I don’t think YouTube became profitable, so I don’t know what you expected here? You aren’t entitled to a service they operates at a loss for your personal enjoyment. If you believe you’re entitled to that, then by all means start your own YouTube and put your money where your mouth is.
YouTube is still around is because Google believes that YouTube could become profitable eventually. YouTube earns money with ads and a premium subscription, which many people consider overpriced already. Since the premium subscription is overpriced already, they can only crank up the ads.
This reminds of Twitch, whose service is more expensive to operate than YouTube, except that viable alternatives such as Kick are willing to operate at a massive loss to gain market share. YouTube has no such thriving alternative.
If we’re generous and say that I spend only roughly 2 hours daily x 30 days = 60 hours. $12 premium subscription / 60 hours = $0.20 / hour, excluding the share creators receive from that. That’s cheap for the service they provide.
Edit: I forget I’m on !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com here. Everything done by corporations is evil and morally justifies piracy I guess.
You’re missing the point. Youtube operated at a loss to strangle its competitors who didn’t have Google’s massive cash reserves at their back and call. If YouTube hadn’t done that, we would have seen a greater degree of options on the video streaming market. Monopolies are bad no matter which way you put it.
Exactly. All these people complaining about ads and how YouTube gets user data won’t pay a bit of money to remove those same ads, especially considering the access to information that you get. YouTube is indispensable.
I don’t think YouTube became profitable, so I don’t know what you expected here? You aren’t entitled to a service they operates at a loss for your personal enjoyment. If you believe you’re entitled to that, then by all means start your own YouTube and put your money where your mouth is.
YouTube is still around is because Google believes that YouTube could become profitable eventually. YouTube earns money with ads and a premium subscription, which many people consider overpriced already. Since the premium subscription is overpriced already, they can only crank up the ads.
This reminds of Twitch, whose service is more expensive to operate than YouTube, except that viable alternatives such as Kick are willing to operate at a massive loss to gain market share. YouTube has no such thriving alternative.
If we’re generous and say that I spend only roughly 2 hours daily x 30 days = 60 hours. $12 premium subscription / 60 hours = $0.20 / hour, excluding the share creators receive from that. That’s cheap for the service they provide.
Edit: I forget I’m on !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com here. Everything done by corporations is evil and morally justifies piracy I guess.
You’re missing the point. Youtube operated at a loss to strangle its competitors who didn’t have Google’s massive cash reserves at their back and call. If YouTube hadn’t done that, we would have seen a greater degree of options on the video streaming market. Monopolies are bad no matter which way you put it.
This is a great bit. Seriously chiefs kiss.
Exactly. All these people complaining about ads and how YouTube gets user data won’t pay a bit of money to remove those same ads, especially considering the access to information that you get. YouTube is indispensable.