>> |
No. 386180
>>386172 >you’d almost think they want people to find some other video site to which they can upload silly cat videos and leave YouTube to the professional content creat—oooooooh.
>I KNOW that is what they want. They would realize the maximum profit if all the content on youtube was commercialized and uploaded by big networks, loaded with advertisements.
Funny thing about that: I don't really see why big networks would want to work with Youtube, other than to get the visibility of being on the same site people browse their friend's arbitrary uploads, cat videos, and other such things. I suppose there's also users who upload copyright-infringing material that the owner chooses to monetize themselves instead of it shutting down, but they'd be driven out with the above since they're not getting paid themselves.
Without that, I expect viewership wouldn't be driven much by Youtube itself, and I don't see why content creators wouldn't then host their creations elsewhere. Possibly just less crowded sites, ones that give a better cut of revenue, or ones more specialized to their type of content, if not a place they run themselves. There's also the question of how much of a revenue cut Youtube gives, but Blip.tv is the only host I know of that gives details on that matter publicly, so it's hard to make a point of comparison out of it.
Honestly, I think Google might be trying to kill off Youtube altogether, and just sell ads to appear next to videos on other sites. Or just leaving Youtube as a testing ground for interns like I've long suspected.
|