, your content that you share, and all your watching patterns data, which has value, is stolen without recompense. Please. Don't "but you get something for FREE" me -- we're the product and that ain't right. Youtube should be a service -- pay for or not -- not a package delivery vector for ~~meme viruses~~ content-free and meaningless adverts.
  - jitl 3y ago
    If it costs YouTube 2 cents to stream a video to you, and they get 3 cents for delivering the ads with it, let’s say they could pay you half a cent and keep half a cent of profit for themselves. For that to be worth it, you’d need to watch 2x the videos (and ads) for them to break even on the deal, and more than 2x for the deal to make more than the current deal today (you watch 1x and they keep the whole 1 cent). Would actually watch 2x more content to earn those pennies? These numbers are made up, but explain a possible model of why YouTube doesn't try to induce more views with a monetary incentive. > Otherwise they have polluted their value prop > Please. Don't "but you get something for FREE" me -- we're the product and that ain't right. I think the economic deal is clear to you. You don’t get something for free. You’re paying by watching ads (same as OTA TV broadcast for the last 60 years) and with the collection of your habit data (modern surveillance capitalism). In exchange YouTube serves you videos. If you don’t like the deal, and they won’t negotiate with you, then you should walk away. Personally I pay the $14/mo to not see ads; YouTube doesn’t produce content directly but they incentivize the production of a lot of niche content creators who otherwise would never get a deal from Netflix etc, and the YouTube mobile app is the most reliable one I use (better than Netflix, much better than Hulu).

Winsaucerer 3y ago

It's so expensive. I have multiple people in the house, and I already pay for music with Apple. It's a big price to just get no ads and nothing else.

mattrighetti 3y ago
I pay $6.99 for the student plan which is not that bad. Since I got AdGuardHome on my network ads started to be very very very aggressive on YouTube so I just gave up and paid for it since I use it extensively during the day.
DrReachAround 3y ago
It's not "so expensive". It's a couple of cups of coffee from Starbucks, for 720 hours of content per month per person. Even if you factor in 8 hours a day of sleep you could watch it for 16 hours per day per person for one low price. That's about US$0.01 per hour.
- Winsaucerer 3y ago
  I obviously don't watch anywhere near as much YouTube as you do. The price is higher than I pay for any other streaming service. I don't drink coffee, but a quick look suggests it's 4 to 6 cups of Starbucks coffee here in Australia. I remind again that this is the price I'd need to pay for my household, not just one individual (just like the other streaming services I subscribe to which is used by the whole household).

OtomotO 3y ago

I remember 2004, when ads on the web were incredibly annoying. There was (loud) sound, and half the information was buried under ads for certain pages. Me being a teenager back then, decided I've had enough after a late night gaming session with friends ended with a stupid website screaming in my ear to buy a new car. I installed an ad blocker and since then my web experience is (mostly) ad free. When I see ads I immediately know what NOT to buy. I feel I've already paid with my lifetime, so I am not going to add (haha) money on top

otteromkram 3y ago
How have you paid them with your lifetime (whatever that means)? Especially since you've been actively avoiding advertisements. Follow-up: If you like someone's YouTube content, how would you suggest they be compensated?
- fileeditview 3y ago
  The catch is that you pay Google and not the content creators..
- frabcus 3y ago
  Patreon of content creator that I like.
- AuthorizedCust 3y ago
  > If you like someone's YouTube content, how would you suggest they be compensated? Not my problem to solve. Perhaps content creators or those who host their content can find less offensive ways of monetizing?
  - DrReachAround 3y ago
    Sure, they could charge you per view, which is being done indirectly now through ads. You're not entitled to free content no matter how much you think you are.

Xelbair 3y ago

I would if they didn't datamine me so hard. simple as. Also i get to chose what runs on my machines, not them. Wait, now that i think about it i wouldn't. I would rather give that money directly to few creators i watch, instead of them getting 0.01% of that.

RektBoy 3y ago

haunter 3y ago

I'd consider it if it was a part of Google One for the same price

jamesponddotco 3y ago

Sure, if they also stop harvesting my data after I pay.