YouTube Is Doomed
 

YouTube Is Doomed

Comments please.

I think they will run it for ever as a tax loss. But it proves traffic is only the first step, you have to sell the traffic something to make a profit.

i think they will forever grow

They should sell premium features like Vimeo..

I guess they can't sell ads on the top/bottom of youtube because companies are worried about what video their banner may show up on?

Thing is, why didn't Youtube do the Hulu thing before Hulu??? I thought Google was full of geniuses.

I visit Hulu more than Youtube. The only time I watch a youtube video is when it gets posted somewhere.

They missed the boat.

You mean to tell me once you put up years of family vacations, videos of the kids, etc. you won't be willing to pony up $50 a year...

IMO

The data collected from youtube is one of the most valuable things a media company like google can have access too.

Exactly. They don't care if YouTube makes money, they just want the user data. They want targeted advertising and the more information they have on each surfer the better. If you think YouTube was purchased for the profit potential, you don't know how Google operates at all.

Hulu is great if you live in the states.... Google is worldwide.

Yep.. kills me we can't access the site here in Canada :(

Hulu is what all tubes wish they could be :)

I keep hearing about how that user data will be worth a fortune one day but they better pull the trigger soon. The way people use the internet and access the internet can change very quickly, making all that old data useless in only a few years.

a company like google has more than one way of benefiting from youtube...

Lol. If it were doomed, you would not see them increase upload size limit, and bring the HD.. It's going nowhere.

it will go aaway eventually, this is the Interwebz we are talking about - nothing lasts forever

I remember when the e-groups (later yahoo groups) was the coolest thing ever, they lasted for good few years, the same will happen with youtube - something bigger or brighter will come up

This is true, this is the net 10 years is a lifetime if they make 20 and anyone still cares I will be shocked really :2 cents:

um put ads at the end before you can see related vids after a imbeded player finishes the vid.

Data on people looking at videos on Youtube. Manner from heaven. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

I would say it's not worth that much from day one.

You tube just implemented it's PPC!
It will survive and thrive

the drp up box with buy song from itunz you talkin about?

they should sell ads chepa and doing high volume that would be a start point

thirded.

Youtube = Google
Google = endless reservoir of money

No, I'm referring to this:

https://ads.youtube.com/index

Well they ran at a lost and outlasted all the VC funded competition pretty much (still a few around, but they will outlast them). Now they will turn the screws and pump the advertising, etc as they have been and make money. Be interesting to see what happens.

you do realize that user generated content is the one that pays to promote themselves on youtube.

getting in promoted video for the keyword you tagged is as simple as paying each click. And none of the outside consulting firms that keep doing this "youtube is losing money analysis" ever see those revenue stats.

I have done youtube viral campaigns before, buying yourself to the front page is a really cost effective way to get a lot of views. and more and more people are doing it every day.

the other way they are losing out is this:https://youtube.com/watch?v=npJ3nTS9UqQ

Show me the ads... there aren't many. they have poor monetization of these pages.

Aren't they currently making some deal with music/film industry?
I think when all torrent sites are gone (it WILL happen sooner or later) they will make money off it.

you don't think the mashup link above the fold is a PAID LINK

Yeah... but don't you think they should have adsense on there or something?

yeah it's going down

I don't have an expert opinion on this but the idea that Google is too diabolically clever to ever make a mistake or pursue a dead end strategy is ridiculous. 10 years ago it was Microsoft and Yahoo who could do no wrong and would soon take over the entire world. As companies become bigger and require more market share to keep their growth rates high enough to please the markets they have a tendency to overreach. Market share and revenue growth do not always equal long term profitability.

So they spend 600 mil a year to get that data? Seem kinda pricey considering they surely get enough information from their search engine. What would you rather- raw search terms from Google or finding out that the person is a habitual watcher of cute panda home movies (which they would likely know from the search terms on Google already - that is my whole point here.)

If you add on some other data collection points like Google Analytics on god only knows how many pages and also Gmail reading all your mail already, Youtube for data collection at 600 mil a year seems a bit of a rich?

No, Google wanted to monetize it with ads and found they couldn't. They fucked up so far and it is looking like a mistake. Claims this 600 mil a year of value is gained though data collection could only be swallowed the most committed Google fanboy.

once again you prove you have no insight or sense of business on the internet

i don't care for hulu we have itv here which has the same stuff and more i saw that i think you can see every in the world.

The article was written by a guy owns a VIDEO ADVERTISEMENT service..

I have also heard more than one price now for the 2009 bw cost. And it "appears" people are taking the financial reports, chopping the bw and adding in the ads, and "thinking" that is how you calculate profit for a company.

Anyway - Google offers 100's of free services it currently does not make money on and they do not plan on dropping. Clearly, they see a bigger picture with the tools, that we don't.


Back to the article... "Unfortunately, far more user-generated content than professional content makes its way onto the site, which means that while costs grow linearly, non-monetizable content is growing geometrically as compared against the monetizable content that YouTube really wants and needs to survive."


How wrong is that? Amateur videos kill it with advertisements on youtube.. hell some are so bad you can't watch the damn video. Seems to me, the more professional they are, the less advertisements I see.

You would think a video traffic ceo dude would know this, by simply looking.

They sell the traffic/exposure to themselves... Go ask the old lady that looks like she is about to die if she knows what Google is, then ask a 3 year old, and find anyone else you like and ask them.

Now, what do you think the #1 sold thing on youtube is?

The second YouTube goes offline, everyone on the planet will have a small boost in their internet speed.

Hmm.

Paul Markham's Comprehension of YouTube business model Vs Google's long term plans...

I know who'd I'd back.

YouTube is neither a failure nor doomed, and Google's goal with it isn't (mainly) direct income or data collection.

What they want is to build broad, lasting customer loyalty. To be omnipresent in consumer's online lives.

A single search engine can easily be replaced by another one. Remember AltaVista?

But if a person has a google account which is linked to his email address, his youtube account, his blogger account, his orkut account, his feedburner account, etc., he can't just leave Google.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Google_products

Google wants to be a part of virtually aspect of your online life. They don't create the content, they create the framework in which you can create, consume and search the content. This is a long-term plan, not a short-term one. Google are very aware of the fact that missing the "next big thing" could well mean losing market share across the board.

Imagine for a moment that YouTube had been acquired by Microsoft instead of Google. YouTube accounts would have been integrated with Windows Live accounts, thereby further increasing the market share of Hotmail and Messenger. It would also have boosted MSN.com (possibly through far-reaching intregration of the two) and Live Search. Essentially, Google's online market share would have been broadly compromised, and with it its stronghold in online advertising.

Even Google has admitted that they need to monetize youtube so all you saying they are rocking are nuts.

The youtube "doom theories" were a lot more plausible 3-4 years ago. Even then none of them came true.

What's so special about yet another idiot's opinion on youtube's theoretical demise? Especially when said idiot is the "ceo" of a company trying to sell video hosting services that no one has ever heard of.

great article.

But this has nothing to do with adult tubes, who exist to parasite off the legitimate porn industry. As long as they get advertising dollars for airing stolen content, they can control their costs to make money. Youtube has a burden of storing non-monetizable content (AKA schlock videos from john q public) that adult tubes do not share.

My google and youtube account are seperate. Are yours linked? I don't even see it as an option on my google account.

You can log into youtube with your google account.

you can never kill it!!!!

I always wondered why showing ads at amateur videos is not possible and why they're not "monetizable". What's the problem with showing some ad next to the video of some one getting his kids to Disney land?

Haha..Canada SUCKS!

btw - proxy

as long as google is backing youtube it's going nowhere....

They'll be fine in the short term. Long term is anybody's guess.

I think thats bullshit regarding the user-generated content, there is plenty of user-generated content that is monetizable and that drive masses of traffic who view and click on ads... for instance https://youtube.com/fred - this kid has 1,046,991 subscribers by himself and growing by the minute