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.
No- YouTube hasn’t gone 
Kevin Maney
Interestingly, the following paragraph got yanked from the story that’s live now: “Analysts keep fanning the fire with outrageous predictions. PricewaterhouseCoopers released a report saying that by 2010, online video will be a $1.8 trillion industry. That’s about what the USA now spends on health care in a year. If PricewaterhouseCoopers is right, then if YouTube continues to control 60% of the market, by 2010 it will be a $1.1 trillion company.” A message on USAToday article PriceWaterhouseCoopers’ Entertainment and Media Outlook predicts that the entire entertainment and media industry will be $1.8 trillion by 2010. An earlier version of the story misstated PWC’s outlook.”
Here’s how Google will Eat YouTube by 4th Quarter 2006. Is anyone writing this down?
Sensational headline, and not yet true (that I’m aware). But it will be this summer. If you’re ripping off TV and uploading it, you can’t hide behind YouTube. Remember the Napster days when a few individuals got singled out and brought to court? We’ll soon see a few high-profile lawsuits against not YouTube but its uploaders. “YouTube Stirs Napster Memories in Digital Movie Era” is the title of 
Jean-Baptiste Soufron is French, Chief Legal Officer of the Wikimedia Foundation, writes in this