Feb 20 marks the date of "no more revenue" for those of us who earn money on youtube. They have officially announced that as of Feb 20 2018 in order for you to earn money on you tube, you MUST have 1000 subscribers and 4000 views per year. If you do not have that, your videos will no longer be monitized. Do the math. Your video will need to get 11 hours of views per day to reach 4000 hours. And lets not even talk about having 1000 subscribers. And they continue: Once you reach 1000 subscribers, you must maintain that for one year, and THEN you can apply for "revenue partner" status. What a joy. First Amazon Prime lowers it's royalty by over half, and then youtube cuts it out altogether. Where can we make a buck...
No more youtube revenue for us
- Thread starter Rayandmigdalia
- Start date
Around 1,200 hours. No where near close enough to get it. Once you are off, it will now become almost impossible to become a YouTube partner again.
You're so cool... *Yawn*. "It's really not hard"... give me a break man. Serious creators? Oh.. you mean the Youtube Superstars that eat Tidepods for a living or filming dumb stunts... or do you mean the ones that just record themselves playing video games? Yep, those serious creators.
Sorry if you're offended. My point is that it really isn't difficult to meet their terms. I'm in full support of the new rules. That said, I do think they need to payout whatever was earned to those accounts being de-monetized.
My main concern is what will change for external in-video linking.
And WTF will happen to the $5 I made with adds??
But you benefitted from the previous situation and it helped you to created more stuff and build your audience before meeting the new threshold.
Lots of serious creators don't meet the standards for various reasons: not marketing savy, focussing on a 'niche market', growing but not big enough: losing the small income on the side can make a difference for the ability to keep on creating at the same pace.
If everyone has to focus on the 'easy markets' with a large audience: be prepared for more of the same and more wannabees trying to milk a hype instead of focussing on what interests them.
Besides all that: an accidental viral can't be monetized anymore.
YouTube is moving towards 'Winner takes all' where it was far more 'democratic' before.
BTW, after 9 years I've got 65 subscribers, lol.
It is mostly a portfolio for me.
The videos I make for clients are on their own channels: that is where the most views are and should be going.
The occasional short film I make is short and not monetized: although I was ready to monetize the accidental viral that never came
I have 1 or 2 videos monetized for fun
And WTF will happen to the $5 I made with adds??
But you benefitted from the previous situation and it helped you to created more stuff and build your audience before meeting the new threshold.
Lots of serious creators don't meet the standards for various reasons: not marketing savy, focussing on a 'niche market', growing but not big enough: losing the small income on the side can make a difference for the ability to keep on creating at the same pace.
If everyone has to focus on the 'easy markets' with a large audience: be prepared for more of the same and more wannabees trying to milk a hype instead of focussing on what interests them.
Besides all that: an accidental viral can't be monetized anymore.
YouTube is moving towards 'Winner takes all' where it was far more 'democratic' before.
BTW, after 9 years I've got 65 subscribers, lol.
It is mostly a portfolio for me.
The videos I make for clients are on their own channels: that is where the most views are and should be going.
The occasional short film I make is short and not monetized: although I was ready to monetize the accidental viral that never came
I have 1 or 2 videos monetized for fun
Last edited:
Wow! The Harvard execs @YouTube brought down the hammer hard this time.
My heart goes out to the content creators who will be affected by this clever way to milk "it" some more.
Even if it's 100 bucks a month that they will deprive someone, that is money well (and most likely hard) earned!
Shame on you utub freshly graduated and eager to impress execs!
My heart goes out to the content creators who will be affected by this clever way to milk "it" some more.
Even if it's 100 bucks a month that they will deprive someone, that is money well (and most likely hard) earned!
Shame on you utub freshly graduated and eager to impress execs!
I can almost promise that nobody who is making at least $100 a month is affected by this. If you're making payout each month, there's a 99.999999% chance you're already meeting the requirements and have nothing to worry about.
What happens if someone only earns an average of $80/mo, does YouTub pay out ~$160 every other month? Does the money carry over if it doesn't reach the minimum monthly payout?
Last edited:
I hope you're right.
But they probably won't pay up without the threat of the class action lawsuit.
I basically agree with what you're saying.
If you have a good job/situation so you're not relying solely on that $100/mo, & your job/situation & health allow you to have productive years of filmmaking ahead of you, & you're willing to spend those years finding a subject an audience will be interested in enough to subscribe, & it's a subject you'd also be interested in enough to post videos regularly, then it's not that hard.
You have to admit though, it's easier to think that when you've already done it
YouTube has to cater to its advertisers & has to look like they're doing something in response to the guy that made the offensive suicide video. But I'm not sure the new rules really address that problem. Isn't it still possible for the existing monetized partners to make a video that can offend people & advertisers? Doesn't this seem like it's more about YouTube trying to save money?
Rayandmigdalia, what if you make some 5 min. videos about your lifestyle & filmmaking process? Something you could post every couple months? Your info shows an interesting backstory. Maybe people would be interested in learning about what you guys did before, what made you decide to make movies, your experiences making your 1st film, how you're making films today, your concerns with Amazon & YouTube, etc. Put enough vlogs together & it could be a full length documentary.
No. Once you're booted off the program, you are no longer entitled to the money and they are no longer contractually obligated to pay you.
On the "upside" you no longer will have ads on your videos.
Hi. I get between $20 and $200 a month from youtube. Some of my videos have over 150,000 views, but that was years ago. So I will be losing this money directly and immediately.
Congrats on making stuff that people want to see! Easy for some people, not so easy for others. Different strokes for different folks as they say.
Yes. When Adpocalypse hit, I got hit hard and had a month where I didn't hit payout. It rolled over to the next month and got added to it.
Last edited:
You've got the subs, and you could probably easily get the hours with a few longer videos than just a few minutes. One of your movies, maybe a half hour training video or something.
Thanks
Fingers crossed. I have a feature film on there, just never really promoted it much. To be honest, I'm not that upset. I don't feel I have made anything of any viral-ity just yet.
I do have a short film that might go viral after the film festival run this year. So I'm holding off any real efforts until that time.
I should probably just look this up myself
but .... damn does this mean you have to work for free for an entire year first?? It sounds like they aren't going to retroactively pay you for that prior year once you are accepted, even though you've been meeting their criteria that entire time.I should probably just look this up myself
That is what 'winner takes all' is about.
It is like Taylor Swift taking 20% of your Spotify subscribtion money while all you listen to is that obscure metalcore noise band who gets $0,000001 from your streams.
The system is now in favour of those who already made it.
And it indeed does not solve the 'idiot streaming a suicide'-problem.
That guy does not suffer from the new threshold.
@El Director:
how would you feel if it did affect you?
Like a 100K subs threshold?
I can tell you that with audio releases (music, comedy, etc) subscriber count and all that doesn't matter. If you're with a distributor like Tunecore or Catapult then they collect royalties from any and every play of your content. Your content gets automatically identified.
I'm sure that if you're with a distributor like Distribber then they collect royalties in the same manner.
I'm sure that if you're with a distributor like Distribber then they collect royalties in the same manner.
That is a totally different subject matter: automatic identification of stolen audio and the compensation for the rights owners is something unrelated to moneizing possibilties. Those videos could never be monetized by the uploader in the first place.