undefined | Better HN

0 pointsstiray9mo ago0 comments

There is no if. This is how corporate greed works.

What will happen is, that content creators will spread to different providers, that also have managers and stockholders/owners.

Look what Netflix was like and how many various payable video streaming providers you have now. More than you are prepared to pay for content.

In few years, you will be torrenting content that today you watch for free.

And only because people decided to pay, showing the world that there is money to be made in YT model.

0 comments

scoofy9mo ago

Yes, businesses want money. The point is that YouTube has no leverage on creators. they have to play nice because the barrier to entry is nil as competitors already exist in Twitch, Dailymotion, Nebula, Vimeo, Dropout, etc.

None of that helps you if you want it to be free, but for those of us willing to pay, we can happily ally with creators if YouTube gets shitty.

That’s how it’s supposed to work. It’s a good deal now and I’m happy to take it. None of that matters if you are comparing it to piracy… obviously.

stirayOP9mo ago

We will see how prepared you will be to pay, where each of creators you watch will be on different network and you will have to pay for each network $10/month, while you watch 20 creators.

Again, this is nothing new. It already happened with video streaming, where Youtube now is Netflix then.

scoofy9mo ago

This already happened with Dropout.tv when college humor left YouTube.

Yes, it ain’t perfect. The alternative is the creator literally stop making videos. YouTube is already not serving ads for demonetized videos. People doing it for the love of filmmaking can already do it for free.

1 more reply

anticensor9mo ago

Or stratify users into creators and viewers and force both strata to pay, where viewer users cannot upload and creators cannot watch (even if they paid).

xdfgh11129mo ago

Most of your suggestions are fiction but tiktok and insta are real competitors to YouTube shorts.

sokoloff9mo ago

I’m glad there’s competition for the one part of YouTube that I dislike even more than the ads.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsstiray9mo ago0 comments

There is no if. This is how corporate greed works.

What will happen is, that content creators will spread to different providers, that also have managers and stockholders/owners.

Look what Netflix was like and how many various payable video streaming providers you have now. More than you are prepared to pay for content.

In few years, you will be torrenting content that today you watch for free.

And only because people decided to pay, showing the world that there is money to be made in YT model.

0 comments

scoofy9mo ago

None of that helps you if you want it to be free, but for those of us willing to pay, we can happily ally with creators if YouTube gets shitty.

That’s how it’s supposed to work. It’s a good deal now and I’m happy to take it. None of that matters if you are comparing it to piracy… obviously.

stirayOP9mo ago

We will see how prepared you will be to pay, where each of creators you watch will be on different network and you will have to pay for each network $10/month, while you watch 20 creators.

Again, this is nothing new. It already happened with video streaming, where Youtube now is Netflix then.

scoofy9mo ago

This already happened with Dropout.tv when college humor left YouTube.

1 more reply

anticensor9mo ago

Or stratify users into creators and viewers and force both strata to pay, where viewer users cannot upload and creators cannot watch (even if they paid).

xdfgh11129mo ago

Most of your suggestions are fiction but tiktok and insta are real competitors to YouTube shorts.

sokoloff9mo ago

I’m glad there’s competition for the one part of YouTube that I dislike even more than the ads.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse