Comments

  • How does one make such astronomical sums of money via YouTube? Just advertising or does it include sponsorships and donations or what? That's just mind-boggling.
  • JerkStore: How does one make such astronomical sums of money via YouTube? Just advertising or does it include sponsorships and donations or what? That's just mind-boggling.


    All of the above.
  • JerkStore: How does one make such astronomical sums of money via YouTube? Just advertising or does it include sponsorships and donations or what? That's just mind-boggling.


    Ads, sponsorships, Patreon.

    It's a constant, unforgiving hustle.
  • I'm a Patreon for a couple of the pbs shows and don't know who any of these people are.
  • I'm sure seven-year-old Nastya will grow up to be perfectly normal and well adjusted.
  • JerkStore: How does one make such astronomical sums of money via YouTube? Just advertising or does it include sponsorships and donations or what? That's just mind-boggling.


    Firstly it's just Youtube/Google/AdSense. Depending on your personality and how popular you become, in particular how quickly that popularity grows, you'll catch the eye of sponsors. Once you get over a certain amount of subscribers you can start with community posts where you engage with your fanbase more directly and find out what they want from you. That's when you can decide if you know you can generate enough content to be able to split it into categories of increasing exclusivity - that's when patreon starts to become an exciting prospect.

    In the past this was easily exploited by bots churning algorithms to create content that meant nothing and did nothing. These days YT is a bit tighter as to what can be monetised. Original hits and original content means you continue to get paid. Use the same format for every single vid, even though the content is intrinsically different? That's a demonetisation.

    The downside is they're relying too much on algorithms to detect content as there's far too much being uploaded daily for any human to check over unless such content is flagged. Case in point - this is one of mine and was flagged by Sony for copyright as they claimed it came from Fantasy Island...


    The two hidden Faces in the Columbia Pictures Intro
    Youtube zdYwRhnC-9Q


    It didn't, they never followed up on the claim and 30 days later the video was released, but if you're just trying to start out, a flag like that out of nowhere is enough to scare you into quitting.
  • I think YouTube star is probably a very hard way to make an easy living.
  •  

    Stantz: JerkStore: How does one make such astronomical sums of money via YouTube? Just advertising or does it include sponsorships and donations or what? That's just mind-boggling.

    Firstly it's just Youtube/Google/AdSense. Depending on your personality and how popular you become, in particular how quickly that popularity grows, you'll catch the eye of sponsors. Once you get over a certain amount of subscribers you can start with community posts where you engage with your fanbase more directly and find out what they want from you. That's when you can decide if you know you can generate enough content to be able to split it into categories of increasing exclusivity - that's when patreon starts to become an exciting prospect.

    In the past this was easily exploited by bots churning algorithms to create content that meant nothing and did nothing. These days YT is a bit tighter as to what can be monetised. Original hits and original content means you continue to get paid. Use the same format for every single vid, even though the content is intrinsically different? That's a demonetisation.

    The downside is they're relying too much on algorithms to detect content as there's far too much being uploaded daily for any human to check over unless such content is flagged. Case in point - this is one of mine and was flagged by Sony for copyright as they claimed it came from Fantasy Island...


    [YouTube video: The two hidden Faces in the Columbia Pictures Intro]

    It didn't, they never followed up on the claim and 30 days later the video was released, but if you're just trying to start out, a flag like that out of nowhere is enough to scare you into quitting.


    My church has a license for broadcast (and include the license in our text) and every single one of our services gets flagged for copyright.  I file an appeal and 30 days later it's usually gone.  Not that we make any money off it but it is certainly tilted waaay in favor of the music industry.
  • I've heard good things about Markiplier as a person, though I have no idea what the appeal is if his content. Anything else I know of the names I recognize is for all the wrong reasons.

    Tl;Dr you don't have to be an awful person to make it on YouTube but it helps.
  • RolandTGunner: I'm sure seven-year-old Nastya will grow up to be perfectly normal and well adjusted.


    Look, cocaine is a food group.
  • I may be poor-ish compared to these guys, but I still have my dignity intact.

    Mostly, anyway. New Years eve was an anomaly.
  • Are you kidding, subby? Money be damned, I would never want to be a YouTube "star". Have you seen the videos these garbage people make? They are more or less compelled to put out content daily, and once the money starts coming in, they are just constantly trying to find ways to keep getting views, which usually involves wasting large sums of money in extremely stupid and disgusting ways. All while speaking loudly and rapidly in the most annoying and attention grabbing ways possible.

    My kids used to watch Unspeakable. I thought watching him play Minecraft was stupid and boring, but I remember watching others play video games as a kid, so I couldn't fault my kids for watching him play. But then he started doing other types of videos, and some of them were him literally destroying expensive toys by running them over with VERY expensive cars. Just for the "satisfying crunch". I told my kids that what he was doing was evil and they should neither watch him nor want to be like him.
  • #1 is also running a multistate fast food company, #8 and #4 are running professional TV channels that are basically incidentally YouTube-based (so in all three of those cases a lot of that money is going to paying staff, renting office space/studio space, etc), iirc #3 is similar as of recent developments, and #6 literally cannot have any of the money involved because she's a minor by an enormous margin.

    That's a lot of people who aren't actually making most of the money their channel is associated with for a list of "top earners".  Ordering your list around gross and not net, and then attributing the entire gross of a multi-employee business to the front man in some cases, is some Hollywood accounting nonsense.

    Good for these people succeeding at their chosen profession, though.  I'm snarking at the BBC's writer having no idea what part of the body his farking pants go on and ending up with them on his head and left arm somehow, not any of these random entertainers who are probably all perfectly fine people.  Except the Pauls, fark those guys.
  • YouTube trends expert Chris Stokel-Walker said this year's list is interesting because it shows "how stale" YouTube has become. "It strikes me how white and male this whole list is," he said.
    "If you take any of the names and look at previous years' lists, you'll probably find them on there as well, just in a different order."


    And most of them are simply famous for being famous. It's almost as if you have a large amount of starting capital for brute-force promotion you can leverage that for greater capital.
  • I know of a couple of them from my 19 year old daughter. Markiplier, Rhett and Link (Good Mythical Morning), and Mr. Beast. Markiplier and Rhett and Link seem to do some pretty non-offensive and chuckle-worthy content. Markiplier I don't find as funny and i think it's a generational thing. I don't get it like I don't get the youtube poop videos my 24 year old son loves so much. Rhett and Link have some funny routines they do like Will it Jerky and things like that. They seem more of a standard FM Morning Radio style of comedy

    Mr. Beast I honestly don't know what he produces to make his money but it is my understanding he does some pretty wholesome giveaways and good things with it. He does record and use it for content, I don't want to make the guy seem too pure, but he seems to pick some cool things to do.

    The rest IDK and I am ok with that.
  • snowybunting: I may be poor-ish compared to these guys, but I still have my dignity intact.

    Mostly, anyway. New Years eve was an anomaly.


    20 bucks is 20 bucks after all
  • I have actually heard of one of them, Unspeakable, one of my kids is a fan.

    Sadly I have contributed to his $28.5m paycheck through merchandise which, to paraphrase to the great and powerful Yogurt, it's where the real money is made.
  • There are a lot of pitfalls
    How Much YouTube Paid Me For 1,000,000 Views and why...
    Youtube WE9zoXtLBaY
  • Arsement.

    /heh heh heh
  • JerkStore: How does one make such astronomical sums of money via YouTube? Just advertising or does it include sponsorships and donations or what? That's just mind-boggling.


    How does one make such astronomical sums via movies or television?  Just the gate, product placement, or backers?  It shouldn't be that much of a surprise that google makes a ton of money with youtube, and pays a tiny fraction out to keep the money coming in.  And there's always sponsors (who demand their "ad") and patrons who presumably do an end run around google's cut.

    There was a fark link that lead to a site that estimated the payout of each youtube channel.  And as expected, the payout was inversely proportional to quality.  It turns out the algorithm demands daily uploads, and the higher quality videos take longer (sometimes much longer) than that and cut the pay.  Often, the good content is made by people with day jobs, so they can take the hit in income and take longer to make good content.

    Tierzoo was the exception (huge value, rare content).  I have to wonder how much of the money went to where the stock footage came from.  That or the makers of the videos went off to school for higher degrees and keep producing less and less.  And I highly recommend Tierzoo for anyone interested in zoology, gaming, rpg builds, and/or evolutionary biology (especially if you like multiple choices on that list).
  • There's a time when I wanted to be a YouTuber.  That's in the past.  I'd be too picky about sponsors and ads I'd want in my videos.
  • amyldoanitrite: Are you kidding, subby? Money be damned, I would never want to be a YouTube "star". Have you seen the videos these garbage people make? They are more or less compelled to put out content daily, and once the money starts coming in, they are just constantly trying to find ways to keep getting views, which usually involves wasting large sums of money in extremely stupid and disgusting ways. All while speaking loudly and rapidly in the most annoying and attention grabbing ways possible.


    My channel is incredibly modest and I only upload if there's something i think would interest others. The video above, and one that was greenlit a couple of weeks ago regarding something i found on a building in GTA. I have a video where I made fudge and a couple that are basically the same subject, again regarding GTA (One of these videos, made 6 years ago and technically obselete, is still doing stupid numbers for some reason)

    Fark user imageView Full Size


    Until YT tightened their crteria regarding what content could be monetized and what format that content had to be in, I had earned £35 from the work of 2 videos. The fudge one and one that was claimed by paramount as it featured the final easter egg in Cloverfield. That money is still sitting in my adsense account and I can't touch it until I earn £60, which I can't do until I'm monetised again. I work for a living and need a steady wage, not something that could drop off a cliff when the weather changes.

    This is the current criteria for monetisation:

    Follow all of the YouTube Channel Monetisation Policies. (yep)
    The YouTube Channel Monetisation Policies are a collection of policies that allow you to monetise on YouTube. As a YouTube partner, your agreement including the YouTube Partner Programme policies requires compliance with these monetisation policies to potentially earn money on YouTube.
    Live in a country/region where the YouTube Partner Programme is available. (yep)
    Have no active Community Guidelines strikes on your channel. (Not as far as I'm aware)
    Have more than 4,000 valid public watch hours in the last 12 months.(nope)
    Have more than 1,000 subscribers.(nope)
    Have a linked AdSense account.(yep)

    So you really have to dedicate yourself to it. A good example is Awkward Ashleigh, who's reaction videos have been greenlit a few times. She started her channel about 18 months ago and tipped over 100,000 subscribers at the end of last year. She settled into a niche and naturally excelled at it without trying, thanks to her personality and having enough free time to both semi-professionally produce, edit and increase her content and make it look easy.

    All while speaking loudly and rapidly in the most annoying and attention grabbing ways possible.

    Unfortunately, that kind of banal content fills out the criteria for monetisation very quickly, as infuriating and mind-numbing as it may be. I have 2 sons with autism & ADHD and that garbage they watch by choice and it entertains them. Some who gets very close to this is Sean McClaughlin (JackSepticEye). He screams into his mic as an intro, but the rest of the content is pretty ok. Plus he's a really nice guy so it can be forgiven.

    To paraphrase Holden McNeil; The internet has given everyone a voice, and it seems everyone has chosen to use that voice to be as irritating as possible while making idiots of themselves in a desperate attempt to make money, be popular, and become famous, none of which they may be mentally ready for, and it's a 5% success rate anyway.

    I know if one of the names on thsi list, and I watch none of them, because they do nothing that I, as someone approaching 50, has no interest in watching. I;d love to be a creator, but I entered this world 20 years too late, so I have to sell expensive stuff to idiots for a salary with no commission all day.

    There's always the lottery
  • amyldoanitrite: Are you kidding, subby? Money be damned, I would never want to be a YouTube "star". Have you seen the videos these garbage people make? They are more or less compelled to put out content daily, and once the money starts coming in, they are just constantly trying to find ways to keep getting views, which usually involves wasting large sums of money in extremely stupid and disgusting ways. All while speaking loudly and rapidly in the most annoying and attention grabbing ways possible.

    My kids used to watch Unspeakable. I thought watching him play Minecraft was stupid and boring, but I remember watching others play video games as a kid, so I couldn't fault my kids for watching him play. But then he started doing other types of videos, and some of them were him literally destroying expensive toys by running them over with VERY expensive cars. Just for the "satisfying crunch". I told my kids that what he was doing was evil and they should neither watch him nor want to be like him.


    My god, unspeakable and that whole gang of morons make me want to gouge my eyes out and rupture my ear drums.
  • I don't begrudge anyone who finds an audience, legally of course. To use one example, I used to watch Jenna Marbles back when she did her older style comedy videos. Someone like her would never have been allowed to have her own show on tv if that was what she was going to do on it. Yet I found her channel funny and entertaining. So Youtube has allowed lots of people to find their niche and I think that's a good thing.

    The part I see people tripping over is the money making part. Being creative or artistic is one thing, making money is another. I'm sure artists in the music business or movie business can confirm that. It's not reasonable to think a person should be able to be as popular or make as much money as the top Youtubers but do it in a way that is not so annoying or seemingly devoid of content value. The audience decides. Maybe 100,000 people find a Youtuber annoying but if 1,000,000 find them entertaining then no one cares about the people who are annoyed and the money will start to roll in.
  • Um... OK? They have no impact or bearing on my life, and I don't feel anything except a vague contentment that they found a niche that allows them to be successful. As long as they go their way and don't get in mine, more power to them, I guess.
  • Load 3 of 3 newer comments
  •  

This thread is closed to new comments.