Youtube Red Subscription Service - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: krivx
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 05:59:17 am
content: Is there a thread on this already? Youtube are introducing an ad-free subscription servicehttp://techcrunch.com/2015/10/21/youtube-red/#.g7rscd:VRIHhttp://youtube-global.blogspot.com/2015/10/red.htmlApparently they will remove videos from uploaders who don't agree with the new deal. Any idea how this will effect channel owners like Dave?

author: crispy_tofu
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 06:45:51 am
content: YouTube Red has a name suspiciously familiar with some other sites...

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 06:47:22 am
content: Quote from: crispy_tofu on October 22, 2015, 06:45:51 amMy thought exactly... They should have known that there is going to be that connection, and still went with the name.

author: sony mavica
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 07:41:54 am
content: if you don't like ads just use adblock i could care less if a video has ads or not i don't use adblock on youtube

author: crispy_tofu
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 08:07:58 am
content: I'm not sure about everyone else, but AdBlock has stopped working for me on YouTube... Bizarre! (leave it off for Dave, of course)

author: rdl
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 09:03:44 am
content: I don't use a specific ad blocker program, I mostly rely on a comprehensive hosts file, NoScript and Ghostery. I can't remember the last time I saw an ad on youtube. I think there was a Toyota ad sometime last year. Pretty sure it was a Hak 5 video and the ad was actually part of the video, not a separate download.Sometimes on youtube there's a long pause before a video will start, as if it's try to play an ad, but gives up. I think this was a recent change, I remember for a long time I'd have to manually refresh before the video would start to play.

author: krivx
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 09:16:31 am
content: I'm not really concerned with how this would or wouldn't effect adblockers. The current state of youtube is that a large majority of viewers are not using them (http://digiday.com/publishers/global-rise-ad-blocking-4-charts/) and most of the revenue for channel owners is coming from ad impressions. The change in policy is a little worrying in that it may make some channels unprofitable and thus unsustainable under a flat rate scheme if their income drops drastically. It may push youtubers further towards external income systems like Patreon.As an aside, the subscription seem to include Google Music access, which was previously a paid subscription service.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 09:49:40 am
content: I guess someone decided to make Youtube profitable for the first time. I cannot really blame Google for this.In the meantime, uBlock works well on youtube. I buy uRuler and Amazon affiliate, so I dont feel guilty.

author: krivx
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 09:59:18 am
content: Quote from: NANDBlog on October 22, 2015, 09:49:40 amI have supported channels too, it's not really an issue of feeling guilty. It's the logistics of the creators continuing. If EEVBlog (or whatever) can't continue without ads then it doesn't really matter if I personally have contributed or not, it's done either way.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 10:43:21 am
content: Adverts? What adverts?If an advert appears I do one of two things: close the tab, or hide the tab and do something else until the advert is over.There are too many things my eyes and brain could pay attention to - adverts instantly make me look at theotherthings.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 10:43:47 am
content: Quote from: krivx on October 22, 2015, 05:59:17 amI have no idea.Youtube haven't given me any details at all, but then again, I'm a nobody.i have no idea if content creators will get a cut of the monthly fee for each view. If they don't, well, obviously the wheels could fall off the entire Youtube Partner billy cart.If we do get a cut, then whether it's more, the same, or less than what we get will depend upon how much it's liked or hated.I have no problem with the idea itself, and if it proves to not drop my average income (much) then I'll support it.Of course I'm not like most Youtube content creators, as the majority of my income comes from outside the Youtube Adsense ads. But most other Youtubers rely almost solely on their Youtube ad revenue.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 10:45:46 am
content: Quote from: NANDBlog on October 22, 2015, 09:49:40 amI have no problem with people using adblocker on my channel, that's their choice and I support that choice.If enough people use it, then I'm not going to cry foul, I just need to adapt to that.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 10:49:16 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 22, 2015, 10:43:47 amIt seems we do get a cut. Some say we'll earn more it seems?But it seems Red is compulsory, I ever agree with it, or my channel vanishes. Just like the forced Google+ BS

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 10:54:04 am
content: http://techcrunch.com/2015/10/21/an-offer-creators-cant-refuse/#.otwkoj:9VVjQuoteSo will be interesting to see how much (if any) my revenue goes up, as I'd have to be somewhere near the top of longest average videos length channels.

author: rollatorwieltje
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 11:28:24 am
content: The problem I see for content creators is that at some point Youtube will forbid in-video adds like those Squarespace and Audible etc. sponsored deals many Youtubers have, as it conflicts with "providing an add-free experience" and obviously with Youtube's own money making scheme. In the USA the FTC in has recently started to look at paid promotional content where the sponsor is not mentioned, so in the end the only option for sponsored content will be either a deal with Youtube taking a percentage or risk issues with the FTC by not mentioning who paid for the video (sponsors probably don't want this option anyway).For consumers I can see it happen that when some "protected content" is used in a video it will be hidden by the paywall, or when you view the video you automatically "pay for" the song.

author: LordNobady
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 11:37:22 am
content: Google will be trying to push is. The problem is that if they push to much the content creators will go to other sites. and then the users will follow.If google makes it impossible to live of it youtube will blow.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 11:43:49 am
content: Quote from: LordNobady on October 22, 2015, 11:37:22 amNo, they won't. That's channel suicide.QuoteNo, they won't. Most people will not switch platforms just to follow someone.Also, search views will drop to zero.Half the views on my channel (and hence half my Youtube adsense revenue) comes from people who are just searching for stuff.

author: crispy_tofu
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 11:46:52 am
content: IMO I think YouTube has reached the point where they can get away with nearly anything they do, because there really aren't other video websites anywhere near as popular as it...

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 11:51:36 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 22, 2015, 10:45:46 amI actually moved to the big screen to watch Youtube, where the Ads are still there. With smart TVs, I think people will do that.Quote from: EEVblog on October 22, 2015, 10:54:04 amWith the shady, NDAd not clearly communicated business practices of google, anything is possible. The subscribers for red will be people with disposable income, so probably they will spend more time watching quality content, and not play-doh videos.

author: krivx
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 11:55:59 am
content: Quote from: NANDBlog on October 22, 2015, 11:51:36 amYep, I think people underestimate the amount of smartphones and TVs that do not do any blocking. It can be particularly difficult with phones and might require rooting. Most people won't bother.

author: Muttley Snickers
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 12:23:24 pm
content: Please forgive my ignorance in these matters but apart from the bundled music package that they are going to throw in I see this as nothing more than an in house add blocker provided by them themselves.I mainly watch on a smart TV and hit the mute button if there is an annoying add on, very rarely if ever do I sign in to watch a Youtube clip and generally only to give a thumbs up where due, I have no interest whatsoever in online music or play lists so I foresee that this implementation will require signing in to bypass the adds, not interested.Also whats stopping them long term from increasing the number or duration of adds to an intolerable level for those that refuse to cough up, paramount to extortion I say, but what would I know.

author: rs20
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 12:29:28 pm
content: Quote from: Muttley Snickers on October 22, 2015, 12:23:24 pmSubtle difference is that an ad blocker denies revenue to content creators, whereas this service maintains (perhaps even enhances??) revenue for content creators.

author: Rasz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 12:33:43 pm
content: Quote from: crispy_tofu on October 22, 2015, 11:46:52 amexcept its not true. good example is facebook video, its growing like crazy.I watch YT with my own js script pushing raw mp4 links to standalone mplayer.exe = no ads until YT starts encoding inside video stream. This way I can bypass flash and inefficient decode libraries bundled with browsers, not to mention Google insistence on pushing VP9 codec at me (slightly smaller bitrate but significantly lower quality)

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 12:39:09 pm
content: Quote from: crispy_tofu on October 22, 2015, 11:46:52 amYup, that's how it works.And any Youtube content creator knows this all too well. For most it is the price you pay to ride on the Youtube success bandwagon.

author: Muttley Snickers
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 12:48:07 pm
content: Quote from: rs20 on October 22, 2015, 12:29:28 pmYes, damn and I only read that bit not ten minutes ago in a prior post, see people are selfish, guilty as charged.....I will post him a cheque instead, he will be better off that way because my cash bounces.........

