I guess the other difference is that YouTube isn’t traditional media, the content you consume on there has no exclusivity or anything. And the creators producing it are incentivized to go where the biggest audience is (which will always be something free) to maintain relevance and gain bigger sponsorships
Something like Netflix, Hulu, Prime, etc. pays for the content in advance with MAYBE some royalties (and never a lot) and they own the media produced. YouTube doesn’t pay for production (they tried this and it failed horrifically) they pay a portion of the revenue that gets generated from viewership
This only makes sense if watching for free with ads wasnt an option, if they wanted more money they would just raise the cost of premium
I mean, this exact thing has already happened with other services. Hulu used to have a free ad supported tier and a paid ad free tier, for example
I guess the other difference is that YouTube isn’t traditional media, the content you consume on there has no exclusivity or anything. And the creators producing it are incentivized to go where the biggest audience is (which will always be something free) to maintain relevance and gain bigger sponsorships
Something like Netflix, Hulu, Prime, etc. pays for the content in advance with MAYBE some royalties (and never a lot) and they own the media produced. YouTube doesn’t pay for production (they tried this and it failed horrifically) they pay a portion of the revenue that gets generated from viewership
“No midrolls”
Don’t even say that