5 ms·
Hollywood accounting. First off, remember they're paying themselves (AWS). Large streams are more expensive but those get the subs. Ad revenues they are also s
by whatyesaid 3y ago
Hollywood accounting. First off, remember they're paying themselves (AWS).
Large streams are more expensive but those get the subs. Ad revenues they are also splitting but they play 3 minutes of ads that interrupts the entire content every 10 minutes.
- dathinab 3y agoJust because Amazone owns Twitch doesn't mean they pay themself, they are still two distinct legal entities and Twitch is competing with other non Amazone owned companies (e.g. Kick) for the same resources. If Twitter would not pay Amazone I think it might even somewhat fall under competitive distortion/unfair competition. Large steams do amortize cost while the bandwidth cost is somewhat scaling per viewer there are other cost which scale per used resolution and per region the stream is streamed to. So on a per-view bases large streams are often not the most expensive. But very small streams with viewers across continents have the highest per-view cost. AD revenue is split but the main problem is Twitch ADs are not worth much and a bought way to little, often leading to no ADs playing at all for many (non US) regions. >they play 3 minutes of ads that interrupts the entire content every 10 minutes. They do not (typo?), it's depending on the streamers setup but ADs are normally more in the 3min per hour basis which is fine to be honest. There are sometimes some additional banner ads but they don't cover the content, don't "play" and are not that disruptive. And there is Twitch Turbo which disables all ADs but streamers still get the AD money. Through that isn't worth it's money for a lot of people.
- scarface_74 3y ago> If Twitter would not pay Amazone I think it might even somewhat fall under competitive distortion/unfair competition. It’s “unfair competition” for a company to use its own servers to host its own business?
- k12sosse 3y agoMore like Google sweetening the pot for Play store with ad sale discounts, less like Microsoft having the audacity to bundle IE with the OS. If AWS was Twitch Web Services it would be OK. But Amazon is not Twitch so it is anticompetitive.
- scarface_74 3y agoSo now you’re saying a company is not allowed to branch out and have any other applications on their own servers? Should Microsoft also not be allowed to host online Office on Azure?
- dathinab 3y agoIf Office and Azure are operate by two companies owned by Microsoft instead of MS directly then MS the one operating Office would have to pay the one operating Azure for the hosting.
- scarface_74 3y agoAWS is not a separate company and even if they were, there is nothing stopping one company from negotiating with another company for special negotiated rates. You don’t think Netflix is paying rack rates for AWS do you?
- dathinab 3y agono AWS _is_ a different company then Twitch, Amazone owns Twitch but Twitch isn't Amazone. and yes you can always negotiate rates but it has to be in some "reasonable boundaries" so Twitch still has to pay Amazone and Amazone can't just set the price to just the cost Amazone has, even less so below.
- scarface_74 3y agoThis is not in any way shape or form true. When you go into the internal “phone tool” if you work for Amazon, AWS, Twitch etc you still eventually get to the same CEO. (Former AWS employer)
- dathinab 3y agoyou are aware that twitch still has its own CEO right?