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 12:50:26 pm
content: Quote from: Rasz on October 22, 2015, 12:33:43 pmName someone who's a famous Facebook video content creator with millions (or billions) of views and fans.Youtube has 10's of thousands. Youtube istheplatform, nothing comes close, not even 1% close. Facebook gets a lot of video views, but it's not a place you can build a channel, gain an audience, get general search views, grow an audience organically, and make a living from it.I'm ranked 6,479th in the world (or 10,852nd depending upon how you look at it) and I get recognised in the street. Has Facebook produced even one?

author: rs20
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 01:17:27 pm
content: Dave, the video you just linked mentioned watch time as a factor; does that benefit creators who make hour long videos?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 01:19:46 pm
content: Quote from: rs20 on October 22, 2015, 01:17:27 pmThere is talk that this could be the case. Which is good for me of course.But also some talk about this being US only?So either Aussie partners are not invited, or if we are, only 25% of my views come from the US, making it not such a huge deal (for now)

author: Rasz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 01:34:32 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 22, 2015, 12:50:26 pmlets be real, we both wouldnt know, you hate bookface, and I dont even have an account therebut it is a fact that FB video is growing like crazy and has a chance of being a serious competition to YT.http://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-video-v-youtube-market-share-data-2014-12http://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-will-sharead-revenue-1435790090As much as Vimeo is a joke, FB is THE place go get random eyes stumble into your video. I wouldnt be surprised if FB views equalled your YT views if you started posting there.

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 02:31:06 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 22, 2015, 11:43:49 amAnd many in the other half are a result of prior searches (in my case, an old you tube search for a DMM review).

author: langwadt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 04:49:25 pm
content: Quote from: rollatorwieltje on October 22, 2015, 11:28:24 amafaict doing ads with out youtube getting a cut is already sketchyhttps://support.google.com/youtube/answer/3364658a few days ago I saw one guy had put a progress bar on his video with the text roughly"this is an ad I need to pay bills, hang on", while talking about some madras or what ever it was

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 05:38:46 pm
content: FB video is simply to get the ad revenue from the embedded ad, cutting out YT from the system and making all a walled garden in FB. Nothing more, they want to have full acess to the video along with the rest, and with them having enough edge servers to reduce traffic to the core hosting video locally ( as most is watched locally in many instances) makes sense.Here they are cutting deals with cellular carriers to do a Blackberry and have a FB server on the cell network to do the mobile subscribers, offering in many cases a zero rate for the data. That was the biggest plus for RIM, the data to the user appearing as zero cost was a major growth factor.

author: Macbeth
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 09:19:53 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 22, 2015, 10:54:04 amA certain Mr Lorton's vids will be raking in the cash, probably more than his bitcoin mining empire anyway

author: rollatorwieltje
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 09:53:27 pm
content: Apparently it's not just add-free, when you're subscribed to Red the Youtube app on your phone/tablet will also allow "background play" and offline viewing... Maybe useful for some, but let's face it, it's already trivial to download the video files and watch them with any player you like. Not sure how Youtube is going to stop people from doing that.I can already "background play" Youtube on my Samsung Android tablet anyway, just open the Youtube app in a new window

author: crispy_tofu
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 11:15:12 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 22, 2015, 12:50:26 pmEven if Facebook video is growing, I have not seen any videos than are longer than about a minute (rarely up to 5 minutes). Most of them are Vines or other short videos that are only a few seconds long, so I don't think there will be a market for long videos in Facebook any time soon.

author: rs20
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 02:51:36 am
content: Quote from: rollatorwieltje on October 22, 2015, 09:53:27 pmIt's already trivial to download any TV or Movie you want and watch them with any player you like. Doesn't seem to have stopped Netflix being successful...

