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

YouTube might terminate your access if not profitable for Google

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 95 posts

Re: YouTube might terminate your access if not profitable for Google

#51

Post by nickjj »

alexeichemenda wrote: post #47
nickjj wrote: post #42

This is a weird rule for people uploading videos. You can't just decide to show ads on your videos. Youtube requires you to meet certain guidelines. The last time I checked you need 4,000+ hours of view time each year and 1,000+ subscribers to be allowed to show ads on your videos. That means smaller channels who have limited audiences would have no way to avoid termination because Youtube is blocking themselves from…

It's very likely that if the said small channels are indeed too small to be allowed to monetize, then they would fall under the not profitable accounts even if they were allowed to monetize.

> It's very likely that if the said small channels are indeed too small to be allowed to monetize, then they would fall under the not profitable accounts even if they were allowed to monetize.

It might take 6 months or even a year+ of dedicated uploading to meet those guidelines for most content (unless it's a really popular / trending niche like a new game, etc.).

If Youtube starts banning those accounts then they are effectively not allowing anyone else to join their platform because they would be terminated before they have a chance to get popular enough to enable ads so that Youtube can make money.

Re: YouTube might terminate your access if not profitable for Google

#52

Post by ctdonath »

mic47 wrote: post #11

This might be actually a good thing. Say that you are a user, which uploads a LOT of large videos that almost nobody is watching, apart from your small cabal, and you restrict ads on them (AFAIK was possible in past, not sure if it is now). In such case, you get quite good service for free, and you cost YouTube quite a lot of money for storage. I see that YouTube have following options: 1.) Show more ads elsewhere (s…

Vs other replies, seems it's intended more toward genuinely wasteful content, like "10 hours of stupid on repeat".

Re: YouTube might terminate your access if not profitable for Google

#53

Post by smcameron »

baybal2 wrote: post #22
tudorizer wrote: post #7

As much as I dislike this, they are a business. Running servers and streams is not free. The great conondrum of software...

And yet, Google gets very good prices for servers from OEMs. Instead of terminating people without saying a word, and then stonewalling them, they could've just demanded payment for the service.

They build their own servers. They are an OEM.

Re: YouTube might terminate your access if not profitable for Google

#54

Post by spuz »

nickjj wrote: post #42

This is a weird rule for people uploading videos. You can't just decide to show ads on your videos. Youtube requires you to meet certain guidelines. The last time I checked you need 4,000+ hours of view time each year and 1,000+ subscribers to be allowed to show ads on your videos. That means smaller channels who have limited audiences would have no way to avoid termination because Youtube is blocking themselves from…

That rule only applies for creators looking to be paid for monetising their channel. YouTube will still play ads and earn revenue on views of smaller channels. My channel for example only has about 50 subscribers but displays ads on certain videos that contain copyrighted music.

Re: YouTube might terminate your access if not profitable for Google

#55

Post by madiathomas »

varelaz wrote: post #28
madiathomas wrote: post #21

I skip all YouTube adverts that are longer than 15 seconds and never click on any advert when searching. I am probably considered "commercially unviable", even though a company I own 100%, pays Google thousands of dollars every year to use Google Suite and Google Cloud Engine. I don't see a reason for my personal account to be commercially viable.

Google uses CPM or even kind of vCPM model for videos mostly AFAIK, so if you see more than 5 seconds of the ad, advertisers will pay for it.

Then I am a profitable user then.

Re: YouTube might terminate your access if not profitable for Google

#56

Post by PeterStuer »

I have a family YouTube Premium sub. I think advertising is a horrible monetization model. I also heard that a YouTube Premium view counts something like 6-7 times in terms of monetization for content creators as compared to an ad monetized view.

Re: YouTube might terminate your access if not profitable for Google

#57

Post by alexeichemenda »

nickjj wrote: post #51
alexeichemenda wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very likely that if the said small channels are indeed too small to be allowed to monetize, then they would fall under the not profitable accounts even if they were allowed to monetize.

> It's very likely that if the said small channels are indeed too small to be allowed to monetize, then they would fall under the not profitable accounts even if they were allowed to monetize. It might take 6 months or even a year+ of dedicated uploading to meet those guidelines for most content (unless it's a really popular / trending niche like a new game, etc.). If Youtube starts banning those accounts then they a…

>If Youtube starts banning those accounts then they are effectively not allowing anyone else to join their platform

That's a huge if - one that Youtube probably is not going to enforce on new customers. The same principle applies to most businesses I know - a new account/client has X months to be profitable until they get dropped.

On the flip side, i've often stumbled (in the days where I was parsing youtube for side projects) on projects with hours long videos with 3 views - for years. My best guess would be that those accounts / uploads are what youtube is targeting, not preventing their new account sign up / new DAU drop.

Re: YouTube might terminate your access if not profitable for Google

#58

Post by madiathomas »

Maxion wrote: post #41
madiathomas wrote: post #21

I skip all YouTube adverts that are longer than 15 seconds and never click on any advert when searching. I am probably considered "commercially unviable", even though a company I own 100%, pays Google thousands of dollars every year to use Google Suite and Google Cloud Engine. I don't see a reason for my personal account to be commercially viable.

Keep in mind that not all advertisement is made with the intent of the ad watcher clicking the ad and purchasing a product immediately. The larger brands especially do a lot of share of mind advertising where the goal is simply to make you aware of / remind you of the brand.

Then they must make their adverts smaller. 5-10 seconds is enough to remind me there is a soft drink brand called Coca-Cola.

Re: YouTube might terminate your access if not profitable for Google

#59

Post by mysterydip »

mic47 wrote: post #11

This might be actually a good thing. Say that you are a user, which uploads a LOT of large videos that almost nobody is watching, apart from your small cabal, and you restrict ads on them (AFAIK was possible in past, not sure if it is now). In such case, you get quite good service for free, and you cost YouTube quite a lot of money for storage. I see that YouTube have following options: 1.) Show more ads elsewhere (s…

Where should people go for how-to videos on repairing x? Usually I've found what I needed on youtube, and while very helpful for my need, the popularity of such videos (often long for instructional purposes) is in the hundreds or low thousands of views.

Re: YouTube might terminate your access if not profitable for Google

#60

Post by boomboomsubban »

chii wrote: post #43
utf985 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this a good thing? Obscure and/or old archive footage which usually doesnt get that many views is one of the best things about YT.

> Obscure and/or old archive footage which usually doesnt get that many views is one of the best things about YT. and one of the costs youtube bears, since by definition they can't make money off those videos, but has to pay for storage. I dont know if there's a solution - perhaps non-commercialized accounts can't upload more than X gigabytes of vidoes, or be forced to have ads? Or you (the channel owner) pay for the…

Even consumer SSD's are around 10 cents per gigabyte of storage. These videos wouldn't get many views, but they don't need a ton to recoup storage costs.
Post reply on HN