Tarmack
Rhetorical Porcupine
There is effectively no chance of this negatively affecting content creators. The only possibility is if the ad platform gets abandoned completely which will not happen. At least not rapidly.
Here's why. YouTube is not 100% supplied with ads. It's closer to 50% supplied with ads when last I heard. This means that there are twice as many views as there are ads to show on those views. This is not true in all sectors of course as some have higher competition than others, but in the general sense it is true, there are more views than ads. The relatively small number of people who will sign up for Red, compared to the number who will not, only remove a small amount of the available ad inventory. This means that the ad that would have been shown to that person will be shown to someone else who didn't subscribe to the service. This is totally added value to YouTubers.
Further to that, on average a single view is not worth much. It's much less than a penny per view. If you assume an average CPM of $8, RPM of $4.40, that's 0.0044 cents per view. Now, it's not that simple because ads are often based on clicks, so some can be worthwhile and some not so much. Who do you think clicks more ads? Someone who is going to sign up for a service like Red, or someone who won't? People signing up for Red aren't going to be high click ad consumers, rather they'll be the lowest of the low because they're the ones p****d off enough by ads to be willing to pay not to see any.
So, you take that $10 a month and turn it into a per view amount, after you take out around a 50% cut for YouTube (I haven't seen them comment on the exact value), average it over let's say 1000 views a month to 100 views a month. Each view from that user is then worth $0.005 to $0.05 PER VIEW. That's higher than the average CPM conversion. Much higher in some cases.
There is nothing negative about this at all in my view. Do the math for yourself.
Minor Correction: It's based on minutes watched, not individual views. This favors viewer loyalty and doesn't materially change my point.
Here's why. YouTube is not 100% supplied with ads. It's closer to 50% supplied with ads when last I heard. This means that there are twice as many views as there are ads to show on those views. This is not true in all sectors of course as some have higher competition than others, but in the general sense it is true, there are more views than ads. The relatively small number of people who will sign up for Red, compared to the number who will not, only remove a small amount of the available ad inventory. This means that the ad that would have been shown to that person will be shown to someone else who didn't subscribe to the service. This is totally added value to YouTubers.
Further to that, on average a single view is not worth much. It's much less than a penny per view. If you assume an average CPM of $8, RPM of $4.40, that's 0.0044 cents per view. Now, it's not that simple because ads are often based on clicks, so some can be worthwhile and some not so much. Who do you think clicks more ads? Someone who is going to sign up for a service like Red, or someone who won't? People signing up for Red aren't going to be high click ad consumers, rather they'll be the lowest of the low because they're the ones p****d off enough by ads to be willing to pay not to see any.
So, you take that $10 a month and turn it into a per view amount, after you take out around a 50% cut for YouTube (I haven't seen them comment on the exact value), average it over let's say 1000 views a month to 100 views a month. Each view from that user is then worth $0.005 to $0.05 PER VIEW. That's higher than the average CPM conversion. Much higher in some cases.
There is nothing negative about this at all in my view. Do the math for yourself.
Minor Correction: It's based on minutes watched, not individual views. This favors viewer loyalty and doesn't materially change my point.
Last edited:
