Youtube being losing money left and right. What is bothering me is the question of 'why not youtube goes for the 10-15 second ads at the start of every video and try to bring the revenues and P/L in the gains territory'. Every other network, even CNN and BBC do this. What stops youtube from adopting the same approach. It is not a drastic change of the business model and for a free news/sport/music video, viewers would not mind a small ad from a consumer business. Thx all for the inputs.
I would mind it. I hate already how a 30second sound bite is accompanied by a 15 second commercial just before on so many websites. Plus the technology is screwy and the more videos within videos and the more times I can't access them at all! I would probably still watch YouTube just long enough for someone else to come along.
Five second spots would be my limit for youtube. I want to just bounce around and see interesting stuff, I never know what I'm going to get before it starts, waiting very long to just find out if I want to see the video is out..... The biggest loser on talk radio is Air America. I tried to stream one of their shows... I was into my fifth frigging commercial before the show started and I had to hit the kill switch... nobody is listening so they have to run more ads to pay for it... bad business model...
You tube can still come back into black numbers if they go for 5-10 second ads. They have been making money so far until recently, so small help from revenue ads will be a big help. Or they can have ads for only the premium content videos, i.e. some videos which will have ads and some which will not. Video clips take a lot of bandwidth so there has to be a compensation and counter revenue stream running in parallel.
Hulu has bettery quality. Well Vzillion is going to blow them both away. Geoff ===== aka Cajun Sniper Trader/Administrator http://PureTick.com
Itâs my understanding that it is a legal issue. I'm no lawyer but as I understand it, it's something like this. Basically, Google makes the claim that they can't possibly prevent all copyrighted material from being placed on YouTube, and that Google is not responsible for enforcing that all videos have the necessary licensing that might be required. They can do this under the "safe harbor" provisions in the DMCA. This basically makes it the responsibility of copyright holders to watch YouTube, and send Google a DMCA take-down notice if the rights holder sees his/her stuff posted illegally on YouTube. Any legal liability is on the hands of the individual YouTube user and not with Google. The problem is that if Google were to actually profit from unlicensed intellectual property on YouTube, itâs harder (or maybe not possible at all) to use the "safe harbor" provisions in the DMCA, and therefore Google might have to assume legal liability for unlicensed content posted on YouTube. So, this prevents Google from placing ads on any video that they don't for-sure have a 100% legit license to all of the content in the video.
They need to add everything with no restrictions. If you are old enough and someone upload monkey/midget porn, you should be able to watch it. Youtube should be the only site where you could get everything. Different age groups lead to different ads. I could go all day. But I already have a job.
I would much rather make a donation than be subjected to commercials. If I had to sit through an advertisement before every video I watched, I would not use youtube.
The Credit Suisse analysts donât however think itâs necessarily game over for YouTube. They describe the site as being still âat a nascent stage.â They then spell out how Google could better turn YouTube from a money pit into a veritable gold mine. This requires more official or premium content being put on the site, which will only come from content deals. ____________________ broker reviews Etoro Review AvaFX Review