MoogleViper Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 Yeah I kinda think along the same lines in that nothing else is really big enough to, and that YouTube is super huge.However I do think of things like Myspace and Imageshack that have once been used by almost everyone, and now are faded into obscurity in the minds of some. Were those money/sub driven causes too? The power of free/not paying shouldn't be underestimated. But neither of those services faded because they charged too much. They faded because better services.came along. Their lack of innovation, whilst their competitors innovated, is what caused the shift. It's a very old-fashioned view (that many people still have) that money is the primary driver in the market. Think of any major market shift and it most likely was due to innovation rather than cost. Apple didn't become the biggest company in the world by being the cheapest, they did it through innovation.
Rummy Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 Sadly I'd continue to be of the view that money is a driver - what is it that the innovation offers that drives things? Surely better efficiency and value for the money(or lack thereof, in case of free services) being put out? I don't think it can be separated. Are Apple actually the biggest company in the world(genuine question)? Was the innovation in terms of the product, or the branding/marketing, or something else? I can't actually recall what happened with MySpace though I'd presume it was facebook(though I feel like I left the former before the latter) but with Imageshack - what did their competitors start doing that won out there? I use imgur mostly for hosting these days, but I see very little difference myself personally compared to the functionality I had with Imageshack - in their case I think they put barriers in to its old functionality, and that's what I'm saying would be my concern with YouTube if they change their service like jayseven suggested(which, again, isn't actually the case here as it seems).
Goafer Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 Put me squarely in the old fart brigade... I just don't understand how watching someone play a video game or chat about bags and shoes can be so popular... *confused* I don't understand watching a game of football, but that seems pretty popular. Sometimes people just want passive entertainment.
Cube Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 Yes, a lot of the time it isn't so much about what they're doing, but the personalities that people can enjoys. For example, Ashens reviews random crap but I find him to be extremely funny and entertaining, as well as interesting at the same time. Why else would I watch a ?
MoogleViper Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 Sadly I'd continue to be of the view that money is a driver - what is it that the innovation offers that drives things? Surely better efficiency and value for the money(or lack thereof, in case of free services) being put out? I don't think it can be separated. Are Apple actually the biggest company in the world(genuine question)? Was the innovation in terms of the product, or the branding/marketing, or something else? I can't actually recall what happened with MySpace though I'd presume it was facebook(though I feel like I left the former before the latter) but with Imageshack - what did their competitors start doing that won out there? I use imgur mostly for hosting these days, but I see very little difference myself personally compared to the functionality I had with Imageshack - in their case I think they put barriers in to its old functionality, and that's what I'm saying would be my concern with YouTube if they change their service like jayseven suggested(which, again, isn't actually the case here as it seems). Innovation offers a better all-round service that people are willing to pay for. Apple are both technologically and marketing innovative (though, despite popular belief, they are not inventive; apple have never invented anything). The iPod was not the first mp3 player, they were about four years too late in that regard, but they were the first to offer a complete package. They saw that the issue with mp3 players was the lack of availability of digital music. So they created the iPod which they bundled with iTunes (which they also didn't create, they bought out soundjam mp). Its the same.story with the macintosh, which was the first prebuilt PC (previously they were only kit form). They also produced the first mouse and GUI (which they bought from Xerox). The first smartphone was from Palm years before the iPhone, but it had little functionality, and the internet network wasn't ready for a product like that, son they created the iPhone with the app store (the touch screen was.made by finger works, so apple bought the company). Same story with the tablet (Microsoft made a tablet PC first). It's not that money isn't a driver, it's that money isn't the primary driver. Hence why BMWs are more expensive than Hondas, even though Hondas are better by every quantifiable metric. But Hondas don't carry the same level of prestige. People are willing to pay for complete packages. Apple were announced as the biggest company a few years ago (although it was debatable whether it was actually the China petroleum group; either way they're still up there). Yet their products are the most expensive in their field, and anyone "in the know" will shout about how they're not the best phone/PC/tablet in the market, and how you can get so much better for less money, but they still outsell their rivals. I don't understand watching a game of football, but that seems pretty popular. Sometimes people just want passive entertainment. Watching shows like bake off, or big brother, or keeping up with the kardashians is far more mundane, but shows like that have drawn in millions of viewers for years. The idea that most people want the most stimulating/intellectually challenging entertainment is just unfounded nonsense.
bob Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 Watching shows like bake off... is far more mundane, Shun him. SHUN HIM! Seriously though, what the fuck is wrong with you?
Phube Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 Right on cue: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-34504053 1 - Nope 2 - Nope 3 - Nope 4 - Nope 5 - Nope 6 - Nope 7 - Nope 8 - Nope 9 - Nope 10 - Nope
Serebii Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 Damn I'm not on there. Really need to up my Youtube game.
Ashley Posted October 25, 2015 Posted October 25, 2015 They'll crack down on people using adblock and crank up adverts after red picks up. marrk myyy wooorrrrddss! Only evil people use adblock. Right on cue: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-34504053 1 - Nope 2 - Nope 3 - Nope 4 - Nope 5 - Nope 6 - Nope 7 - Nope 8 - Nope 9 - Nope 10 - Nope 1. Misogynist 2. Comedy Game thing I guess? 3. Fashionista wannabe 4. Torier version of Serebii 5. Friendly ghost
Nolan Posted October 25, 2015 Posted October 25, 2015 FuCK I NEED TO GEt my keyboard. i also turned on capslock somehow and am shifting for each letter.... thanks win8.1... Much better. My mate was telling me about this yesterday - he said it was $11 a month in the US or something?! That's a huge price imo if accurate - and not something I'm particularly interested in in the slightest. I know people who use Youtube like lots, but I was thinking about it and I'm not sure I'd class my own usage as all that huge these days(barring embedded/linked content). $10 actually. And fuck paying that, or any, amount. I get the impression that the fee doesn't affect regular YouTube adverts at all. Just that the new content doesn't have adverts. It affects the content creators in a massive way actually. Non Red members will still see ads and revenue will still be generated as current regardless of whether new or old content. Subscribers to Red will see no ads on any content, its very cloak and dagger, mysterious right now but there will some sort of profit split. No one really knows because Youtube is pretty tight lipped as usual. There were rumors of that creators who didn't sign up to be a part of Red (i.e. allow ad-free subscribtion videos) would have their videos marked as private and ergo viewable by no-one. I haven't found or seen hard evidence of this and I'm not going to do the hard digging but I've seen it mentioned twice now. What is happening though, is that videos are being blocked currently because the owner of the IP has yet to sign on with Red. Notably Japanese developers have not agreed and youtube has blocked any video featuring gameplay of those developers games in the US. And that is a problem. And if they never agree.....we don't know. It might just not be possible to view their games on the platform at all. And that gives a bit of truth to the rumor that content creators will have their videos marked private if they don't agree. A couple links for anyones perusal. Jim Sterling talking about it in his way. Destructoid's article about blocked videos and the response Youtube gave as to why. Basically, YoutubeRed is a bad thing. I can't blame them for wanting more revenue to themselves, but it feels really against the people. Only evil people use adblock. 1. Misogynist 2. Comedy Game thing I guess? 3. Fashionista wannabe 4. Torier version of Serebii 5. Friendly ghost I don't see a four I see 3 threes.
Magnus Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 ThatcherJoe? I thought it was reasonably clever. Unless you're offended because there's no one Torier than you.
Ashley Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 (edited) I don't see a four I see 3 threes. I was going by the order in the list. The list is actually ranked and there are three people joint third. Edited October 26, 2015 by Ashley
Serebii Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 ThatcherJoe? I thought it was reasonably clever. Unless you're offended because there's no one Torier than you. Crap, I need to stop wearing a monocle when I come here. I've been found out.
Diageo Posted October 27, 2015 Posted October 27, 2015 I already pay for Google Play Music and that's bundled in so I'm not going to complain about the removal of ads from Youtube and the ability for locked screen and offline playback and extra content. People will still get all their normal ad-paid videos, this is just like the extra content youtubers already put on services like patreon which increase youtuber revenue through their community, because ad supported revenue is not high enough to support the growth of certain styles of videos (mainly the ones that take a long time and are expensive, such as animation). It's a way for people who love watching youtube to help support the creators more. I think it's a good thing.
flameboy Posted October 29, 2015 Posted October 29, 2015 (edited) This guy made his views known.... I would say "real consequences" it a somewhat exaggerated viewpoint. He has made a crap ton of money in a "luxury" industry (I mean this in terms of it not being a vital service) he should be counting grateful something he has a career at all...the people who watch with adblocker are still giving him views.... Edited October 29, 2015 by flameboy
Diageo Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 They might be giving him views, but he's not getting ad revenue from them. Should everyone in "luxury" markets be thankful they have a job at all? For some demographics, people like him are their main source of entertainment, same as TV used to be. There's somewhat of an adblockalypse since Apple made adblocking mainstream and Google is making efforts to change the way ads are presented to combat this. Both with this and the new specifications for making news content faster to load on the web. I don't like how Youtube is pulling an Apple Music and not paying youtubers for views during the free trial. If this is true they should change that very quickly.
Goafer Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Should everyone in "luxury" markets be thankful they have a job at all? If they're as piss boilingly annoying and high paid as him? Yes, he should count himself very lucky.
Happenstance Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 If they're as piss boilingly annoying and high paid as him? Yes, he should count himself very lucky. Why though? I hate him as much as the next guy but he wasnt lucky, he still worked to get where he is.
MoogleViper Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Why though? I hate him as much as the next guy but he wasnt lucky, he still worked to get where he is. I think its more a case of.moaning, "I'm making a million pound with a decent job, hut I could be making 2 million if it weren't for evil people using adblock. Woe is me."
Happenstance Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Don't see why there should be a difference just because he makes more. If I was missing out on a million pounds I should have been owed then I'd moan as well.
Nolan Posted November 1, 2015 Posted November 1, 2015 What's the bet that he too uses Adblock though? I really wouldn't be surprised if he(and many others) did it as well and kept others from owed revenue. I know of a fair few places that don't condemn Adblock but politely ask users to whitelist their site because the extra revenue does help, and the ads are unintrusive.
david.dakota Posted November 1, 2015 Posted November 1, 2015 I already pay for Google Play Music and that's bundled in so I'm not going to complain about the removal of ads from Youtube and the ability for locked screen and offline playback and extra content. It's easy to consider Red in isolation but coupled with Google Music it's a pretty attractive and unique service, definitely worth the charge. It'll be interesting to see how things evolve, I can see a time where Google chase Netflix/Amazon TV.
Diageo Posted November 3, 2015 Posted November 3, 2015 I think its more a case of.moaning, "I'm making a million pound with a decent job, hut I could be making 2 million if it weren't for evil people using adblock. Woe is me." Is he moaning or just stating a fact?. Youtube Red is a move towards a different model of income that moves away from advertising, and it has to some extent been pushed along by adblockers.
Recommended Posts