*
OK.
Everyone knows that television and video are going to migrate to the web.
The big question is not if, but rather when.. and maybe how.
One of the first platforms open to everyone is Youtube.
Which is now launching channels.
Does this work? Meaning, can you earn a living doing this?
The jury, which used to be out, seems to be coming back from lunch.
Sam Morgan Moore, a professional photographer and videograher in the UK sent me a very interesting linke to Daily Dot Infographic which attempts to answer this question.
Like I said, it’s a mixed bag.
Youtube has over 1 million ‘content partners’ accepting advertising. Of these, OpenSlate took a look at the ‘Top 1000″ channels.
They aggregate 11.3 Billion views a month. That is a LOT of eyeballs.
They have 462 million subscribers. That is a lot of viewers.
Clearly something is happening here.
They also average $23,000 net each month in advertising driven income.
That means that the ‘average’ income (amongst the top 1,000) is about $275,000 a year.
It’s not bad.
It’s not what you could run a cable channel on, and it requires a lot of work to get there.
Last month, the top 1,000 produced 30,000 videos (or 30 videos per channel) for a total of 250,000 minutes of content, or 250 minutes per channel or 8 minutes per video – which strikes me as kind of long, but that’s what they say.
All this stuff generates a lot of traffic on the ‘social networks’ but that and $4 will buy you a cup of coffee at Starbucks, so I don’t see a whole lot of value in Social Network valuations, at least not now (at least not with Facebook stock still careening southward).
But what this does tell you is that there is ‘something’ there, something, I think, just getting started.
First, the odds on becoming a net profiability YouTube channel are already 1/1000. Â Not Powerball numbers, but hardly a good bet. Â You’re better going to Vegas and betting 26 all day long at Roulette.
Second, even if you do manage to crack the top 1,000, it’s a lot of work for a return of $250K a year. Â You have to continually create 24 minutes per month, and it has to rate. Not impossible by a long shot, but no easy task either – over time. Â One month, fine. Â Try this pace for a year or two. And, let’s assume that you are not doing this on your own out of your basement, but maybe you’ve got a few friends, a few unemployed actors, you have to pay them something, an editor friend who has to eat, blah blah blah. Â Not to mention rent. Â Take out all the expenses and maybe you’re netting 50K for the year? Â Like I said, OK, but Steven Spielberg you are not.
One of the more interesting metrics here is the areas of content that the 1000 covers: Â 25% music; 20% gaming; 14% comedy; 13% entertainment, 7% how-to (and of those, 60% are beauty). So if you were planning on making serious documentaries or news shows… don’t.
At the end of the day, I personally don’t think that any of this should be or will ever be advertising based.
Advertising in itself is a remnant – a carry over from the linear world and has increasingly little place in a non-lineaer environment.
Video is growing, but the idea of ‘channels’ on YouTube is, to my mind, another anachronisitic carry-over from cable and network TV land.
