Posted July 20, 201113 yr http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405...=googlenews_wsj Wall Street Journal "The old model cheapened the value of music videos," says Vevo President and Chief Executive Rio Caraeff. "We want to restore the premium lustre." Money is trickling back to the labels: A label whose videos rack up 10 million streams on Vevo could collect around $70,000. 143 million views x $0.007 per view = $1,001,000 check from VEVO These 19 Music Videos (except the last 2 in the pictures) have crossed the 143 million views mark: http://www.vevo.com/videos#?order=MostViewedAllTime http://www4.picturepush.com/photo/a/6133437/640/6133437.jpg http://www5.picturepush.com/photo/a/6133438/640/6133438.jpg The fastest to 300 million views is On the Floor. It debuted on March 4, 2011. Which mean it only took 4 and a half months.
July 20, 201113 yr This is what made me laugh at 'the metal militia' campaign to thumbs down Bieber videos. All they achieved was giving him extra views and thousands of extra dollars. Fools.
July 20, 201113 yr This is what made me laugh at 'the metal militia' campaign to thumbs down Bieber videos. All they achieved was giving him extra views and thousands of extra dollars. Fools. If only 'thumbs down' datings *did* lose him money... :w00t:
July 20, 201113 yr This is what made me laugh at 'the metal militia' campaign to thumbs down Bieber videos. All they achieved was giving him extra views and thousands of extra dollars. Fools. 'Campaign'? You make it sound like people have formed some sort of an alliance with the specific aim of thumbing the videos down :unsure:
July 21, 201113 yr Author Pretty crazy how much revenue it generates. I gotta think of something good... ha It would generate a lot more if most VEVO views are from VEVO.com instead of Youtube. If all VEVO videos are viewed on VEVO, it could pays around $2 million for every 100 million views. Instead of $700,000 for every 100 million views. For example, Hulu charges $50 CPM (cost per thousand) for its videos. This equates to $0.05 per ad per viewer(or $5 million per ad per 100 million views). Edited July 21, 201113 yr by Dust2
July 21, 201113 yr It would generate a lot more if most VEVO views are from VEVO.com instead of Youtube. I tend to avoid Vevo if I can, because of the bloody pre-song adverts! :angry: That's why I have to channel hop on Sky, too. I wish there was an option to block Vevo videos from a Youtube search. Edited July 21, 201113 yr by vidcapper
July 21, 201113 yr Author I tend to avoid Vevo if I can, because of the bloody pre-song adverts! :angry: That's why I have to channel hop on Sky, too. I wish there was an option to block Vevo videos from a Youtube search. Your favourite artists probably NB5jyYD2WEw There is no free lunch. If you want ad-free Music Video, go buy it on Itunes. Edited July 21, 201113 yr by Dust2
July 21, 201113 yr Your favourite artists probably Of course. :lol: There is no free lunch. If you want ad-free Music Video, go buy it on Itunes. There used to be a 'free lunch' - that's how YT built up its user base. Perhaps I should ask Youtube for royalties on the videos I've posted there - they may not be music, but since all original work automatically is copyright of the creator, why aren't they sending me a royalties for based on the number of people who've viewed them? :P
July 21, 201113 yr 'Campaign'? You make it sound like people have formed some sort of an alliance with the specific aim of thumbing the videos down :unsure: Thats exactly what they did. called themselves the 'metal militia' , designed to thumb down JB videos. spammed loads of rock videos.....I don't think they really thought it properly.
