21–30 of 73 posts
Can’t help but think the expenses were overboard. $3500 spent per video, including a producer, DP, food stylist, and editor? Surely videos of very similar quality could be made with a fraction of that budget if the fat was trimmed and it was approached more bootstrap-y instead of a full production.
DP?
Can’t help but think the expenses were overboard. $3500 spent per video, including a producer, DP, food stylist, and editor? Surely videos of very similar quality could be made with a fraction of that budget if the fat was trimmed and it was approached more bootstrap-y instead of a full production.
While I appreciate her being so open about the financial side, one has to wonder: > If we roll with the average Adsense income, here’s the bottom line: $14k going out. $4k coming in. Net loss, month over month: TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS. That’s a lot to sink into a channel that is barely moving book sales and not getting me a TV deal. Simply put, it’s completely unsustainable from a business perspective. Why carry on doin…
> Why carry on doing that for so long? They weren't actually losing money. If you read further, it turns out that the channel was profitable thanks to video sponsorships.
I get that the author wants to be a chef and that's fine but I don't think YouTube really rewards high production costs as much as pushing out frequent content.
Can’t help but think the expenses were overboard. $3500 spent per video, including a producer, DP, food stylist, and editor? Surely videos of very similar quality could be made with a fraction of that budget if the fat was trimmed and it was approached more bootstrap-y instead of a full production.
You should give it a try. I do not think you will be able to do it for less at similar quality, especially with food.
The mistake is thinking YouTube content needs to be quality to be successful.
Can’t help but think the expenses were overboard. $3500 spent per video, including a producer, DP, food stylist, and editor? Surely videos of very similar quality could be made with a fraction of that budget if the fat was trimmed and it was approached more bootstrap-y instead of a full production.
You should give it a try. I do not think you will be able to do it for less at similar quality, especially with food.
I do know that there are many profitable cooking YouTube channels that didn’t have a separate producer and food stylist from day 1, and probably still don’t.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should give it a try. I do not think you will be able to do it for less at similar quality, especially with food.
IDK, I watch this guy futurecanoe who does random cooking content and he just films that shit with the worst quality camera he could find. And he has ~3mil subs. The mistake is thinking YouTube content needs to be quality to be successful.
Can’t help but think the expenses were overboard. $3500 spent per video, including a producer, DP, food stylist, and editor? Surely videos of very similar quality could be made with a fraction of that budget if the fat was trimmed and it was approached more bootstrap-y instead of a full production.
You should give it a try. I do not think you will be able to do it for less at similar quality, especially with food.
I think he did have a good camera early on, but that's more of a one time 1k-2k purchase, not 3500 a video.
> It costs $29 per thousand to run an ad in my videos, and I get $10 per thousand. Where does the other $19 go? To YouTube, of course. That’s a 2:1 split in favor of the platform. Lord, give me strength. I thought the split was something like 55-45 for Youtube vs the creator. This sounds more like 66-33, is this typical for other creators / influencers as well?
The RPM she achieved is excellent (average in many niches is $1-$2), she could have been incredibly successful if she trimmed down her production cost.