You will, dear reader. But now even more people will. Scott Karp, the popular “Publishing 2.0” author, has given away some of our secrets in his article “Who Will Make Money With User-Generated Online Video.” That’s okay. There’s enough to go around.
In addition to advertising revenue-sharing, Karp points out “subscription revenue sharing.” I’m having trouble envisioning that taking off soon. But it’s probably a viable long-term play. People will eventually (although somewhat reluctantly given all of their other entertainment/technology monthly bills) start shelling out monthly fees to access premium online video content.
If TiVo and Sirius can do it, so can the world of online video. We’ll pay for the assurance that good content is weeded from the cat-crapping videos, and to avoid suffering through pre-roll ads. I just cancelled XM, though, because I got tired of a hybrid subscription PLUS ad model. So here’s hoping we don’t introduce that toxic bleach & amonia mix.
I’ve recently updated you on Revver, Metacafe and Eefoof. But I didn’t mention LuLu.tv. May be worth a look.
Well, I took a look at LuLu.tv and at the moment I think you’d have to be LaLa to bother. You pay a monthly fee and then you collect a percentage of their monthly cash pool based on your clicks. I suspect I’ll be sticking to the office football pool this month. Please, someone else spend $15 to find out if we should bother….
Marquis will try it. Marquis will try anything.
We had one person last month not make back their subscription. The pool is pre-funded:) Thanks for the mention, and come on over Marquis!
Thanks, Jack. I may have to give it a whirl too.
I’ve done some printing through Lulu (I made a photobook with the quality of a magazine for friends), and that process went great.
“I just cancelled XM, though, because I got tired of a hybrid subscription PLUS ad model.”
Sounds like cable TV.