The online video market is getting more crowded. Here’s another revenue-sharing model in the lines of Revver and Eefoof and Motion.tv. It’s called Flixya. I discovered it from some self-promotional comments posted on popular YouTube videos.
Looks interesting, but the proof is in the pudding. I’ve asked Marquis to post his earnings to date on various sites (and he hasn’t tested Flixya). We need more content creators to do this so we’re not all wasting our times on cool sites with no traffic. Here’s his report from this morning:
Got my earnings statements for July from Motion.TV and eefoof today. I earned .61 cents at Motionless and $8.64 at foofaddle.
He’s earned thousands on Revver, but he’s been posting since 2005 and has a lot more content there. We content creators all want to know where we can make the most dough in the easiest way.
A pure “what site can I make the most $” experiment will require the following:
- The same videos are uploaded during the same time period to multiple sites.
- Revenue is calculated for JUST that time period (recognizing the lag effect of payouts).
- If you publicize that video through other channels, you have to do it equally for each of the sites (for instance, if I feature my Revver video on CubeBreak or a blog… but not my Eefoof version, I’ve biased the study). For best results, don’t publicize any.
- You need to test at least 10 videos to mitigate the “confounding variable” of one site “featuring” that video and skewing the test.
- The other confounding variable is that the sites’ traffic is changing rapidly. So if one site becomes exponentially more popular in months ahead that changes our earning potential
I’m laying this out but I suddenly don’t have the time to do this experiment because I just took a new job. And Marquis is fixing his mom’s toilet. Anyone else interested in giving this a run? We’ll creative the “definitive guide to online video revenue-sharing sites.” Oh- don’t raise your hand if you’re going to do this. It will bias the study because the site might treat you like the chef that discovers the Food critic is at the restaurant.
What if I say I’m going to do the test just so the sites will really treat me right (like the discovered food critic)? Then, in each blog that I mention the test results, for each site I have the same paragraph lauding the site. So when they google their site, they see that they’ve been lauded (as long as they don’t read further and see the same thing being said about the other sites) and they’ll want to feature my videos even more. I would rake in the video dough. Is that ethical? Who polices fake site lauding blogs? Maybe I should just get into politics instead? Maybe I should get back to work… 🙁
Truth be told that’s what the whole point of this blog is. You feature Nalts’ videos… you get good press.
Woah- did I say that or think that?
$1.10-motionless,$12.10 eefoofed 🙁 COME ON REVVER 1.0 !!!
Aquadad: You could try using ‘zefrank’ as a noun, pronoun, adjective and verb. Couldn’t hoit. It’s just a zefrank. Zefrank it or not. I’m just zefranking here.
Marquis, are you zefranking around with my head? Does MotherZefranker work? Holyzefrank! Motherzefranking zefrank zefranker!
Nalts, your using your internal blog outloud again.
Zefrankingly yours,
A.D.
Maybe I’ll change my name to AquaZefrank? AquaMentos? AquaIDoNothingAllDayDad? Actually, it’s more like IDoWhatMyWifeSaysAllDay. MarquisDeAqua? Aqualts?
I really need to stop zefranking around with the blogs. I haven’t made a video in weeks!
Man- that meter maid ZeFranked me. I’d llke to apologize for any ZeFranking I did on Saturday. I don’t remember much.