15 Replies to “Is YouTube’s Ad Sharing “All It’s Cracked Up to Be?””

  1. YouTube’s ad sharing program is disappointing to people who’s videos only ever appeal to a niche market (such as myself). The article mentions that creators want to drive traffic to their own dedicated sites, citing ‘more control over content’ as the reason.

    Whilst this is certainly true, what you are actually trying to do is siphon your market out of a main stream site so that you can target your ad revenue more efficiently.

    My videos have been effective in this regard in that the number of people subscribed to my web site far eclipses the number of people subscribed to my YouTube channel (and I mean FAR – like eat my dust, can’t see you, even with a telescope).

    I still don’t have anywhere near the number of web site subscribers that would get me into YouTube’s ad sharing program but at least I’ve got a chance to begin earning some revenue with Revver, Flixya and ad sense from my own creative content.

  2. Some lessons to be learned from this article, but does ANYONE have the details on this youtube revenue sharing deal?

    Is there a list of all the chosen?

    What are they being paid or what percent?

    Why aren’t any of the people talking, except blunty3000 sort of?

    Were they told to keep quiet? This doesn’t seem like standard online site paying practice. Is youtube developing an elite cult?


    echo echo echo

  3. Would someone actually pay me for sitting on the toilet and talking about shitting my pants?

  4. So what’s the share? What’s youtube paying? How is it structured?
    I can’t find any of that info on youtube. Anyone of “the chosen” what to dish?

    Why the big secret?

  5. For my mind, MetaCafe is best for those who want to be seen and earn some money in the same time. Its video circulation technology gives a fare chance to everybody (relatively of cause). Thought you can theoretically get better revenues from Revver, your video still have more chances to get lost in the ocean of the viral content, with all the respect. I’m not even speaking about much more bigger “ocean” of YouTube, which is still good for storage, but not more than that.
    I also think that there is a good point in the article about separate video sites and video blog’s brands emerging. Those who will succeed in producing video brand will be the main earners, probably. Actually, they are now, as “Ask a Ninja” or the host of this blog.
    It seems that viral content field is developing in a way similar to Independent Film Industry, while most of the creators look forward to be bought by big production company in the future, after producing the next hit in a cheapest way. Some independent filmmakers still want to keep their creative freedom and refuse to became just bolt in a bigger commercial machine, despite of the gold mines. Hopefully we will be able to keep that kind of free creative minds in videoblogging community.

Comments are closed.