author: rollatorwieltje
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 06:03:03 am
content: Quote from: rs20 on October 23, 2015, 02:51:36 amSome dodgy torrent site versus the original file, not sure if that's an entirely fair comparison. On Firefox for Android you could literally right click and save the video. I don't see how they could stop this, seems like a side effect of moving to HTML5.

author: Galenbo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 07:27:48 am
content: Quote from: crispy_tofu on October 22, 2015, 11:46:52 amThat's a good description of the actual status, but keeping it that way, staying on top, is the difficult part.Finding a good balance between income, profit, costs, producer friendly, viewer friendly, adding new features is a huge daily task.To not become: Haha, I remember the days Youtube was hot, and people still used that.If they f** up, they surely get on top of: Top10 vanished websites and software people used to use everyday.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 07:38:33 am
content: Quote from: Rasz on October 22, 2015, 01:34:32 pmSo you can't name one, just like I can't.Facebook is almost zero competition to Youtube in terms of being a place for video content creators.QuoteNo, it's not.No one goes to Facebook to search for video content, that is not its purpose, which is why it's no completion for Youtube in this respect.Youtube is the world's biggest search engine. Half my daily views come from searches and recommendations. That would drop to zero on Facebook.QuoteAnd I'd earn zero income from it, as would any other creator.But yes, if I had to leave Youtube I'd likely upload my videos to Facebook so people can follow my page on there, as well as other platforms.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 07:45:04 am
content: Ok, so it seems Facebook has now monetised videos:http://blog.hootsuite.com/how-facebook-videos-can-help-you-make-money/First I'd heard of that.What's that I hear? Is that the sound of Youtubers stampeding to Facebook? Oh, no, it's not, it was the rustling of leaves.And if you think Youtubers can get a bit miffed with Youtube, they'd positively hate Facebook:https://medium.com/@hankgreen/theft-lies-and-facebook-video-656b0ffed369#.76zx0gksh

author: krivx
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 07:50:03 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 07:38:33 amI don't think searching for video is possible on Faebook, only for the account of the uploader.

author: Galenbo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 08:19:02 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 07:38:33 amBut every time I get on Facebook I end up watching videos I didn't search for, so they are even better than Youtube.The "search" is limited to adding pages and contributors to my favourites.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 08:56:40 am
content: Quote from: Galenbo on October 23, 2015, 08:19:02 amBut you are missing the point. That view does not translate into a channel subscription, nor does it lead to people going to the channel page to check out the creators other videos. This is a massive aspect of Youtube that does not happen on Facebook. They are not equivalent platform.From a content creators point of views, it's not just about the views, there is so much more at play. This is why no Youtubers are leaving and gong to Facebook - none.QuoteCorrect, no one searches Facebook for videos, if that's even possible?Youtube is THE search engine for video, nothing else matters

author: MikeW
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 09:09:32 am
content: Quote from: Galenbo on October 23, 2015, 08:19:02 amEvery time I get on youtube I end up watching videos I didn't search for.

