Архив рубрики: YouTube

Auto Added by WPeMatico

NFL considers a cheaper Sunday Ticket offering on YouTube with fewer games

YouTube recently became the exclusive streaming rights holder of NFL Sunday Ticket, a sports package that was reportedly bid on by other tech giants Apple and Amazon. While YouTube will likely charge a high price for the NFL Sunday Ticket, there may be a more affordable YouTube offering for viewers that want access to fewer games.
According to NFL’s chief media and business officer, Brian Rolapp, the league is considering a “lighter” NFL Sunday Ticket offering on YouTube and YouTube TV that provides a select number of games for a lower price.
“We’re also thinking about, but haven’t made any decisions, do you create a new product? Do you do a lighter version? We haven’t made any decisions there, but you will see that. I don’t know if we’ll go team-by-team, but could you get fewer games for a lesser price? I think that’s all up for debate and conversation,” Rolapp revealed to the New York Post’s Andrew Marchand and Sports Business Journal reporter John Ourand in their podcast.
Rolapp noted that one reason the NFL struck a streaming deal with YouTube is so the league could make new changes to the Sunday Ticket product. “It’s been distributed for so long. I think there’s probably a lot of opportunity between the ‘all you can eat’ and free television. I think there’s a lot of room there to explore.”
YouTube wasn’t immediately available to comment to TechCrunch.
NFL Sunday Ticket is launching on YouTube and YouTube TV later this year. The company confirmed that it would be available as an add-on package on YouTube TV as well as a standalone offering on YouTube Primetime Channels. Notably, this will be the first time that Sunday Ticket will be available à la carte for viewers.
While pricing details haven’t been announced, it will probably be expensive. NBC Sports reported that “a TV person” estimated that NFL fans would have to pay around $300 per season for Sunday Ticket. DirecTV charges its customers $293.94 per season or $395.94 for the NFL Sunday Ticket Max package with extra content.
YouTube has to pay approximately $2 billion per season for the rights, The Wall Street Journal reported. For comparison, DirecTV paid $1.5 billion.
In Alphabet’s fourth-quarter earnings call, Google’s Chief Business Officer Philipp Schindler mentioned plans to launch a feature on YouTube TV that allows viewers to watch on multiple screens at once. He added that YouTube TV customers would get new features specific to the Sunday Ticket experience, such as comments, chats and polls.
Updated 2/10/23 at 3:55 p.m. with correction to DirecTV prices.

YouTube secures NFL Sunday Ticket in landmark streaming deal

NFL considers a cheaper Sunday Ticket offering on YouTube with fewer games by Lauren Forristal originally published on TechCrunch
NFL considers a cheaper Sunday Ticket offering on YouTube with fewer games

YouTube rolls out new Partner Program terms as Shorts revenue sharing begins on February 1

YouTube will begin sharing ad revenue with Shorts creators on February 1, the company revealed on Monday. To prepare for the upcoming change, YouTube is starting to roll out new terms for all creators in the YouTube Partner Program. Creators need to accept the new terms by July 10 to remain in the program.
The major change to YouTube’s Partner Program will allow creators to earn money from ads that are viewed between videos in the Shorts Feed. Although the new revenue sharing model will replace the YouTube Shorts Fund, the company says it expects the majority of its Shorts Fund recipients to earn more with the new Shorts revenue sharing model. As previously announced, creators can apply to the program if they meet a new Shorts-specific threshold of 1,000 subscribers and 10 million Shorts views over 90 days.
As part of the new terms, creators need to accept specific monetization modules. The first module is called the “Watch Page Monetization Module” and allows creators to earn money from ads served on their long-form videos and YouTube Premium. The next module is called the “Shorts Monetization Module” and lets you earn money from ads that play between Shorts in the Shorts Feed and YouTube Premium. The last module is called the “Commerce Product Addendum” and is for features like Channel Memberships and Supers.
YouTube recommends that creators accept all of the modules to unlock their full earning potential on the platform. Creators that make Shorts and have accepted the new Shorts Monetization Module will become eligible for Shorts ads revenue sharing on their Shorts views starting next month.
As for how exactly the Shorts revenue sharing will work, it’s a bit complex due to music licensing. Each month, revenue from the ads appearing between Shorts will be added together and used to reward monetizing Shorts creators and cover the costs of music licensing. A portion of the total revenue will be allocated to the creator pool based on views and music usage across all watched Shorts. If a creator uploads a Short without music, all of the revenue associated with its views goes toward the creator pool. If a creator uploads a Short with music, the revenue based on its views will be split among the Creator Pool and music partners based on the number of tracks used.
Next, the creator pool is allocated to creators. YouTube explains that it will allocate revenue to monetizing Shorts creators based on their share of total Shorts views in the Creator Pool. If a creator got 5% eligible views out of all Shorts uploaded by monetizing creators, they will then be allocated 5% of the revenue in the creator pool. Creators will keep 45% of their allocated Shorts revenue. For instance, if a creator is allocated $1,000 from the creator pool, they will be paid $450.
It’s worth noting that non-original Shorts are not eligible for revenue sharing. Non-original Shorts are those that include unedited clips from movies or TV shows, re-uploaded content from other creators on YouTube or another platform, or compilations with no original content added. Shorts that receive artificial or fake views, such as from automated clicks or scroll bots, are also ineligible for revenue sharing.
With these upcoming changes, YouTube Shorts is poised to become TikTok’s biggest competitor. If creators can make more money via YouTube Shorts than on TikTok, they’re incentivized to make original content for the YouTube platform. No short-form video platform has quite figured out how to share ad revenue up until now, which gives Shorts a notable leg up on the competition.

YouTube targets TikTok with revenue sharing for Shorts, Partner Program expansion

YouTube rolls out new Partner Program terms as Shorts revenue sharing begins on February 1 by Aisha Malik originally published on TechCrunch
YouTube rolls out new Partner Program terms as Shorts revenue sharing begins on February 1

What to expect from the creator economy in 2023

Social media platforms and creator-focused startups haven’t looked too hot this year, as companies like Snapchat, Patreon, Cameo and Meta all waged layoffs along with the rest of the tech industry. YouTube ad revenue is declining, and creator funds for platforms like Pinterest have dried up.
It might seem like things are bad on the surface, but the creator economy is more than just a buzzword that’s losing interest among venture capitalists. Despite challenges on a platform level, creators are continuing to make a living outside of the bounds of traditional media and will only continue to grow in 2023.
Social media platforms will need to commit to creators (seriously, this time)
In my opinion, the biggest creator news in 2022 was YouTube’s announcement that it would include Shorts creators in the YouTube Partner Program, allowing shortform creators to earn ad revenue for the first time ever. Starting in early 2023, creators will be able to apply to the YouTube Partner Program if they meet a new Shorts-specific threshold of 1,000 subscribers and 10 million Shorts views over 90 days. As members of the Partner Program, these creators will earn 45% of ad revenue from their videos.
This is huge, because it’s an open secret that shortform video is hard to monetize. For example, TikTok pays creators through its Creator Fund, a pool of $200 million unveiled in summer 2020. At the time, TikTok said it planned to expand that pool to $1 billion in the U.S. over the next three years, and double that internationally. That might sound like a lot of money, but by comparison, YouTube paid creators over $30 billion in ad revenue over the last three years. As the pool of eligible creators becomes more saturated, creator funds are pretty useless — if you’re in TikTok’s creator program and have a video get 1 million views, you might be able to cash out for a small latte. So while these multi-million (or billion) dollar creator funds might seem like a beacon for creators, they don’t help too much. Most popular TikTokers make their money from sponsorships and off-platform opportunities, rather than from their videos.
TikTok has long been the dominant platform in short form video, while Snapchat, Instagram and YouTube largely copied the newcomer to keep up. But creators will finally be incentivized to flock to YouTube Shorts once they can actually earn ad money there. The best part? There has never been more pressure on TikTok to follow suit.

YouTube Shorts could steal TikTok’s thunder with a better deal for creators

‘Creator Economy’ isn’t a buzzword
What’s a buzzword? You know it when you see it. It’s when Facebook rebrands to Meta and you suddenly get hundreds of emails about “the metaverse,” or when a crypto startup declares its commitment to fostering “community” just because it has a semi-active Discord server. You could also classify “creator economy” as a buzzword — I personally find myself cringe whenever I say it out loud, but I stand by the fact that it’s a much easier shorthand than saying “the industry in which talented people on the internet are leveraging social media audiences to develop careers as independent creatives.”
But all of these buzzwords actually represent real things. Yes, even the metaverse is a thing, though I’d argue we’re talking more about Club Penguin than whatever Mark Zuckerberg is into. The problem with buzzwords, though, is that they dilute real phenomena into fads that get further muddled by disconnected venture capitalists doubling down on the trend with over-enthusiastic investments.
On TechCrunch’s own Equity podcast last week, everyone’s favorite tweeter and brand new dad (!!) Alex Wilhelm reflected on a prediction he made last year.
“The passion economy isn’t sustainable,” he read, quoting his prediction from last year. “Nailed it! Who talks about creators these day? Nobody!”
I can forgive Alex because I do hate “passion economy” with the fire of an exploding supernova for each and every follower Khaby Lame has on TikTok. The term glorifies the relentless, soul-crushing hustle that people face while trying to “make it” in a field they love, while ignoring that industries that people pursue out of passion (art, non-profit work, politics) are often the most exploitative of all.
I think what Alex is getting at here, though, is that in 2021, venture capitalists poured money into the creator economy in the same way they pursued “trendy” tech like AI and web3. According to data retrieved from Crunchbase earlier this year, here’s the breakdown of creator economy funding for the first three quarters of 2022.
Q1: 58 rounds worth $343.2 million.
Q2: 42 rounds worth $336.0 million.
Q3: 19 rounds worth $110.2 million.
I don’t think this means that the creator economy is failing, though. It could just mean that the industry is correcting for over-investing in a bunch of creator-focused companies that creators didn’t actually want or need. Also, you know, the economy.
I’ve been saying for the entire past year that creator economy startups can only succeed if their foremost goal is truly to help creators. In 2021, a year when venture capital flowed like champagne at a Gatsby party, we joked that there were more creator economy startups than creators. But that’s a problem for investors, not creators, many of whom operate completely oblivious to the whims of a16z. It’s indicative of an environment that incentivizes tech moguls with no hands-on experience to try to solve problems of an industry that they don’t quite understand, and as a result, the space became deeply oversaturated. I cannot keep track of the number of companies I’ve encountered that attempt to automate the process of securing brand deals or help creators make white label products.
I’d go as far as to say that it’s bad for creators when there are too many startups angling for their partnership. We know that most startups are doomed to fail — what happens if you rely on a company to offer your business some sort of service, and then they fail within a few years? This is why I’ve made it a personal policy of mine to always ask creator-focused startup founders how they would plan to protect their creators from harm if their company fails.
No matter where the VC funds may fall in 2023, the playbook for creators’ success remains the same. Diversify your income streams, build trust with your audience, and make sure you don’t burn yourself out.

Yeah, funding for creator-focused startups is drying up

Venture capital will continue to intersect with creators, but not in the way you think
Investments into creator economy companies might be down, but creators are continuing to interface with VC money in a way that their audiences don’t often see. Charli D’Amelio and her family have become investors themselves. MrBeast is seeking funding at a unicorn-sized valuation, which isn’t surprising given that other especially successful creators have accomplished the same.
In less extreme cases, many creators are growing their businesses through startups like Creative Juice, Spotter and Jellysmack, which offer up-front cash in exchange for temporary ownership over a creator’s YouTube back catalog, which means the company gets all of the ad revenue from those videos. These companies operate similarly to venture capital firms. They invest in creators that they believe will turn that cash infusion into even more money, giving both parties a return.
Despite securing massive funding rounds and mammoth valuations, the model that these companies operate is still relatively new, and creators should exercise caution, as they should with any business deal.

Is MrBeast actually worth $1.5 billion?

What to expect from the creator economy in 2023 by Amanda Silberling originally published on TechCrunch
What to expect from the creator economy in 2023

YouTube redesign gives long-form videos, Shorts and Live videos their own tabs on channel pages

YouTube is rolling out a change impacting how videos appear on its platform. The company today announced a redesign that now splits video content into three different tabs on all channel pages — one for YouTube’s traditional long-form content, another for YouTube Shorts only and a third for Live videos, including past, current and upcoming livestreams.
The changes will allow users to more easily access the types of YouTube videos they want to watch — a move YouTube says it made based on user feedback. In an announcement, the company said it heard from viewers they wanted to be able to navigate to the kinds of content they were most interested in when exploring a creator’s channel page, leading to this makeover.

you heard correctly we’re beginning to roll out Videos, Shorts, and Live tabs so you can easily explore these different kinds of content on YouTube
more info here: https://t.co/BaXQnQVUcR https://t.co/8XCdpr7HAH
— TeamYouTube (@TeamYouTube) October 27, 2022

The update also means that Shorts content and Live streams will no longer be found in the main Videos tab on the channel page — something that could appeal to longtime YouTube viewers who haven’t appreciated the infiltration of YouTube’s short-form content into their favorite channel’s video feed in recent months.
However, for those who do like watching Shorts, the redesign gives YouTube a way to direct them to more short-form videos. Now, when users are watching Shorts videos in the Shorts feed in the main YouTube app, then navigate to the creator’s channel, they’ll be sent directly into this new Shorts tab to watch even more Shorts content. This could help YouTube boost its views for Shorts as those users will no longer be immediately lost to the creator’s long-form content, as before.
Initial feedback from users on Twitter responding to YouTube’s post about the changes has been positive, as users are expressing their appreciation for giving each type of content its own separate category.
Image Credits: YouTube
The redesign follows another major update to YouTube this month which introduced, at long last, YouTube handles in the @username format. These usernames will now allow creators to identify their channel and interact with their viewers across YouTube Shorts, channel pages, in video descriptions, in comments and more.
YouTube says the tabbed redesign is rolling out starting today and will be available to all users across all devices in the weeks ahead.
 
