For example, there is one stock related youtube channel I follow that charges $8/month for access to their private stock picks, analysis, etc. That also doesn't include content that has real monetary value to consumers. It's about a feeling and that feeling is often worth more than $5/month. Most people have something they are irrational fanatical about and would pay more than $5/month to consume/learn/see everything about that thing. A super fan doesn't care how much the content cost to produce or the variety of that content, in fact they want more of that one type of content than anything else. one youtube channel could never have the same asset value as half of the content on netflix.īut, if you're talking about personal value, emotional value, qualitative value, I don't think you can speak in terms of asset value. I can understand how you might look at it that way, but I guess it depends on how you define value. > at $5 per channel that is like saying the channel is half as valuable as Netflix, which is simply not possible Floatplane is way more direct but you're left growing your subscriber base outside of the platform. Nebula will likely provide discoverability within their catalog of creators in return for the shared revenue model. This seems more similar to how places like Rooster Teeth operated in the early days, only it's now providing the video streaming as-a-service. Also given that Nebula is very heavily skewed education channels, you'd likely have trouble if you're outside of that realm.įloatplane on the other hand seems more targeted: you pay for a specific content creator. I would worry that they're not going to get enough revenue from their share of watch time to cover their own costs. However, it's probably more difficult for smaller to mid-sized creators. Nebula is probably fine if you have a large pre-existing and engaged subscription base. I'm not sure how they're going revenue sharing, but I'm guessing it's based on proportional viewership. I honestly did know or even expect that Apple devices don't support VP9, but I don't blame Google for sticking to an open codec instead of giving in to Apple and their bet on HEVC for corporate contacts, especially when the codecs are this close in regards to performance.īiggest difference IMO is that Nebula is going with the Netflix-model for their network of content creators. VP9 and HEVC are pretty close when it comes to compression performance in many real world videos. Youtube has moved to VP9 and is seemingly going for AV1 as its preferred future video codec. Of course, this is just one example of the codec licensing, and the pricing depends per region (which adds another layer of paperwork) so real pricing won't be that steep, but it's not going to be cheap to switch to HEVC playback. Serving 5 billion videos (titles) each day, such a codec could easily sink the company. For example, some versions of H.265 have a $0.02 cost per disc/title. The cost of licensing all of Youtube's encoder and decoder systems would probably make a small dent in server cost more than storage for H.264 content of the same length and quality would cost. Many old videos made in a special Flash format suddenly turned choppy and ugly when Youtube changed something on their backend and as far as I know, that has been the case ever since.Īs for HEVC, not supporting is makes sense. LINUS TECH TIPS PRIVATE INTERNET ACCESS SOFTWAREThe result also seems to depend on the input format and how well Youtube's software deals with it. Animation, on the other hand, is usually fine with Youtube's presets. Leaves in the wind on the background of a video can quickly cause a drop in video quality. The quality of the content strongly depends on the video material. One of their interesting current feature for example is to allow streaming to multiple platform (Floatplane, Twitch and Youtube) in parallel. That means that most of their function will be geared toward creator, and allow them to offer something more to their viewer (but that for sure will require an account and a paid subscription). It's closer to Patreon in that regard (though I believe they still have a bit of discoverability, but it's certainly not your source for that). That means that it will never be your source to discover someone, but it will be your source to subscribe to someone that you discovered somewhere else. It's not there to replace it, it's there to supplement it and be there in case it disappear. You should look at their video for the release of the beta, I still haven't watched it though, so I could be wrong on some stuff, but that video will certainly make everything more clear for you.Įssentially, Floatplane is a fail over for Youtube. Floatplane was never about the viewer though.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |