Print 22 comment(s) - last by aqwan135.. on Dec 20 at 8:12 PM

Current ad sharing scheme doesn't allow YouTube access to all content

The online video market is dominated by YouTube. The Google-owned website has by far the lion's share of viewers each month for online video, but is unable to generate significant profits from its huge user base. YouTube has said in the past that the key to bringing in more advertisers was to get content that is more professional on its site.

To that end, Google and YouTube have held talks with TV networks and film studios over the possibility of putting full-length shows and films onto the YouTube network under an ad-sharing program. So far, only a few content producers have agreed to the plan. YouTube currently shares profits with some video makers of popular videos that become viral by invitation. YouTube has also tested pre-roll video ads of 15 to 30 seconds for effectiveness.

YouTube may have the most visitors, but Hulu is coming up fast and is where most users go when they want to watch full-length TV shows. Advertising sales on Hulu are doing well and reports claim that key advertising inventories are being sold out at Hulu. Hulu executives have stated before that a free model is a hard way for the site to capture the value of its content leading some to believe Hulu may transform into a paid content platform.

YouTube is now eyeing a paid content platform as well that would see users paying a subscription fee to view longer full-length TV shows and films. Google's David Eun has said that some full-length programs won't be available to it with its current ad revenue sharing program.

Eun told Reuters, "We're making some interesting bets on long-form content; not all content is accessible to us with the advertising model."

The monthly subscriptions to YouTube service would be similar to how cable companies operate and YouTube is looking into movie rentals like Apple and Amazon offer. So far, the video sharing site has not signed any major content partners for rentals or other longer form content types. Short clips of shows from partners are available on the YouTube platform.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

F@$# that!
By DarkElfa on 12/16/2009 11:44:53 AM , Rating: 5
When are these companies going to learn that you can't start charging for something you've "trained" people to enjoy for free and expect it to work out for you fiscally. What will happen is someone else like Vimeo will step in and take the market from them. Nobody with a brain is going to pay for access to people getting socked in the nuts and Boxee videos.

RE: F@$# that!
By nafhan on 12/16/2009 11:52:27 AM , Rating: 4
I'm pretty sure they are talking about having people pay for full length professionally produced content, and not 3 minutes of someone's cat jumping in and out of a box...

RE: F@$# that!
By geddarkstorm on 12/16/2009 1:27:03 PM , Rating: 2
I pray, oh I pray, you're right.

Though.. that was a pretty cute cat.

RE: F@$# that!
By iVTec on 12/16/2009 12:26:30 PM , Rating: 2
RE: F@$# that!
By Hiawa23 on 12/16/2009 4:40:15 PM , Rating: 2
When are these companies going to learn that you can't start charging for something you've "trained" people to enjoy for free and expect it to work out for you fiscally .

In a tough economy you look for any revenue stream you can find. I wouldn't pay but who knows maybe some would & I think this is more for the full length movies or something. The article may not be clear enough..

RE: F@$# that!
By aqwan135 on 12/20/2009 8:12:11 PM , Rating: 1

fr ee sh i pp ing

(jordan shoes) $32

(air max) $34



To YouTube And Hulu
By Reclaimer77 on 12/16/2009 11:52:01 AM , Rating: 3
You need to start charging. Ok, fine. I can understand that. But here's the deal. If you want me to pay, I demand NO commercials and NO ads. Take it or leave it.

RE: To YouTube And Hulu
By callmeroy on 12/16/2009 12:13:34 PM , Rating: 2

That line of thinking is one of the main reasons why I refused to pay for Sirius radio (even though my car was supposed to come with only 1 year free service but I actually had the service for 20 months for free)...I hate it with a passion and I think its quite "ballsy" -- any company who charges for their content but still runs ads on it.

RE: To YouTube And Hulu
By Yawgm0th on 12/16/2009 3:33:42 PM , Rating: 2
I hate it with a passion and I think its quite "ballsy" -- any company who charges for their content but still runs ads on it.
Like newspapers did for hundreds of years?

I'm not saying I like it, but I don't think it's ballsy at all.

RE: To YouTube And Hulu
By stirfry213 on 12/17/2009 12:53:02 PM , Rating: 2
Hardly a fair comparison. You can completely disregard the ads that come in the newspaper. They don't force you to read the ad to continue reading the story.

RE: To YouTube And Hulu
By Yawgm0th on 12/17/2009 2:59:47 PM , Rating: 1
You can ignore ads on websites. They usually have a skip button. No one forces you to read anything. Even the big pop-up (see this ad before continuing to [site]) are analogous to full-page or full-spread print adds in a newspaper or magazine. You have to turn past it to get to your content.

Besides, there's no AdBlock for newspapers.

RE: To YouTube And Hulu
By MamiyaOtaru on 12/17/2009 6:46:17 PM , Rating: 2
I take it you don't have cable or satellite TV?

And yeah that pisses me off. Years ago I thought part of the point of cable was going to be no ads.

By StevoLincolnite on 12/16/2009 11:06:09 AM , Rating: 5
The thought of paying to get rick rolled is mind numbing...

RE: .
By Goty on 12/16/2009 11:07:06 AM , Rating: 3
YouTube is now eyeing a paid content platform as well that would see users paying a subscription fee to view longer full-length TV shows and films.

I don't think Rick Astley or "Never Gonna Give You Up" fit the bill.

Content and price
By nafhan on 12/16/2009 11:50:26 AM , Rating: 2
It's going to boil down to content and price. If I could go to youtube (or anywhere) and have a comprehensive movie rental library at a reasonable price, I'd be there. The price probably needs to be around $.99, as that puts it firmly into impulse buy category and lets it compete on price with Redbox.

RE: Content and price
By kattanna on 12/16/2009 3:34:28 PM , Rating: 2
how about a flat monthly rate like netflix?

i see no need to pay individually per movie or show

RE: Content and price
By inperfectdarkness on 12/16/2009 3:53:11 PM , Rating: 2

netflicks will own everyone if hulu/youtube charge. people would rather bide their time till netflicks has it.


do nielson ratings even count any more?

Remember Cable TV
By rasmith260 on 12/16/2009 2:07:56 PM , Rating: 5
I think you guys are either forgetting or may be too young to remember how Cable TV got its start. One of its selling points was No Commercials and over time, once profits starting leveling off, they brought in commercials with the argument that it would allow them to keep the prices down while allowing for more and better content and from there it was a slippery slope to what Cable TV is today (you pay ever increasing prices to Watch TV and Commercials, to some extent), and the same thing will happen with Youtube and Hulu. The more things change the more they stay the same, now back to the future.

RE: Remember Cable TV
By Slyne on 12/16/09, Rating: 0
I don't see any problem with this
By kroker on 12/16/2009 7:25:12 PM , Rating: 2
Please don't take this out of context, Youtube didn't claim anywhere that they were asking you to pay for the content it is currently providing for free. It's just an extra service, for which you can choose to pay or not.

Hulu might be nice, but it's only available in the US, and I'm from Europe. I don't want to install special software to trick Hulu to use it outside of the US, which may or may not work today, and may or may not work tomorrow. The only taste of free legal videos (supported by ads) which I got so far was with southparkstudios (there might be other sites like this as well, I'm not an avid video watcher)

I might consider Youtube's offer if it's compelling and has a reasonable price. Then again, I might not. But the important part is that I would have an extra choice for something that wasn't there before without loosing any of the existing functionality. So, what's the problem?

Would I pay for such a subscription service? As I said, it depends a lot on what they would offer and at what price. But... I think the more likely answer is not. Truth be told I don't think anyone likes the subscription model, many would prefer something like Hulu, but hey, you don't always get what you want.

inflated potential can kiss my arse
By Zensen on 12/16/2009 9:20:00 PM , Rating: 2
about time, I hate that internet companies have inflated worth because of their 'millions of dollars of earning potential' because of how many people they can reach for spamming... i mean advertising.. some of us will "baa" at anything.

Just get on with it and charge for premium content tv/video/erggh vlogs. when those users can't view music videos they'll go elsewhere but at least you'll have those users who like to look at cute cat vids all day.

By BitByRabidAlgae on 12/17/2009 1:50:43 PM , Rating: 2
If these guys want to start charging for "premium" content, then the performance when delivering such content had better go WAY up. I can live with lower video resolutions, and not-theater-quality audio. But, I will refuse to pay for something that freezes every 2 minutes because they don't want to pay for the servers and bandwidth.

Unlike YouTube (at least currently), you can't just pause a Hulu vid and let it buffer the whole thing. Hulu's licensing deal with the studios forbids them from buffereing more than 5 minutes of video. So, these guys will need to either cook up custom apps that will encrypt everything and allow you to buffer the whole thing to your HD. Or, they will need serious upgrades to their infrastructure.

The only way I ever found Hulu tolerable, was to use one of those Hulu downloader apps that saves the vid to your drive. But that's a running battle between Hulu blocking them and the downloaders countering. I grew tired of this battle, and stopped using Hulu.

"You can bet that Sony built a long-term business plan about being successful in Japan and that business plan is crumbling." -- Peter Moore, 24 hours before his Microsoft resignation
Related Articles

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Laptop or Tablet - Which Do You Prefer?
September 20, 2016, 6:32 AM
Update: Samsung Exchange Program Now in Progress
September 20, 2016, 5:30 AM
Smartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki