Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My Youtube earnings

brickexperimentchannel.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 422 posts

Re: My Youtube earnings

#231

Post by SpelingBeeChamp »

rippercushions wrote: post #183
_tom_ wrote: post #178

$90 is not much for all that. As an employee, that's pretty good, but as someone who probably had to invest thousands of hours before he knew if he'd see any revenue, that's a pretty meager return! It would be interesting to see his revenue graphed over time. Pretty sure he didn't make 12k/mo for the first few years. Which means he's making more Than that, now.

His content is quite "evergreen" though, so even if he were to stop making content today, money would keep rolling in for quite some time.

Not necessarily. If you stop uploading, views will fall off a cliff sooner than you’d think. Even for old content that had been consistently attracting views. It kinda sucks.

Re: My Youtube earnings

#233

Post by coldtea »

midasuni wrote: post #225
runarberg wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> digital sharecropping This has to stop. People are making products which one company uses to profit. This company is buying their labor—albeit in a really roundabout way. We’ve heard this gaslighting from e.g. Uber, where their workers weren’t employees but “gig workers”, or some other thing. The only reason companies do this is to get their labor for cheaper. No, these are YouTube workers, their labor is bought by…

Does YouTube stop people from uploading the videos to other platforms? Do they require a set commitment of work? There are various tests that apply to contractors in the U.K. to work out if you’re an employee or a Lego mate contracting company, as it makes a difference to how taxes and benefits are calculated. Fro my understanding YouTube nowhere near meets that criteria of employee/employer. Companies like Uber and…

>There are various tests that apply to contractors in the U.K.

As there are in most of the world. Most of them were made for the factory and office era, and despite "updates" still within the old spirit, are antiquated in 2023 when it comes to addressing many new work scenarios...

Re: My Youtube earnings

#234

Post by coldtea »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #210
runarberg wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> digital sharecropping This has to stop. People are making products which one company uses to profit. This company is buying their labor—albeit in a really roundabout way. We’ve heard this gaslighting from e.g. Uber, where their workers weren’t employees but “gig workers”, or some other thing. The only reason companies do this is to get their labor for cheaper. No, these are YouTube workers, their labor is bought by…

the analogy doesn't work here, the videos are owned by their creators so they can monetise that content in other available ways, once an Uber driver has given someone a ride they can't find new ways to profit off of that (at least legally, or unless the passenger was a celebrity)

The farm products were owned by the sharecroppers too, to eat or sell as they see fit. They just had to pay their tax to the landowner and be at their mercy regarding the property and changes in demands.

Re: My Youtube earnings

#235

Post by coldtea »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #91
coldtea wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would be surprised if any nation classified a person uploading videos on to a platform with the hopes of having a revenue share on ads the 3rd party sells on those videos is in anyway an "employee" of any kind. I would be surprised in some countries dont change their laws at some time to account for this digital sharecropping (from Youtube and iOS App Store to Uber, etc), and set some rules (like with employment)…

Digital sharecropping? Any country or group of people is welcome to spin up their own data centers and content moderations teams to make their own YouTube.

And any sharecropper was welcome to buy their own land, spin up their own castle, fund their own mercenary army, and make their own feudal kingdom! Sharecroppers weren't slaves either. But that's a pretty low bar (and "build your own YouTube" a pretty high bar).

Re: My Youtube earnings

#236

Post by a4a4a4a4 »

amake wrote: post #222
jesuscript wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I immediately noticed a dark dynamic based on the analytics. Lucky for OP, they are making Lego videos. However, if you are in the business of selling your opinion or sexuality, and you start to see that people click on certain hot takes or less-clothes on, you will start to morph to cater to that traffic. I wonder how this destroys a person (the greed). Totally taking the convo in the darker direction, but you can s…

> He’s a liberal Is he?

"Liberal" in the US used to mean (and still does outside the US) someone with a "live and let live" mentality, where things/actions are generally allowed unless there is a very good reason for restricting them. "Classically liberal" is a better match for the term in modern US English. So things like decriminalizing drugs, allowing gay marriage, being pro-gun/self-defense as a human right, privacy as a human right, etc, all fall under "classically liberal". It might help to read the word "liberal" in a philosophical sense, where it means "liberally applying the idea of freedom for everyone, only restricting that freedom where absolutely necessary, where one persons freedom begins to infringe on the liberty of others".

Re: My Youtube earnings

#237

Post by Aaronmacaron »

doodlesdev wrote: post #50
jonas21 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's right. A lot of YouTubers make videos detailing their YouTube earnings and post them to YouTube (for example [1]). If it were against the ToS, you'd think YouTube would at least remove those videos. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Rm-ElJPDJk

It is against ToS I'm pretty sure, I don't remember YouTube ever doing anything about it ever though since a lot of people really do share this information publicly.

I came across a YouTube creator who shared their revenue with their audience. They mentioned that the idea that sharing revenue is not allowed has been a myth for many years. However, I believe that some channel networks may prohibit creators from disclosing their revenue. Unfortunately, I cannot recall the name of the creator.

Re: My Youtube earnings

#238

Post by ffmpegy »

jesuscript wrote: post #213
nomilk wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (this) information is extremely valuable Estimating earnings based on views/subs is helpful to prospective youtubers, letting them make wise decisions about whether they pursue that path or do something else with their time (it will probably dissuade more than it will encourage, but that's a good thing if in aggregate people are making sounder career decisions).

I immediately noticed a dark dynamic based on the analytics. Lucky for OP, they are making Lego videos. However, if you are in the business of selling your opinion or sexuality, and you start to see that people click on certain hot takes or less-clothes on, you will start to morph to cater to that traffic. I wonder how this destroys a person (the greed). Totally taking the convo in the darker direction, but you can s…

Performing artists have for centuries had to balance catering for popular opinion and tastes versus a more faithful realisation of their vision in order to make a living. I don't see a difference with this at all.

Re: My Youtube earnings

#239

Post by markdestouches »

amake wrote: post #222
jesuscript wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I immediately noticed a dark dynamic based on the analytics. Lucky for OP, they are making Lego videos. However, if you are in the business of selling your opinion or sexuality, and you start to see that people click on certain hot takes or less-clothes on, you will start to morph to cater to that traffic. I wonder how this destroys a person (the greed). Totally taking the convo in the darker direction, but you can s…

> He’s a liberal Is he?

These tags are useless and have always been.

Re: My Youtube earnings

#240

Post by SpelingBeeChamp »

system2 wrote: post #51
ultrafez wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of the cost might come from buying a computer suitable for video editing, which I can imagine could be a couple of thousand dollars.

Exactly. SSD storage alone can cost $5,000+. A nice camera is around $2,000 and lenses around $1,500 each.

Oh yeah. I have been producing content full-time on YouTube for nearly 7 years. I have two NASes, each with ten 18TB HDDs and an SSD cache, plus a separate all-SSD DAS that has ten 4TB TLC NVMe SSDs. Video storage is a significant cost that people frequently overlook.

And we edit on two M1 Ultra Mac Studios, as well as M1 Max MacBook Pros, all fully-optioned.

People vastly underestimate the time and expense involved with “just posting videos to YouTube.”

(If it’s such easy money, why aren’t they doing it…)

Post reply on HN