Tim R-T-C Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 13 hours ago, drkopen said: Bischoff and a few others have already protested to YouTube when this was initially announced. Looking at the figures they gave (and i could be wrong I am not great at math) it appears they got £2,200 for about 1,100,000. That's really low. Product placement, sponsorship and their own add would have brought in considerably more. Did they ever try and get viewers to sign up to a mailing list? They could build a good platform themselves with those numbers. £2000 for a million views is/was the accepted standard for youtube. They would often split their show up into matches, so if each video got a million views that could be £10,000 revenue. Obviously there are other potential revenue sources but they require dedicated marketers to source and can be unreliable. A lot of youtube revenue comes from sharing, searches and word of mouth which are hard to replicate on your own platform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted May 23, 2017 Paid Members Share Posted May 23, 2017 2 hours ago, drkopen said: Sorry but both math and maths are accepted abbreviations of mathematics in the English language. https://youtu.be/_4dvyU0J1d8?t=14s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dart Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 4 hours ago, Tim R-T-C said: £2000 for a million views is/was the accepted standard for youtube. They would often split their show up into matches, so if each video got a million views that could be £10,000 revenue. Obviously there are other potential revenue sources but they require dedicated marketers to source and can be unreliable. A lot of youtube revenue comes from sharing, searches and word of mouth which are hard to replicate on your own platform. I uploaded a video to YouTube that had 1,400,000 views. Why the f didn't I get £2000 !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoon Posted May 29, 2017 Share Posted May 29, 2017 is your account active you have to activate the monetized feature on your channel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dart Posted May 29, 2017 Share Posted May 29, 2017 Yeh, I've made some money off it, just nowhere near that amount! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members JNLister Posted May 30, 2017 Paid Members Share Posted May 30, 2017 The Youtube ad revenue pricing is extremely vague. It may well be that though you got all those views, the advertisers weren't paying as much per viewer as for some videos, either because of a perception of the audience for the subject of your clip, or because of the actual known demographics of the people who watched it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dart Posted May 30, 2017 Share Posted May 30, 2017 Yeh, no big deal, I didn't upload the video to make money, and I didn't expect it to get anywhere near the amount of views it has got, but if it had made £2000 I'd be a very happy person. (for the record it is a wrestling video, and it took a year to get 1,400,000 views) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Unit Posted May 31, 2017 Share Posted May 31, 2017 Seems as though Joe Coffey and Sha Samuels haven't been paid by WC as per their twitter accounts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 Joes said later that his tweets aren't about what culture, seems to be more about 5star canceling their tour, and a bit about WOS as well. Accepting these dates with these new companies to then be cancelled on is losing them bookings elsewhere that will be taken by other talent before they get short notice cancelled on. The Sha tweets are Followed by one of the what culture guys calling him out, so holding off until after their show to see what his is about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon-Carr_92 Posted June 4, 2017 Share Posted June 4, 2017 Fair to say things have escalated pretty quickly in terms of the YouTube thing and WCPW. Last night, they streamed their show Fight Back from Friday. Which was due to be the Premiere of Loaded Season 2. They went ahead with just that planned show of the residency. The show carries the issue they've faced of ad revenue and the change in the policy. However, after it finished, YouTube took it down and the channel got a Strike for "a violation of policy on spam and deceptive practices" and they've had their streaming abilities revoked on it. What do you think it was on it that constituted that? I didn't see it, but it's a strange one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polish Dad Posted June 4, 2017 Share Posted June 4, 2017 Chances are it was their logo for the show being a 'parody' of YouTube's logo. They consider it deceptive practice, as someone not paying attention could see the logo and assume it was an official YouTube show. Happened to us once and now I avoid it like the plague. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dart Posted June 4, 2017 Share Posted June 4, 2017 I don't get how their initial videos before they became a promotion, and the ones they've continuted doing, the ones that got them noticed, the ones where they talk about how awful WWE is...how were they ever able to make money off those videos, as they were full of WWE copyrighted material surely...logos, photos etc? Did they just never get reported? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNRN10 Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1spu4j2 - intresting take on the situation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Your Fight Site Posted June 5, 2017 Paid Members Share Posted June 5, 2017 12 hours ago, The Dart said: I don't get how their initial videos before they became a promotion, and the ones they've continuted doing, the ones that got them noticed, the ones where they talk about how awful WWE is...how were they ever able to make money off those videos, as they were full of WWE copyrighted material surely...logos, photos etc? Did they just never get reported? They tend to use stills, and it’ll probably fall under U.S. copyright law of “fair use” due to it being used in a commentary and review context, unlike uploading rips of entire shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim R-T-C Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 14 hours ago, The Dart said: I don't get how their initial videos before they became a promotion, and the ones they've continuted doing, the ones that got them noticed, the ones where they talk about how awful WWE is...how were they ever able to make money off those videos, as they were full of WWE copyrighted material surely...logos, photos etc? Did they just never get reported? US Copyright law allows for use of material such as that under fair use for review and criticism. Otherwise film and game reviews would have nothing to work on. However it does trigger Youtube's copyright detectors, which is presumably why they moved to still images only. As has been mentioned in the twitter post above, Youtube are very poor at communicating with their content creators and videos flagged for copyright violations are hard to restore even if they are within legal permission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.