July 21, 201113 yr Thats exactly what they did. called themselves the 'metal militia' , designed to thumb down JB videos. spammed loads of rock videos.....I don't think they really thought it properly. Is this the one that has 600 people on Facebook? I highly doubt they make up more than 1% of Bieber's total thumbs down. And 1 view is 0.7 US cents (0.4p in UK currency) so even if all 600 do it every day that amounts to giving Bieber £2.40 a day. Not exactly a huge amount... :unsure: Edited July 21, 201113 yr by Bré
July 21, 201113 yr I tend to avoid Vevo if I can, because of the bloody pre-song adverts! :angry: That's why I have to channel hop on Sky, too. I wish there was an option to block Vevo videos from a Youtube search. Would you rather YouTube shut down? Believe it or not there is a purpose for ads, they're not just pointless annoyances. They're a very minor inconvenience, just ignore them. -_-
July 21, 201113 yr Would you rather YouTube shut down? Believe it or not there is a purpose for ads, they're not just pointless annoyances. They're a very minor inconvenience, just ignore them. -_- Why not stick to banner ads then, and keep them clear of the actual videos!
July 21, 201113 yr Author Why not stick to banner ads then, and keep them clear of the actual videos! Video ads pay a lot more than banner ads. Youtube expense is around $800 million a year. It hasn't make a profit.
July 21, 201113 yr I remember a few years ago, there were no adverts on Youtube, at least from what I remember. So how did it work then? And I also remember Girlfriend by Avril Lavigne was the most viewed music video. :lol:
July 22, 201113 yr I remember a few years ago, there were no adverts on Youtube, at least from what I remember. So how did it work then? And I also remember Girlfriend by Avril Lavigne was the most viewed music video. :lol: How did it work before Google ? ...some numbers about how much it cost to run YouTube leading up to the Google acquisition. During the first 18 months of YouTube’s operations, from February 2005 when the domain was first purchased through August 2006 when it was desperately seeking acquirers, the fledgling video company spent more than $11.5 million to grow its user base big enough to become attractive to Google. Most of that money — about $8 million or so — went to paying for infrastructure needed to run the site, with a vast majority of that money going toward the site’s web hosting costs. In the three months from June 2006 through August 2006, the company was spending about $1 million each month on hosting costs alone, and that wasn’t even taking into account data center costs that YouTube was also paying for or ad serving costs as the firm began selling its own advertising. In addition to web infrastructure costs, YouTube had other operating expenses and personnel costs to contend with. In the first 18 months of its existence, YouTube spent about $3.6 million on employee compensation, travel, facilities, costs and the like. By November 2005, its regular operating expenses were about even with infrastructure costs — at a little more than $130,000 per month, but not long after that, the company’s web hosting bills really started to take off as the video sharing site gained traction. It wasn’t until December 2005 that YouTube started clocking revenue — a meager $15,000 during that month — and by that point, the company had spent more than $400,000 on operating and infrastructure expenses. But costs began to increase rapidly after that, and topped out at about $2.6 million during August 2006 — just two months before Google’s purchase of the company was made public.http://gigaom.com/video/how-much-did-it-co...-start-youtube/ The adverts started in 2009, since Google took over Youtube YouTube to trial pre-video ads Andrew Fairbairn 21 May 2009 - 21:01 YouTube is to run a trial of "pre-roll" video ads on selected content from several broadcasters starting from today. The pre-roll ads are short video ads shown before the video you requested and could be up to 30 seconds long. Advertisements will start appearing around videos from BBC Worldwide, ITN, Discovery, National Geographic and - from today - Channel 4. (the rest of the article here) http://www.neowin.net/news/youtube-to-trial-pre-video-ads
July 22, 201113 yr Video ads pay a lot more than banner ads. Youtube expense is around $800 million a year. It hasn't make a profit. It's the classic conundrum - you need to make money from adverts, but if you make them too intrusive you'll drive away your customers...
July 22, 201113 yr Oh please. At the end of the day it's a free service and the overwhelming market leader - nobody's going to stop using Youtube just because there are (skippable!) adverts at the beginning of videos.
July 22, 201113 yr Oh please. At the end of the day it's a free service and the overwhelming market leader - nobody's going to stop using Youtube just because there are (skippable!) adverts at the beginning of videos. Maybe not stop *entirely*, but I certainly use it less than I did, because of them...
Create an account or sign in to comment