4 ms·

Leo LaPorte explains podcast economics: $350,000 expenses, $1.5 million rev

59 points by chuck_taylor 17y ago

weaksauce 17y ago
He is doing some stellar revenue. I am impressed. Though, just like Kevin Rose cashed in on his cred from TechTV and made Digg immensely popular Leo is as well. I would wager that he would not be anywhere near that revenue without the initial infusion of celebrity.
- mechanical_fish 17y ago
  the initial infusion of celebrity Leo wasn't famous on the day he was born, was he? The only reason he seems to have had an "initial infusion" of celebrity is that you're telling his story starting in the middle.
  - johnnybgoode 17y ago
    I think his point is that Leo was famous from traditional media before he started an online podcast.
  - weaksauce 17y ago
    I was talking about his current venture being fueled by his celebrity as a kind of warning to people to not get too excited about starting a "new media" company and expect that kind of revenue. Having celebrity and leveraging it is not a bad thing and can be very lucrative while it lasts.
- ankeshk 17y ago
  A trick I learnt from infomercial makers: Look for 2 out of 3: * Star * Story * Solution 3 out of 3 is best. But 2 out of 3 also makes a good recipe for added fame.
- ricree 17y ago
  He does touch on that a bit towards the end. For the most part, he seemed to view that sort of success as an artifact of the transition between traditional mass media and internet media. In particular, his view seemed to be that the mechanisms for filtering out good content weren't/aren't fully developed, giving people in his position a head start.
rufo 17y ago
Jeebus... I always sort of figured TWiT was more investment for the future and wasn't making money yet - I had no idea they were doing so well. Awesome to hear it, though.
noelchurchill 17y ago
He mentions, advertisers don't believe its worth advertising to smart people because they don't make decisions based on brand, but rather they make decisions based on research. Interesting and true.
- harpastum 17y ago
  It may be true that advertisers believe that, but that statement (advertising to smart people is a waste of time) is not. Buying based on brand recognition is just one facet of a multitude of ways advertising affects buying habits. There are a lot of advertisers that already have a great product, but just need to get the word out (i.e. many YC startups). From the article, "Laporte said he charges $70 CPMs for ads." Clearly advertising to smart people is in demand.
  - Flankk 17y ago
    "Clearly advertising to smart people is in demand." I think the point is that advertising to smart people is not effective; they will research and find the best product regardless of advertising.
    - replicatorblog 17y ago
      I think that point is highly focused on the decisions people would self report. I've seen studies where perception of a fictional brand is significantly increased through repeated banner advertising. I'm sure some high IQ participants in the study would report no impact, but have been influenced at a pre-verbal level. The psychology of repeated exposure is well documented.
    - 8plot 17y ago
      If you view advertising as subversive and dishonest, then yes, advertising to smart people is less effective. Not all advertising is dishonest, and instead informative. Hopefully the new media technologies will let this type of advertising thrive.
      - 17y ago
CitizenKane 17y ago
What impresses me is what is left out of the link title on this and what Leo says in the video. "We have about $350,000 in expenses and $1.5 in revenue and that's doubling every year. The revenue, not the expenses the costs in this are fairly static." (Emphasis Mine) That's amazing, when I heard this it made my jaw drop.
domodomo 17y ago
Wow, TWiT is going to get on the Netflix Roku box. That is a fantastic strategy.
cdibona 17y ago
I would also mention the most important part: Leo works his ass off to a degree that would shock most podcasters dead. His operation is very small, and he does a huge amount of work all by himself, from production to editing to ad sales, new product development and more. He's a one man army. The same work ethic was in evidence at TechTV that I could see in my limited experience doing segments with him. He's also a hugely nice person, something you don't see much in TV people...

59 points by chuck_taylor 17y ago

He is doing some stellar revenue. I am impressed. Though, just like Kevin Rose cashed in on his cred from TechTV and made Digg immensely popular Leo is as well. I would wager that he would not be anywhere near that revenue without the initial infusion of celebrity.

mechanical_fish 17y ago
the initial infusion of celebrity Leo wasn't famous on the day he was born, was he? The only reason he seems to have had an "initial infusion" of celebrity is that you're telling his story starting in the middle.
- johnnybgoode 17y ago
  I think his point is that Leo was famous from traditional media before he started an online podcast.
- weaksauce 17y ago
  I was talking about his current venture being fueled by his celebrity as a kind of warning to people to not get too excited about starting a "new media" company and expect that kind of revenue. Having celebrity and leveraging it is not a bad thing and can be very lucrative while it lasts.
ankeshk 17y ago
A trick I learnt from infomercial makers: Look for 2 out of 3: * Star * Story * Solution 3 out of 3 is best. But 2 out of 3 also makes a good recipe for added fame.
ricree 17y ago
He does touch on that a bit towards the end. For the most part, he seemed to view that sort of success as an artifact of the transition between traditional mass media and internet media. In particular, his view seemed to be that the mechanisms for filtering out good content weren't/aren't fully developed, giving people in his position a head start.

rufo 17y ago

Jeebus... I always sort of figured TWiT was more investment for the future and wasn't making money yet - I had no idea they were doing so well. Awesome to hear it, though.

noelchurchill 17y ago

He mentions, advertisers don't believe its worth advertising to smart people because they don't make decisions based on brand, but rather they make decisions based on research. Interesting and true.

harpastum 17y ago
It may be true that advertisers believe that, but that statement (advertising to smart people is a waste of time) is not. Buying based on brand recognition is just one facet of a multitude of ways advertising affects buying habits. There are a lot of advertisers that already have a great product, but just need to get the word out (i.e. many YC startups). From the article, "Laporte said he charges $70 CPMs for ads." Clearly advertising to smart people is in demand.
- Flankk 17y ago
  "Clearly advertising to smart people is in demand." I think the point is that advertising to smart people is not effective; they will research and find the best product regardless of advertising.
  - replicatorblog 17y ago
    I think that point is highly focused on the decisions people would self report. I've seen studies where perception of a fictional brand is significantly increased through repeated banner advertising. I'm sure some high IQ participants in the study would report no impact, but have been influenced at a pre-verbal level. The psychology of repeated exposure is well documented.
  - 8plot 17y ago
    If you view advertising as subversive and dishonest, then yes, advertising to smart people is less effective. Not all advertising is dishonest, and instead informative. Hopefully the new media technologies will let this type of advertising thrive.
    - 17y ago

CitizenKane 17y ago

What impresses me is what is left out of the link title on this and what Leo says in the video. "We have about $350,000 in expenses and $1.5 in revenue and that's doubling every year. The revenue, not the expenses the costs in this are fairly static." (Emphasis Mine) That's amazing, when I heard this it made my jaw drop.

domodomo 17y ago

Wow, TWiT is going to get on the Netflix Roku box. That is a fantastic strategy.

cdibona 17y ago

I would also mention the most important part: Leo works his ass off to a degree that would shock most podcasters dead. His operation is very small, and he does a huge amount of work all by himself, from production to editing to ad sales, new product development and more. He's a one man army. The same work ethic was in evidence at TechTV that I could see in my limited experience doing segments with him. He's also a hugely nice person, something you don't see much in TV people...