you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 7 points 2 years ago (1 child)

Finally a good argument, thank you.

I agree that premium splits the percentage of my cash equally and easily but only 55% bugs me. That's an arbitrary number based off of some black box calculation.

I do not trust YouTube to have my or the creators best interest in mind.

If this number was 90% for creators I would consider it fair. The majority of the work comes from creators and is the reason YouTube has any people at its doorstep.

In the meantime, I can still far less effectively make use of my money the way I want to until a better alternative comes around.

I'll just have the sweat it and try harder to be a better consumer, I guess.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    That’s an arbitrary number based off of some black box calculation.

    It's not arbitrary. It's the same 55/45 split that creators have gotten from ad-revenue as part of the YouTube Partner Program. I can't seem to find a source to prove it, but IIRC the split percentage has remained completely untouched for a very long time, maybe even since YPP was originally introduced in 2007.

    I should also stress that this is a revenue split, not a profit split. Youtube pays all of their operating expenses after creators take their 55% share. It means that the final balance sheet for Youtube works out to something like (fudging): 55% creators, 25% expenses, 20% profit. I won't shill for the shareholders -- the deal could be better, but it's not exactly highway robbery, either.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments