YouTube Premium

b0rn2sk8 said:
You’re high if you think that would ever happen. It’s basically state sanctioned theft.

Don’t forget between 50% and 70% of the revenue (depending on how it is generated) goes to the content creator and not to Google.
Click to expand...
Well that would be their punishment for anti-competitive behaviour.

The money raised by the other services would also go to the content creators. They could offer creators a bigger slice of the pie (competition).
 
Last edited:
mrochester said:
Well that would be their punishment for anti-competitive behaviour.

The money raised by the other services would also go to the content creators. They could offer creators a bigger slice of the pie (competition).
Click to expand...
You realise Google doesn’t own the content right? It’s owned by the person that uploads it.

There are YouTube competitors, they are all rubbish for both the user and content owner.

Please explain what those anti competitive practices are?
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
You realise Google doesn’t own the content right? It’s owned by the person that uploads it.

There are YouTube competitors, they are all rubbish for both the user and content owner.

Please explain what those anti competitive practices are?
Click to expand...
What I’m saying is that YouTube must give other services access to all the content that is on YouTube.

That way YouTube has to compete on value and features instead of gatekeeping content.
 
mrochester said:
What I’m saying is that YouTube must give other services access to all the content that is on YouTube.

That way YouTube has to compete on value and features instead of gatekeeping content.
Click to expand...
I think you fundamentally misunderstand the relationship YouTube has with content creators.

YouTube does not gatekeep content. They do not own any of the content uploaded to their platform by a 3rd party. They don’t control what 3rd parties do with the content uploaded to YouTube on other platforms. Content creators are free to upload their content to other platforms.

Content creators CHOOSE to upload to YouTube and any other platform. The irony is nearly all choose not to upload to other platforms because they don’t make it worth their time because they either don’t share revenue or the revenue share is significantly worse than YouTube.

*youtube has directly funded some content but you are talking about a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction of the content on the platform.
 
Last edited:
b0rn2sk8 said:
I think you fundamentally misunderstand the relationship YouTube has with content creators.

YouTube does not gatekeep content. They do not own any of the content uploaded to their platform by a 3rd party. They don’t control what 3rd parties do with the content uploaded to YouTube on other platforms. Content creators are free to upload their content to other platforms.

*youtube has directly funded some content but you are talking about a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction of the content on the platform.
Click to expand...
Content creators HAVE to upload to YouTube because it’s where all the customers are. If content creators didn’t upload to YouTube, their content would not be watched and they would not make any money. Therefore YouTube acts as a massively powerful gatekeeper in between content creators and viewers. YouTube are increasingly making it more expensive to pay for YouTube premium whilst simultaneously making the experience worse for non-paying viewers. They can do that because they are a massively powerful gatekeeper.

If all the content uploaded to YouTube automatically became available on other VOD platforms then YouTube would actually have to compete to attract/retain customers (cheaper prices, fewer ads, greater cut of money to content creators etc).
 
Last edited:
mrochester said:
Content creators HAVE to upload to YouTube because it’s where all the customers are. If content creators didn’t upload to YouTube, their content would not be watched and they would not make any money. Therefore YouTube acts as a massively powerful gatekeeper in between content creators and viewers. YouTube are increasingly making it more expensive to pay for YouTube premium whilst simultaneously making the experience worse for non-paying viewers. They can do that because they are a massively powerful gatekeeper.

If all the content uploaded to YouTube automatically became available on other VOD platforms then YouTube would actually have to compete to attract/retain customers (cheaper prices, fewer ads, greater cut of money to content creators etc).
Click to expand...
Again, I think you fundamentally misunderstand why people upload to YouTube and not other platforms.

To reiterate, there is nothing stopping anyone from uploading to other platforms. If other platforms want to compete, they need to actually compete.
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
Again, I think you fundamentally misunderstand why people upload to YouTube and not other platforms.

To reiterate, there is nothing stopping anyone from uploading to other platforms. If other platforms want to compete, they need to actually compete.
Click to expand...
They can’t compete because YouTube has all the viewers and all the content.

If the other platforms had all the content, they could compete.
 
You can't really compete with a first mover advantage like YouTube has, you'd have to have some incredible USP or have huge capital for incentives to sink YouTube. Though YouTube's approaches to moderation and so on these days could eventually erode their position - I've seen several long standing creators recently having their channels incorrectly deactivated and a fight to get them reinstated - often only done in a timely manner once someone with enough clout intervened.
 
The reason that most people choose (they’re not forced) to upload their content to YouTube is that they get a financial reward for the views their content then receives. That money doesn’t come out of Google’s pocket, it comes either from the adverts that you watch or from the monthly subscription you pay.

The purpose of this thread is to shortcut that process (I use SmartTube and a Turkish Apple account).
 
mrochester said:
I think we are at a point where we need some regulation to give other services access to all the YouTube content so that users aren’t forced to use YouTube to access the content they want to watch. That way YouTube will have to compete with other services and give users a better deal.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of alternative services such as Kick, Locals, etc. But most people upload to YouTube because its the most popular. Nothing about that can be done unless people stop using it.
 
mrochester said:
They can’t compete because YouTube has all the viewers and all the content.

If the other platforms had all the content, they could compete.
Click to expand...

There is nothing stopping anyone uploading their YouTube content to other platforms. I feel like a broken record.

People used to upload to Vimeo, daily motion etc. but stopped because the platform didn’t work for the creator or the viewer.

mrochester said:
Hence the need for regulation to address the issue.
Click to expand...

YouTube doesn’t even have all the content. Most content on YouTube is specifically cut for YouTube and the way the YouTube platform works.

What works on YouTube doesn’t work on IG, Facebook, Kick, Twitch, Vimeo, Daily Motion, Twitter, onlyfans or TikTok etc. The same applies to those other platforms.

Rroff said:
You can't really compete with a first mover advantage like YouTube has, you'd have to have some incredible USP or have huge capital for incentives to sink YouTube. Though YouTube's approaches to moderation and so on these days could eventually erode their position - I've seen several long standing creators recently having their channels incorrectly deactivated and a fight to get them reinstated - often only done in a timely manner once someone with enough clout intervened.
Click to expand...

YouTube was not the first.

Vimeo was a thing before YouTube as was daily motion (remember them?).

The irony here is that TikTok has almost as many daily users as YouTube these days and in the US the daily watch time is higher than YouTube.

Social media users are incredibly fickle, TikTok came from nowhere to one of the biggest video platforms in the world over the course of a few years.
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
YouTube was not the first.

Vimeo was a thing before YouTube as was daily motion (remember them?).

The irony here is that TikTok has almost as many daily users as YouTube these days and in the US the daily watch time is higher than YouTube.

Social media users are incredibly fickle, TikTok came from nowhere to one of the biggest video platforms in the world over the course of a few years.
Click to expand...

True there was a few efforts before YouTube but YouTube was the one to take off and nail the formula so to speak and it is difficult to shift that dominance.
 
Rroff said:
True there was a few efforts before YouTube but YouTube was the one to take off and nail the formula so to speak and it is difficult to shift that dominance.
Click to expand...
Yeah and YouTube are now using that dominance to make things worse for creators and viewers. They can enshitify their service precisely because they have no competition.

It’s like how Twitter and other social media companies are able to enshitify their service because the content is trapped in the service and cannot be accessed from somewhere else.
 
Last edited:
mrochester said:
Yeah and YouTube are now using that dominance to make things worse for creators and viewers. They can enshitify their service precisely because they have no competition.

It’s like how Twitter and other social media companies are able to enshitify their service because the content is trapped in the service and cannot be accessed from somewhere else.
Click to expand...
Your argument is completely undermined by Tik Tok who have overtaken YouTube for daily watch time in the US.

Your argument surmounts to ‘I don’t want to pay for the content on YouTube but I still want to watch it.’ It’s so transparent, it needs calling out as such.
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
Your argument is completely undermined by Tik Tok who have overtaken YouTube for daily watch time in the US.
Click to expand...

Tik Tok though is only a competitor for a subset of YT content - and that originally wasn't even YT's core offering - they pretty much reacted to Tik Tok with the introduction of shorts.
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
Your argument is completely undermined by Tik Tok who have overtaken YouTube for daily watch time in the US.

Your argument surmounts to ‘I don’t want to pay for the content on YouTube but I still want to watch it.’ It’s so transparent, it needs calling out as such.
Click to expand...
Yeah I’d love for YouTube to not be able to engage in anti-competitive practices, I will admit that.
 
I am surprised mine is still working, though it is Israel pricing so I guess it was always going to stay put :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom