Fullscreen Launches Creator Platform

I wouldn't be surprised if the real motivation is obfuscation. There is no other reason for networks to hide any YouTube analytics features which already do the job just fine on their own, yet most networks turn those features off. By confusing the channel owners on what numbers actually mean, there are less complaints about bad earnings. You only get the data you're given, despite more data being available.

Properly licensed music is a way of keeping partners because you lose the license if you terminate your relationship with the company.
 
Tarmack, don't you think much of the YouTube Analytics are obfuscated as it is already? I guarantee 90% of creators barely understand what they're looking at already and definitely not the dynamics behind the data.

I do PPC management for small businesses to pay the bills and comparing the data you get from the Adwords platform to the YouTube dashboard is like night and day. Even compared to the standard Google Analytics screens, it's rudimentary. Nearly all of my clients can't decipher any of it, let alone make shifts in their marketing without my help in sleuthing out the data that really matters, setting up proper split tests, conversion tracking and so forth.

That being the case, what's the point of attempting to pull the wool over the eyes of creators in the first place? Now if you were talking about the advertisers here, that would seem to make more sense.
 
Honestly, no I don't feel that Analytics is trying to hide anything. There is no benefit to them to do so. YouTube takes 45% from everyone equally whether you're with a network or not.

I'm concerned that Fullscreen is moving down the road of the same things that BBTV have been caught doing. Not even looking at the below Adsense CPM's that some BBTV channels have (which is impossible since all networks use Adsense as a base to build from), BBTV have been known to pull crap like the 100% TGN contract. How do you get 100% of revenue? Well, you get it because the network has extracted certain operating costs first. By not letting the channel see the actual money going through the path, you simply don't get all of the information and frankly IMO that's unacceptable. It is all manipulation of numbers.
 
Hell, that sounds a lot like what the record industry has done with artists for decades and gotten away with. Truthfully, I think that's a major part of their aversion to digital/streaming platforms. Too much transparency in the numbers are very difficult to game without getting caught.
 
Blenderhead said:
Hell, that sounds a lot like what the record industry has done with artists for decades and gotten away with. Truthfully, I think that's a major part of their aversion to digital/streaming platforms. Too much transparency in the numbers are very difficult to game without getting caught.
Click to expand...
What many networks do that I feel is more like this is:

  • Find unpartnered channel
  • sign for 1/2/3/4/5 years
  • Even if the rev share they got when they signed was fair, if they grow at all during the following years... profit
(not like there are any meaningful expenses to signing a channel)
 
Which sounds exactly like the traditional seven-album deal most new artists would get with a record label.

The only difference I see here is that while a band/singer can get a lot more out of a label (production, marketing, distribution, booking, etc) besides a share of gross revenue, what other value proposition do these YouTube networks provide that the talent really can't do themselves, at least not with scale?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top