this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2024
1095 points (97.2% liked)
memes
10671 readers
2796 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's one or the other. If you pay YouTube for Premium and don't get any ads, advertisers don't pay for your ad impression.
wish there was an option for "pay the platform the few cents the ads make" instead of me paying the platform a wild and ever increasing amount of money
Tbh I feel like they should take a ~30% cut from the creator tips feature and add that to a "ad balance" which would remove ads and subtract the few cents they would've got from the ad. That way YouTube gets paid, the consumer doesn't get ads, and the creator gets encouraged to make good content.
You keep imagining some way how YT could get cheaper for you.
But in fact, ads are highly profitable, and if you buy a premium there's a very transparent revenue share model. 70% of your money goes directly to the creators.
All your wishes are already fulfilled, you're just poor and are trying to justify not paying with imagined arguments.
The thing that bothers me is the revenue doesnt go to creators that I watch. Its all pooled and divided out by view count across the entire platform. Which is bs. I dont want my money going to the top channels that i have zero interest in. A better system is dividing it out to the channels I view.
Thus why adblocking and patreon is highly popular...
Again you're wrong. It's counted directly by the amount you watch and goes to the creators you watch.
Or, equivalently, pool all revenue, divide by watch time, get the same result.
You can verify this by constructing an excel table of 10 users (rows) and 3 channels (columns). Assign random % weights of "watch time" per user per channel. Assume a constant subscription fee of 1. Verify that a column_sum is the same as column_average*10, where 10 is the total platform revenue, as there are 10 users each paying 1.
You are assuming a fair distribution of watch time over channels and/or over the viewers. In reality, some channels are highly popular and some are not. A few proportion of people pay for yt premium. Assuming the payer's money get distributed equally to creators, the less popular channels get less amount from those payers. The question is, does google distribute the paid money according to each user's view?
Then it must changed because thats not how it was when they launched it.
Most YouTube channels have a Patrion account, or something similar.
My biggest gripe about Patreon is that I can't just do a one time donation, it's a subscription to donate money to people. Cool and all, but I'm not rich enough to just give some of my income to people, I'd rather do small donations whenever I can.
I didn't know it was a sub. Yeah that ruins the appeal.
Also Patreon takes a sizeable cut too
You can sub and unsub anytime. You just lose out the "perks" of being subbed the next month.
most patreons are at least $5 so if you sub to more than 2, you might as well be paying for YouTube premium
OR just pay the person directly.
Finally a non-braindead comment.