Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I pay $10/mo for YouTube Premium, and my expectation is that I will not have to sit through any ads. A sponsorship is an ad, which violates that expectation, so I use SponsorBlock to skip them.

For channels that I watch regularly, I contribute to their Patreon if they have one. I shouldn't have to sit through a sponsorship segment in addition to that.



If you pay for YouTube Premium, the creators of monetized videos you watch get paid an order of magnitude more than with just YouTube ads.


"order of magnitude" implies 10x. That's great news for small / independent creators! Can someone point me to a source for this information?


It's hard to compare apples to apples, as ad revenue is based on amount of ads shown and your premium subscription is divvied up among your most watched creators based on watchtime [1]

[1] https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7060016?hl=en


Great link! Do you think it is fair to say the YouTube Premium payout model is similar to the music streaming platform, Spotify?

At the risk of nerd sniping myself, thinking deeper, I wonder if people who sign up for YouTube Premium do less random surfing on YouTube and instead focus on a few channels they love? That would _further_ concentrate their payouts. If true, then the 10x figure sounds reasonable.


Nope. Spotify divides the whole subscription revenue per content's share in total time being played, thus it doesn't matter if you listen exclusively to some garage band - your money would go to whatever pop is now topping.


Well not really because you up the count for the garage band you're listening to. Quick calculation shows this model gives more influence on the repartirion of money to those who listen to the most music, even though they pay the same (as compared to YouTube's that gives the same budget to everyone)


Quick calculation shows that infinitesimal multiplied by a number is still infinitesimal, while YT's model is a real number multiplied by an integer.


Not really:

Let - p := subscription price

- N := number of subscribers

- P:= total spotify money = p * N

In first approximation, let us consider that all subscribers listen to the same amount of music per month

- v := number of minutes of music per subscriber per month

- V := total number of music listened to = v * N

Then, by listening to a minute of an artist, the amount you add to that artist revenue is approximately

P / V = p / v

Which is a fraction of a non-infinitesimal number (in that first approximation)

You got confused by a fact that an infinitesimal number times an infinite number can very much be real


It's not possible to give that specific information

The reason being that people in the businessy genre already get 10x (~$10CPM) what a gaming channel (~$1CPM) gets because there's more advertisers and less channels. You'd need to know the source channel


Its not entirely the channels fault. If youtube paid creators a higher share on monetized videos and didn't keep changing the ranking and terms there would be less need to add alternate forms of monetization.

Heck, youtube could even build in a patron feature much like twitch has with subscriptions.


> Heck, youtube could even build in a patron feature

Isn't this basically YouTube Membership[1]?

[1] https://www.lifewire.com/how-do-youtube-channel-memberships-...




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: