It was announced recently that YouTube is extending its partnership program to include ‘individual popular videos’ on the site.
The below, rather ambiguous sentence attempted to explain it.
“Now, when you upload a video to YouTube that accumulates lots of views, we may invite you to monetize that video and start earning revenue from it. To determine whether a particular video is eligible for monetization, we look at factors like the number of views, the video’s virality and compliance with the YouTube Terms of Service. If your video is eligible for monetization, you will receive an email and see an “Enable Revenue Sharing” message next to your video on the watch page, as well as in other places in your account.”
Now a few things aren’t clear …
– what constitutes ‘a lot of views’
– what does ‘he video’s virality’ mean
Another thing not covered is the revenue share agreement. It is stated that those participating in the program must be AdSense members.
Right now this is a US initiative.
Aside the ambiguous terms, the question to content producers has to be ‘what is the revenue upside’
Right now all I see on YouTube are some display ad units and some pretty off context text overlays that are basically text adsense.
So let’s estimate the eCPM extraction is around $1 … which in all honesty is probably pretty generous considering the mix of low cost CPC, CPM and performance ads.
So if you have 1,000,000 views after YouTube deem your video to be worthy of the partnership program, the overall revenue will probably sit at around $1,000. And that’s assuming the 1,000,000 views are not embeds, but are on the YouTube site.
If your videos are getting around 100-300,000 views then the total revenue generated would be around $100-300 dollars.
Now, how much of this does Google take and how much does the user get?
And how transperent is Google in reporting total revenue and the amount of revenue the creator receives?
And does the user have the ability to approve advertisers that are allowed to run near their videos?
Main takeout is no one would be getting rich from this. And it also demonstrates that the key challenge for YouTube is increasing yield.
If Youtube could command higher cpm’s maybe this would improve … or if it began running pre-rolls. It’s uncertain whether the YouTube users would accept this though.
Now, if I was running an AU site that had a focus on video I’d be looking at content creators who have a following on YouTube and approaching them around a deal . Someone like a Natalie Tran is getting loads of views for her videos, which could be valuable content for a ninemsn or a Yahoo! or a Fairfax. (Natalie Tran link – http://www.youtube.com/user/communitychannel)
Partnering with a ninemsn or Yahoo! could provide advantages. Access to production facilities. Access to other talent. Access to wider distribution and promotion (TV/magazines) and more than likely more revenue.
For the publisher the upside is established, credible content. Talent with an existing following and a track record of traffic that will give the ad market some assurance as sponsors.
Could we see the main publishers scouring YouTube over the next 12 months looking for talent they can poach? Could YouTube be the new community TV?
With video such a crucial area for many publishers the idea isn’t a crazy one …