Does YouTube turn a profit? - GoFuckYourself.com

03-17-2009, 05:21 PM

I was wonderhing this while I was on it today. Do you think they have more money comin gin than going out?

Yeah I know its Google and a billion dollars is nothing to them, but Im wondering if YouTube is in the black or in the red

After Shock Media · 03-17-2009, 05:23 PM

no it does not.

Barefootsies · 03-17-2009, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by After Shock Media

no it does not.

Correct.

It did not turn a profit even before Google bought it. Nor has it come close since.

Si · 03-17-2009, 06:02 PM

YouTube deserves to lose money because it has made society lose wisdom.

fris · 03-17-2009, 06:32 PM

its like $175,000 to advertise on the main index for 24 hours

mynameisjim · 03-17-2009, 06:50 PM

They don't post revenue for youtube on the Google public discolures. But a research group put their total revenue at about $75 million in 2008.

Do the math.

st0ned · 03-17-2009, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mynameisjim

They don't post revenue for youtube on the Google public discolures. But a research group put their total revenue at about $75 million in 2008.

Do the math.

That makes for a huge loss.

"According to data published by market research company comScore, YouTube is the dominant provider of online video in the United States, with a market share of around 43 percent and more than six billion videos viewed in January 2009.[14] It is estimated that 13 hours of new videos are uploaded to the site every minute, and that in 2007 YouTube consumed as much bandwidth as the entire Internet in 2000.[15][16] In March 2008, YouTube's bandwidth costs were estimated at approximately US$1 million a day.[17] Alexa ranks YouTube as the third most visited website on the Internet, behind Yahoo! and Google.[18]"

Source: Wikipedia

Sam Granger · 03-17-2009, 08:29 PM

Well, what do you expect. It's not a regular site. Vids require shitloads of BW. Especially now with HD enabled on youtube! Nothing compared to most of our sites with images, text anf externally hosted flv's

RogerV · 03-17-2009, 08:44 PM

they made alot when they bought it off wallstreet when there stock jumped. doesnt matter if it made money or not people bought more stock etc. all hype like most of wallstreet

Ozarkz · 03-17-2009, 09:02 PM

http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=10054

03-18-2009, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mynameisjim

They don't post revenue for youtube on the Google public discolures. But a research group put their total revenue at about $75 million in 2008.

Do the math.

So they will break even in about 14 years

cali_22 · 03-18-2009, 03:08 PM

Dont kid youself youtube makes lots of money u morons.

Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life · 03-18-2009, 03:13 PM

youtube could cost google millions a day, and it's still worth it for them in their domination plan.

xentech · 03-18-2009, 03:35 PM

Google can afford to lose money on YouTube just to remain the #1 on that niche. It may become profitable in the future, they are already making steps towards it. YouTube is now the second largest search engine in the world so I think in their eyes that loss is worth it.

mynameisjim · 03-18-2009, 03:56 PM

Well, Google can afford to lose money on it, but for how long.

Don't forget, they only have one profitable product and everything else pretty much loses money. You can't ride that forever. I'm not saying they are in any immediate danger, but at some point they need these things to become profitable, not just dominant.

Blazed · 03-18-2009, 04:09 PM

If video advertising ever kicks off like it was expected then things could change very quickly, is that not the reason they bought it in the first place because they saw video advertising as the future?

JamesK · 03-18-2009, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xentech

Google can afford to lose money on YouTube just to remain the #1 on that niche. It may become profitable in the future, they are already making steps towards it. YouTube is now the second largest search engine in the world so I think in their eyes that loss is worth it.

Yep, I agree.

A lot of website types have had this problem in the past. Hell, in the beginning companies didn't even know how to make money off the internet. They will find a way eventually to make huge profit off it.

Snake Doctor · 03-18-2009, 05:07 PM

The big thing holding youtube back right now is the Viacom lawsuit.

Until the legal issues there get sorted out, and they have a clear idea of what they can and can't do, what and how they can advertise etc, they're just going to spin their wheels.

The case law for their business model doesn't exist yet, it's going to be decided by the judge(s) hearing this suit.

Cutty · 03-18-2009, 05:47 PM

All of your answers are invalid unless one of you works for youtube.

$5 submissions · 03-18-2009, 06:13 PM

Probably still in the money losing stage of any business' evolution.

$5 submissions · 03-18-2009, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mynameisjim

Well, Google can afford to lose money on it, but for how long.

Don't forget, they only have one profitable product and everything else pretty much loses money. You can't ride that forever. I'm not saying they are in any immediate danger, but at some point they need these things to become profitable, not just dominant.

Good point. It's an open question when the advertising downturn will hit Google. It hit Yahoo pretty bad during the last bust of 2001 to 2003

SpeakEasy · 03-19-2009, 05:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake Doctor

The big thing holding youtube back right now is the Viacom lawsuit.

Until the legal issues there get sorted out, and they have a clear idea of what they can and can't do, what and how they can advertise etc, they're just going to spin their wheels.

The case law for their business model doesn't exist yet, it's going to be decided by the judge(s) hearing this suit.

I will agree with this statement...

Kron · 03-19-2009, 05:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fris

its like $175,000 to advertise on the main index for 24 hours

damn, this is insane

leek · 03-19-2009, 06:51 AM

Google does not release YouTube's numbers publicly so everything everyone says here is just speculation.

Here is the latest guesstimates:
http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/24/hul...idcontent.html

HorseShit · 03-19-2009, 06:58 AM

imagine if they started charging $5 a member per month, people that like it would definitely pay $5 a month or $50 for a years access, they'd be making nice money then

Zorgman · 03-19-2009, 08:13 AM

It's a tax right off.

Twistys Tim · 03-19-2009, 08:19 AM

I think the important thing for Google was making sure that nobody else owned it.

Twistys Tim · 03-19-2009, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdavis

imagine if they started charging $5 a member per month, people that like it would definitely pay $5 a month or $50 for a years access, they'd be making nice money then

I think that would kill it. A better, or more viable option, would be to upsell surfers to a subscription service with higher quality videos, and exclusive content provided by content partners (TV networks, movie studios, etc.)

Most of their surfers are 35>

CarlosTheGaucho · 03-19-2009, 10:50 AM

The model doesn't work and never will be profitable.

I would expect the only point of the acquisition was to try to get that huge mass of visitors who are mainly kids used to using the google applications etc. to secure the dominant piece of the pie in the future - a strategical acquisition.

Also, the popular fairy tale that this was started in someone's garage is a non sense.

They had $ 8 M of financing for the start and additional investments afterwards - it's significant for the whole web 2.0. bubble that probably bursted already.

No one will ever be able to pull such a trick again.

Not to mention the whole popularity was only enabled by a loophole in the copyrights, so they could attract people to find their favorite stuff at you tube - all inclusive.

No one is really interested in Johnny from Nebraska playing guitar, everyone wants to see the celebrities, movies stars, music videos, politics, sports etc. - the real thing and real content.

Libertine · 03-19-2009, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CarlosTheGaucho

[...]No one is really interested in Johnny from Nebraska playing guitar, everyone wants to see the celebrities, movies stars, music videos, politics, sports etc. - the real thing and real content.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=QjA5faZF1A8 - dude playing guitar, 57 million views.

Reak AGV · 03-19-2009, 11:25 AM

I'm pretty sure YouTube turns profit

Paul Markham · 03-19-2009, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mynameisjim

Well, Google can afford to lose money on it, but for how long.

Don't forget, they only have one profitable product and everything else pretty much loses money. You can't ride that forever. I'm not saying they are in any immediate danger, but at some point they need these things to become profitable, not just dominant.

This recession will take a long time to recover from. Companies will be going out of business while other cot their costs. Advertising on a site that can't prove it's worth money is going to find it hard to justify $750 a day.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blazed

If video advertising ever kicks off like it was expected then things could change very quickly, is that not the reason they bought it in the first place because they saw video advertising as the future?

Go look at the TV stations that live off advertising then think about it on Youtube. Every clip opens with an advert, an advert every 10 minutes and all on a medium used by people who there to not spend money.

Do you see the flaw in your thinking?

It might piss off more people than it encourages. Remember it has fuck all to do with traffic. It's ALL about what that traffic spends against what it costs. Could it be some at Google think traffic is king?

In good times it's a tax loss, in bad times it's a drain.

HomerSimpson · 03-19-2009, 02:01 PM

I doubt they are making profit from YT
just because the costs are too big...

mynameisjim · 03-19-2009, 02:14 PM

I have more confidence in hulu.com one day being profitable than youtube.

If fact, I visit hulu way more than youtube. I use to visit youtube daily, but now the only time I watch a youtube video is when someone embeds it on a forum or blog or something.

Ron2k1 · 03-19-2009, 02:50 PM

YouTube is a perfect marketing tool for Google, it's an extremely well known brand

So Google doesn't really give a fuck about bandwidth cost.

xentech · 03-19-2009, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leek

Google does not release YouTube's numbers publicly so everything everyone says here is just speculation.

Here is the latest guesstimates:
http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/24/hul...idcontent.html

I'm pretty sure I've read from a Google blog or something that said YouTube is losing a fair bit of money at the moment but they are making steps to monetize it (like the index video ads), not exact numbers though.

Twistys Tim · 03-19-2009, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CarlosTheGaucho

I would expect the only point of the acquisition was to try to get that huge mass of visitors who are mainly kids used to using the google applications etc.

Most of YouTube's users are in the 35 - 65 age range. Only about 13% are kids.

xentech · 03-19-2009, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twistys Tim

Most of YouTube's users are in the 35 - 65 age range. Only about 13% are kids.

What leads you to believe this?

kane · 03-19-2009, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake Doctor

The big thing holding youtube back right now is the Viacom lawsuit.

