If they somehow even got 10% of their audience to go to another platform that would be a miracle
Comment on PewDiePie: I'm DONE with Google
Kolanaki@pawb.social 9 hours agoI’m talking about those who have already gotten big, like PewDiePie. Not the dude who just started a channel last week and has nothing to do shit with.
LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 8 hours ago
TORFdot0@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
YouTube still offers them a service in directing them new viewers. The big creators all lose viewers but YouTube funnels replacement views faster than they lose. They could host their own videos but they are gonna see very little growth without Google either in search or with YouTube as they start to lose the base that followed them.
They also won’t be able to negotiate as good as rates for pre-rolls or in video sponsorships as if they were on YouTube.
The only real alternative would be to band together like the creators that are a part of nebula are doing. Hosting on peertube really isn’t an option unless you are independently supported and you are doing it as a passion project and don’t care about audience growth or retention.
dmtalon@infosec.pub 9 hours ago
Still think building their own site with apps I can throw on my devices is pretty involved.
non_burglar@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
The lift of running your own platform is big. You just won’t believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it’s a long way down the road to the chemist’s, but that’s just peanuts to creating your own video hosting platform.
rebelrbl@sh.itjust.works 6 hours ago
It’s not that challenging with a partner to help manage infrastructure which even at his scale is not going to cost an obscene amount of money.
meyotch@slrpnk.net 7 hours ago
Websites work very well and are scalable af. A plugged in person with a track record like that could go Web 2.0 and probably net more.
non_burglar@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
You are correct. Websites, the stack to supply video encoding, even scalability is a solved problem.
The hard work isn’t technical, it’s getting people onto your platform in the first place (marketing), getting people to continue using your platform (retention) and the perennial problems of SaaS evolving with other SaaS platforms (how many dev hours are you willing to eat trying to keep up with the Joneses?).
SaaS, and in this case, SaaS offering content, is a losing game. You will either lose your shirt, sell your business, or become entrenched in a position whose inertia is difficult to break. How much of any of those you are willing to take a firehose of is the question.
Zagorath@aussie.zone 4 hours ago
It’s not easy, but you’re not guaranteed to end up
It depends on the personalities involved and the business model they go with.
Nebula has done really well with consistent growth as a premium offering where people pay one subscription fee to get ad-free videos from exclusively high-quality creators across a quote broad range of niches, in addition to bonus extras and Nebula Originals.
Dropout seems to have a lot of success with a range of mostly unscripted comedy, centred around a core cast of trusted comedic actors with a larger range of guests.
Floatplane, on the other hand, seems much less successful, probably owing to its business model being basically Patreon’s, but only for video. Instead of the wide range of content you get for surprisingly reasonable amounts of Nebula and Dropout, Floatplane ends up looking very expensive if you want to support more than one or two creators. Plus the creators on it haven’t got the same degree of trust; it ends up reeking of the sort of techbro vibes that people are explicitly trying to get away from.