Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not use an ad blocker? There's no incentive for them to fix it.
Ad blockers have never worked for me on YouTube.
Ad blockers work for youtube, try other ones.
YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
531–540 of 550 posts
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#532I always saw her as one of the best candidates to become the Twitter CEO. She has the industry credence, and the experience of leading and making both google ads and YouTube successful (the two parts that Twitter needs help with). I wonder if Elon Musk would notice.
It would be ironic if Twitter turned into a graveyard for former Googlers, considering how many of them have been shut out from ever working at Google again/being rehired by the company end of their respective non-compete periods.
>considering how many of them have been shut out from ever working at Google again/being rehired by the company end of their respective non-compete periods.
Is this because of layoffs or something else happening? I would think that mass layoffs would still allow eligibility for rehire down the road?
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#533Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure about inferior to spotify though. Lots of things (for me at least) aren't available on spotify, even with subscription. More often than not quality is actually better on YT music. Major thing is also asking in car for 'yo google play me this and that' and spotify just returns some nonsense or cover where YT Music always returns the right thing. Apple music is absolute crap, quality of sound was enough that I…
> Apple music is absolute crap, quality of sound was enough that I didn't even bother extending trial Sound quality not good enough? You know Apple Music supports lossless up to 24-bit 192kHz, at no cost, right? Just what are you talking about?
No, I don't know that since I never got to experience it through web nor app. Maybe I need to own an iphone? Googling for it turned a ton of questions about poor audio quality and some hacks as potential solutions, not to mention often blaming user's hardware setup for it. YT Music is no shenanigans just works, and works great, solution.
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#534Earlier quoted context omitted.
Premium moved me from being a consumer of a content made by big companies (including movies, and most of the shows) towards more independent content creators. I couldn't be more happy about it.
How do YouTube creators get paid from premium subscribers, is it fractions of a cent per minute watched or something?
The Spiffing Brit did a video on YT Premium revenue [0]. My understanding is all the money from all the premium subscribers is thrown into a big pool, of which YouTube takes 45% (or whatever their share is) right off the bat. Then, they take each Premium subscribers’ total watch time across all the channels they watched videos on, and split the remaining money based off of total premium subscriber watch time to each channel.
For example, imagine there are only three YouTube channels out there, The Spiffing Brit, Pewdiepie, and MrBeast. There’s $1,000,000 USD remaining in the pot for the month (or pay period, I’m not sure how regular the payouts are) after YouTube takes their cut. In sum total, YT Premium subscribers watched 100,000 minutes of content: 50,000 minutes to MrBeast, 40,000 minutes to Pewdiepie, and 10,000 minutes to The Spiffing Brit. The payouts would be calculated using:
revenue_share_ratio = sum_channel_premium_watch_time / sum_global_premium_watch_time
channel_premium_payout = global_premium_payout * revenue_share_ratio
So:
MrBeast: revenue_share_ratio = 0.50 = 50,000 / 100,000 channel_premium_payout = 500,000 = 0.50 * 1,000,000
Pewdiepie: revenue_share_ratio = 0.40 = 40,000 / 100,000 channel_premium_payout = 400,000 = 0.40 * 1,000,000
The spiffing brit: revenue_share_ratio = 0.10 = 10,000 / 100,000 channel_premium_payout = 100,000 = 0.10 * 1,000,000
A bit of a contrived and simplified explanation I’m sure, but as far as I am aware the formulae they use to divvy up the money between creators is as straight forward as it gets. Money out per creator = global money in total * (creator minutes total / global minutes total)
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#535So much hate for her on all fronts, yet she made the most rewarding media platform today on the internet. Any creator or consumer who has half a brain should realize the magnitude of the feat and how unobvious it is that YouTube exists as it does today.
>"yet she made the most rewarding media platform today on the internet." I think TikTok holds this position, not YouTube. Indeed, YouTube seems to be pushing really hard for Shorts to be a viable competitor but it doesn't seem to be working. Or, do you mean rewarding in terms of monetization for creators and not engagement?
YouTube is killing TikTok at creator payments which is why most known channels didn't go anywhere.
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#536Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sponsorblock is a thing that exists if in-video ads annoy you.
I don’t believe there’s a way to run it on AppleTV, though I would love to be wrong.
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#537Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sponsors don't pay a fixed amount to creators. They pay for (estimated) views. What I'm proposing is exactly, 100% symmetric to how advertisers who pay Google for YouTube ad placement are already treated -- they pay for views, and YouTube can and does choose to not show those ads to some users, those who pay for Premium. Is that unfair for the ad buyers? Sure, if you squint right… but they're not being deprived somet…
> Sponsors don't pay a fixed amount to creators. They pay for (estimated) views. This can't be right, I've seen many videos from creators that say the opposite, it is a fixed amount per contract which can be one or more videos. Maybe it is different with creators that have more than 1M subscribers.
The estimation is on the front end of the contract, not the back end -- the amount offered to a creator whose videos average 10M views is 10x than what is offered to one whose videos average 1M views, in general. If you think about it from the advertiser's point of view, this is the only sane way to manage the risk of a video going viral and exceeding expected number of views, while still providing a reasonably constant valuation of a view event.
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#538Earlier quoted context omitted.
Worth noting you can VPN to other countries and get super cheap rates ($2 month). You don't have to stay on the VPN to retain the rate.
Do you need payment from there or can use any card?
I used privacy.com which allows any zip/billing address. Not sure if it was needed
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#539Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#540Earlier quoted context omitted.
I honestly think YouTube could have stood up to the advertisers... I also think it was way overblown. Too many people got caught in the crosshairs.
>I honestly think YouTube could have stood up to the advertisers. No, YouTube was looking for an excuse to clean house. Advertisers have had the tools to stop their ads from appearing per video type for a long time now, so the claim that "it's the advertisers" was obvious misinformation. >Too many people got caught in the crosshairs. And yet, YouTube has yet to be dethroned; seems to be working fine for them.
Yea, I honestly don't doubt it.
I've had a rep lie straight to my face telling me demonetized content didn't affect the recommendation of the video. Everyone knew it was a lie but they only admitted it years later.