YouTube redesign gives long-form videos, Shorts and Live videos their own tabs on channel pages by Sarah Perez originally published on TechCrunch
YouTube redesign gives long-form videos, Shorts and Live videos their own tabs on channel pages

Is MrBeast actually worth $1.5 billion?

Whenever YouTube superstar MrBeast crops up in business or tech headlines, you’re guaranteed to find a slew of bewildered comments: Who is this guy, and why is a YouTuber such a big deal? Am I old if I don’t know who this is? Why is he younger than me, yet makes so much more money? Is this dude actually giving people free islands, or is he full of it?
If you don’t know who MrBeast is, that’s fine. That just means you probably aren’t on YouTube that often, or that you’ve never wondered what happens if you put 100 million Orbeez in your friend’s backyard. But let me ask you this: Have you heard of Cribl, Snapdocs, Sayo Bank or fabric? I haven’t either, those are just some names of companies worth more than $1 billion that I pulled off Crunchbase.
According to Axios‘ sources, MrBeast — the 24-year-old whose name is Jimmy Donaldson — is trying to raise $150 million for his business, valuing it at $1.5 billion. It might seem hard to imagine how a content creator’s business can be worth that much, but the North Carolina resident has built an impressive empire. With 109 million YouTube subscribers, MrBeast runs the fifth most subscribed channel on the platform, and he’s the top earner among U.S. YouTubers. Across his five other channels, he’s amassed another 82 million subscribers — and that’s not even counting his three Spanish language channels, which have about 33 million subscribers combined.
YouTube is one of the most profitable platforms for creators, because you can earn 55% of ad revenue as a member of YouTube’s partner program. But MrBeast has expanded his business beyond the realm of social media — he has leveraged his brand to open up MrBeast Burger, a ghost kitchen food chain, and a snack company called Feastables, which raised $5 million this year at a $50 million valuation from 776, Shrug Capital and Sugar Capital.
But MrBeast’s business model isn’t as straightforward as making videos and raking in ad revenue. His uploads, which center on extreme stunts and competitions for cash prizes, cost an obscene amount of money to make. Last year, his 25-minute “Real Life Squid Game” video required a whopping $3.5 million to produce, including more than $456,000 in prize money. For comparison, the nine-episode “Squid Game” series cost Netflix a total of $21.4 million, averaging out to about $2.4 million per hour-long installment.
A few weeks ago, MrBeast said that he spends $8 million per month on his businesses. Just last September, MrBeast told the creator-focused YouTube channel Colin and Samir that he spent $4 million every month. That’s a big jump.
Some companies reach unicorn status (a valuation above $1 billion) before even turning a profit. Yet Forbes estimates that MrBeast made $54 million in 2021, so he’s already proven to VCs that they can bet on him to return their investment.
“The videos get views even if I don’t upload, so if I really wanted to, I could just live off of the money that the views made,” MrBeast told Insider. But if the 24-year-old wants to grow even more quickly and turn a larger profit, then venture capital funding might actually make sense.
MrBeast has already taken funding on a smaller scale from companies like Jellysmack and Spotter. Jellysmack uses AI to maximize top creators’ cross-platform growth in exchange for a revenue cut; Spotter gives YouTubers large sums of upfront capital in exchange for revenue from their back catalog. But as one of the most successful content creators in the world, MrBeast can go even bigger with venture capital.
But is going bigger always better? MrBeast’s business model is like a snake eating its own tail — no one is making money like he is, but no one is spending it like him either. He described his margins as “razor-thin” in a conversation with Logan Paul, since he reinvests most of his profits back into his content. His viewers expect that each video will be more impressive than the last, and from the outside looking in, it seems like it’s only a matter of time before MrBeast can no longer up the ante (and for other creators, this has led to disaster). So, if MrBeast’s business really is a unicorn — I’d wager it is — then he has two choices. Will he use the cushion of $150 million to make his business more sustainable, so he doesn’t have to keep burying himself alive? Or will he keep pushing for more until nothing is left?

MrBeast explains YouTube’s algorithm

MrBeast’s ‘Real Life Squid Game’ and the price of viral stunts

Is MrBeast actually worth $1.5 billion? by Amanda Silberling originally published on TechCrunch
Is MrBeast actually worth $1.5 billion?