• Eiri@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    15 days ago

    It’s one or the other. If you pay YouTube for Premium and don’t get any ads, advertisers don’t pay for your ad impression.

    • TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      wish there was an option for “pay the platform the few cents the ads make” instead of me paying the platform a wild and ever increasing amount of money

      Tbh I feel like they should take a ~30% cut from the creator tips feature and add that to a “ad balance” which would remove ads and subtract the few cents they would’ve got from the ad. That way YouTube gets paid, the consumer doesn’t get ads, and the creator gets encouraged to make good content.

      • where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        14 days ago

        You keep imagining some way how YT could get cheaper for you.

        But in fact, ads are highly profitable, and if you buy a premium there’s a very transparent revenue share model. 70% of your money goes directly to the creators.

        All your wishes are already fulfilled, you’re just poor and are trying to justify not paying with imagined arguments.

        • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          14 days ago

          The thing that bothers me is the revenue doesnt go to creators that I watch. Its all pooled and divided out by view count across the entire platform. Which is bs. I dont want my money going to the top channels that i have zero interest in. A better system is dividing it out to the channels I view.

          Thus why adblocking and patreon is highly popular…

          • where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            14 days ago

            Again you’re wrong. It’s counted directly by the amount you watch and goes to the creators you watch.

            Or, equivalently, pool all revenue, divide by watch time, get the same result.

            You can verify this by constructing an excel table of 10 users (rows) and 3 channels (columns). Assign random % weights of “watch time” per user per channel. Assume a constant subscription fee of 1. Verify that a column_sum is the same as column_average*10, where 10 is the total platform revenue, as there are 10 users each paying 1.

            • mitrosus@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              13 days ago

              You are assuming a fair distribution of watch time over channels and/or over the viewers. In reality, some channels are highly popular and some are not. A few proportion of people pay for yt premium. Assuming the payer’s money get distributed equally to creators, the less popular channels get less amount from those payers. The question is, does google distribute the paid money according to each user’s view?

        • ComicalMayhem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          14 days ago

          My biggest gripe about Patreon is that I can’t just do a one time donation, it’s a subscription to donate money to people. Cool and all, but I’m not rich enough to just give some of my income to people, I’d rather do small donations whenever I can.

        • cheers_queers@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          14 days ago

          most patreons are at least $5 so if you sub to more than 2, you might as well be paying for YouTube premium