author: Rasz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 11:37:08 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 07:38:33 amcan you name one from YT circa 2008? I can only two, brookers and smosh. FB video is where YT was in ~2008.Quote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 07:38:33 amwhat does that even mean? by your own definition there was no place for content creators before YT. Its your Amazon is coming so just fold company and retire argument again.Quote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 07:38:33 amsearches would drop, recommendations (shares) would go thru the roof. Imagine G+, but with actual non fake userbase, every nerd sharing your video so it shows in newsfeeds of entire classes/families etc.Just because FB is structured differently (social interaction versus video farm) doesnt mean its bad (not that I would have anything to do with social interaction).Quote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 07:38:33 amyou mean you didnt read the URL of second link I gave you earlier ("facebook-will-sharead-revenue") ?heheQuote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 07:38:33 amYes, just like Viacom was furious with YT in 2007. But grandpa, what Hank talks about and other YT'ers complain is FB growth hacking. YT was doing it to become big, now FB is doing it to catch up. They will stop, or at least moderate it once dust settles. NO ONE was making any money on YT in 2008 either. FB will be forced to deal with freeloaders once real money from sharing revenue rolls in, or else they will get sued (like yt did).Quote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 08:56:40 amThey translate into Followers that will see your newsfeed.Quote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 08:56:40 amDave, you really need to talk to some social people that actually sit on FB 6 hours a day.Quote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 08:56:40 amJust like no record label was abandoning itunes in 2008. Dave, at this pointyou arethe old media, you are the Dinosaur. It takes some metacognition to realize you are where Viacom was in 2007. You complain about this new kid on the block stealing lunch money and gaining popularity on your back, in 5 years this bully will be the main game in town and you will be scrambling to get in, complaining about entrenched entities with 10mil followers and how FB screws you over making it harder to grow in crowded space.Quote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 08:56:40 amYes yes, and Amazon is THE Cloud provider, nothing else matters!!1 You forgot 'get off my lawn'FB is a paradigm shift(bingo!), you dont search for topics, you search for people.Btw I wrote rebuttal to that amazon eevblog episode, but spamfilter didnt like my links to forbes or something and ate whole postDamn Dave, you sound so old, almost like my mum or RIAA boss

author: mcinque
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 11:41:06 am
content: "On October 28, we’re giving fans exactly what they want. Introducing YouTube Red -- a new membership designed to provide you with the ultimate YouTube experience."http://youtube-global.blogspot.ch/2015/10/red.html"YouTube Red will allow users with a subscription to skip advertising, save videos on their mobile phone to watch them later, access to videos and movies reserved for subscribers and stream music in a manner very similar to Spotify. The offer for now is limited to US users and costs ten dollars a month (thirteen for those who subscribe through the Appstore)."The cons: this initiative could damage (IMO) video producers (like Dave, Alan, Mike and other popular youtubers) because those who publish videos to monetize them and does not accept the conditions of YouTube Red will have their videos marked as private, (ie invisible). This is quite disturbing.The pros: the subscription service can add some extra content since a video producer might decide to maintain a basic channel and a channel with a selection of "greater value" videos.I love youtube technical and learning videos, and I could accept to pay something to continue to view them.But not all channel subscribers (students for example) can afford $120/year for the subcription, so with less subscribers a channel would have much less revenue.What do you think about this?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 12:28:31 pm
content: Quote from: Rasz on October 23, 2015, 11:37:08 amNo, it's not, not even close.Online video and video blogging basically did not exist before Youtube.Facebook is now trying to compete where Youtube so thoroughly owns the market it's not funny, that already has 10's of thousands os content creators making a full time living from it.Quote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 07:38:33 amCorrect. Video content creators basically didn't exist before Youtube.Youtubeliterally created the industry.QuoteCrazy non-sequitur.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 12:32:27 pm
content: Quote from: mcinque on October 23, 2015, 11:41:06 amYes, it's not an option. You either accept it, or you cease to exist on Youtube as a partner.QuoteAFAIK that's not how it works. All videos will be available for free, the viewers either choses to have ads, or pays not to have them.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 12:44:45 pm
content: Quote from: Rasz on October 23, 2015, 11:37:08 amAnd that's why Facebook fundamentally sucks as a platform for content producers. People search forcontentthey want, they don't search for people!Searching for and following people only works after you already know who they are.If I'm a content producer starting out, and I upload a video "how to make a widget" on Facebook, no one will ever see the video on Facebook,nobody. Except a few of your own friends. It will disappear into oblivion, almost instantly.Upload the same video on Youtube and given the right keywords itwillget views, every day, continuously, people will find it, over and over again, 365 days a year until the end of time. Why? Because that's how Youtube works and that's how people do search, they search forstuff. Facebook does not offer this.Yes, a successful channel like mine could upload videos to Facebook and get a decent following, but only because I'm already known.And people aren't going to share the "How to make a widget" video they liked on their Facebook page to their friends who they know don't give a toss about widgets. That only works for stupid viral cat videos. Which is basically what Facebook is filled with - viral videos that get shared and then disappear into a oblivion.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 12:54:06 pm
content: In other news, my Youtube Adsense revenue just jumped 70% this monthBiggest single month rise ever, by far.Some people have mentioned Adblockers not working well any more?

author: Rasz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 01:06:29 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 12:44:45 pmOh man, listen to yourself, again you sound like TV execs 7 years ago. Look at TV now, 30% drop year after year. Just because there was no market for TV shows before TV doesnt mean TV will always dominate. YT works significantly different from TV, yet it took over a large pool of eyeballs. Im sure old folks said YT is stupid, because they want to sit in the sofa click on the remote and be fed content, who would want to click all day long just to watch Santa Barbara or Dynasty, right?Yes, change is hard and we resist it, we often feel its bad or stupid, but we cant stop it.At the end of the day you cant argue with over 1 billion eyeballs and $200B market cap, and why would you want to? FB is great at scamming advertisers, why do you care if people view 3 seconds or 30 minutes if FB pays?

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 01:10:12 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 12:54:06 pmI was watching your mail bag twice.It's so out of your control, like farmers that depend on unpredictable rain.

author: Rasz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 01:19:34 pm
content: Just to reiterate. Farting into the microphone and shouting about ass rape(thats right) retarded swede gets more eyeballs than MOST popular TV shows/programs in two decades, yet you still manage to survive on YT. At the same time you complain about FB being only for 5 second cat videos, oh the sweet irony

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 01:23:07 pm
content: Quote from: Rasz on October 23, 2015, 01:06:29 pm

author: crispy_tofu
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 10:34:15 pm
content: Quote from: Galenbo on October 23, 2015, 07:27:48 amOf course, but currently YouTube has a lot of breathing room.Quote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 08:56:40 amNo, you can't search FB for videos.Quote from: Rasz on October 23, 2015, 01:19:34 pmLOL that wasn't Dave, I think that was me.Scrolling through my newsfeed (mind that this is a younger audience), I can show you what kind of videos there are:- 29,069,261 views, 5 minutes- YouTube video which was shared- 786,000 views, 9 seconds- 1,033,873 views, 15 seconds- 3,016,452 views, 28 seconds- 599,000 views, 10 seconds- 147,000 views, 19 seconds- YouTube video which was shared- 108,000 views, 23 secondsand so on...So while there may be a large amount of views, there's a feature on Facebook that autoplays these videos, so they might not be 'quality' views. Also, look at the duration - they're mostly only a few seconds long.QuoteI don't know about you, but I agree with Dave - usually people don't actively search for videos. On my newsfeed, there's more pictures than videos. Facebook Video isn't really catching on with my demographic.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 23, 2015, 10:57:46 pm
content: And for the "Facebook is huge" fans, remember that the Facebook video view counts are basically fraudulent (relative to Youtube view counts). Take them with a grain of salt.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2015, 12:34:06 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 12:54:06 pmThe HTML5 fallthrough that many adblockers were using now drops to a full blown HTML5 player that youtube have recently started using, where as before it went to a HTML5 video element. I dont mind the ads but it doesnt support fullscreen anymore(HTML5 video was preferable as the codecs were more power efficient).

author: Galenbo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2015, 02:39:33 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on October 23, 2015, 08:56:40 amThat's right, but for the content creator like you, what's the big difference between somebody subscribing to your youtube channel (and watching the videos) and somebody subscribing to the facebook "channel" or page (and watching the videos)I think at the end of the day, an equal amount of videos are produced, and an a general equal amount of videos will be viewed.Of course there will be some differences and manipulation, but that also happens inbetween the same platform, with those regular "terms and conditions updates"

author: crispy_tofu
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2015, 09:01:50 pm
content: Sorry for reviving this thread, but there was an excellent video that was recently posted about Facebook stealing views from Youtube: