Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is really an upside down take. 1) The skill/ability curve is going to look really consistent with the earnings curve, just like in anything, similar to sports. 2) 'Creators fund' is marginal - having a few extra dollars for a microphone is not going to bring in more viewers for a stream. Far from 'false economy' it's probably something akin to very efficient. If there is inefficiency, it's about who is highlight…
People at the top of the pay scale are being paid an obscene amount of money for similar quality work that goes unpaid in many cases. From that they can hire teams of others to push their brand further. In order to compete, others need to go into debt just to be able to keep up. In order to admit that the highest paid streamers fairly made it to their current levels of obscene payment, it would be a lot more believab…
'Obscene' is a superlative not hugely relevant here unless you start with calling pro-athletes and actors getting paid 'millions' as 'obscene'.
Twitch streamers have even considerably lower barriers to entry than athletes or actors. In the later case, probably 1/2 of well known actors are born into the industry. Athletes work through a selective system that is gamed so is the workplace.
On Twitch - people are paid literally in donations from viewers, there are no powerful layers of value chain here, which is a very powerful signal of valid intent on the part of those being entertained.
Twitch Entertainers is possibly one of the most free, open and fair markets going.
Once again: your hints of 'money to pay people for promotion' isn't valuable foremost because 1) 'marketing' exists in all professions (actors have agents, press people, managers and work in a highly controlled system of promotion and 2) those activities are scant and not powerful. Nick Merc is not paying big bucks for marketing, and it wouldn't get him anywhere anyhow.
"Technically most of the contributing creators should be paid and promoted by the platform equally," - no. They should be promoted fairly - which they are. Obviously there is some incumbency in that more popular people get promoted more, however, there's ample opportunity for long tail discovery.
The truth is (and this is a very key understanding) most creators are not creating interesting content. Full Stop.
"The inequality reflects on our current societal problems as well." - no, there's little parallel here.
"The level of labor and efforts in being a platform user and a creator are very high," - this is not relevant. Nobody cares how much work or effort goes into the content creation. They want to be entertained with good gameplay or charismatic personalities, and that's it.
"Even very talented creators don't stand a chance of being recognized " - totally the opposite. They have a very good chance of getting some viewers, and if they have something people want to see, more will tune in.
The reality is, like everything in life - 'most people are not good at it' and the eyeballs are going to veer towards the more talented streamers.
Frankly, I think they get paid too much, I'm glad they get paid something but I'm not going to give them my money.
That said, the system is pretty good. A lot of people making a living out of playing video games, and a lot of people seem to be entertained by that.