Until the legal issues there get sorted out, and they have a clear idea of what they can and can't do, what and how they can advertise etc, they're just going to spin their wheels.

The case law for their business model doesn't exist yet, it's going to be decided by the judge(s) hearing this suit.

Yep the Viacom suit will define the future of Youtube and sites like it. If Viacom wins and is given a huge judgment Youtube will either have to adjust how it does business or close down. From what I understand Youtube and sites like it say they are just hosts and have no control over the content on it. Yet you never see porn on youtube so there must be some kind of filtering system in place that keeps it off the site. If Viacom can prove that youtube is controlling the content in any way then their DMCA safe harbor will be pretty much null and void and once Viacom wins every company or person who has stuff on youtube that they don't want there will be filing a suit. Youtube's legal bills could quickly outpace its bandwidth bills.

kane · 03-19-2009, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twistys Tim

Most of YouTube's users are in the 35 - 65 age range. Only about 13% are kids.

Where do you get this from. I would think just the opposite that most of their users are 21 and under. Just from what I know about myself and my friends I sometimes look at youtube and some of my friends occasionally do, but their kids are on it non-stop.

CarlosTheGaucho · 03-20-2009, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Libertine

https://youtube.com/watch?v=QjA5faZF1A8 - dude playing guitar, 57 million views.

A cat with two heads is not an evidence that cats have two heads.

CarlosTheGaucho · 03-20-2009, 07:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kane

Where do you get this from. I would think just the opposite that most of their users are 21 and under. Just from what I know about myself and my friends I sometimes look at youtube and some of my friends occasionally do, but their kids are on it non-stop.

Yeah, I researched it too from a verifiable source, a guy who has access to all those official paid databases about companies and news sources etc. claimed it's expected to be about 40 pct. in the age reange between 12 and 15 or something if I remember well.

But you know how it is, GFY is a world of its own.

CarlosTheGaucho · 03-20-2009, 07:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron2k1

YouTube is a perfect marketing tool for Google, it's an extremely well known brand

So Google doesn't really give a fuck about bandwidth cost.

If you run a business you always care about the costs, especially if you are jewish.

CarlosTheGaucho · 03-20-2009, 07:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reak AGV

I'm pretty sure YouTube turns profit

There are also people out there, who are extremely sure that that hairy pacifist hippie who became very popular after his death was born to a virgin.

Twistys Tim · 03-20-2009, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xentech

What leads you to believe this?

This does - http://www.imediaconnection.com/content/12474.asp

CarlosTheGaucho · 03-20-2009, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twistys Tim

This does - http://www.imediaconnection.com/content/12474.asp

Interesting, but:

1)

By David Hallerman
November 17, 2006

2) US only

3) Nielsen//NetRatings

Is this not the questionnaire? Have you ever seen a kid or anyone young and pacey filling out an online survey?

Well, let's leave it to the experts!

Paul Markham · 03-20-2009, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kane

Yep the Viacom suit will define the future of Youtube and sites like it. If Viacom wins and is given a huge judgment Youtube will either have to adjust how it does business or close down. From what I understand Youtube and sites like it say they are just hosts and have no control over the content on it. Yet you never see porn on youtube so there must be some kind of filtering system in place that keeps it off the site. If Viacom can prove that youtube is controlling the content in any way then their DMCA safe harbor will be pretty much null and void and once Viacom wins every company or person who has stuff on youtube that they don't want there will be filing a suit. Youtube's legal bills could quickly outpace its bandwidth bills.

If Viacom lose will that be the end of it, or will it just start another suit on a different tact? They lose once they're screwed. The cigarette industry was sued many times before it started to lose.

Or am I wrong?

As for legal costs outpacing BW bills. They may already be there, ask people who have been through the US legal system.

Paul Markham · 03-20-2009, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twistys Tim

Most of YouTube's users are in the 35 - 65 age range. Only about 13% are kids.

No one really knows and it's acedemic. As Carlos points out online surveys reflect the people who fill in online surveys. Kids may not bother.

Look at the most viewed scenes for an indication.

polish_aristocrat · 03-20-2009, 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesK

Yep, I agree.

A lot of website types have had this problem in the past. Hell, in the beginning companies didn't even know how to make money off the internet. They will find a way eventually to make huge profit off it.

If I remember correctly, AlienQ said he knows how to make YouTube profitable.
They should just hire him.

CarlosTheGaucho · 03-20-2009, 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

As for legal costs outpacing BW bills. They may already be there, ask people who have been through the US legal system.

The legal costs have to be out of this world in that case..

03-17-2009, 05:23 PM	#2
After Shock Media It's coming look busy Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn". Posts: 35,299	no it does not. __________________ [email protected] ICQ:135982156 AIM: Aftershockmed1a MSN: [email protected]

03-17-2009, 06:32 PM	#5
fris Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 55,229	its like $175,000 to advertise on the main index for 24 hours __________________ Since 1999: 69 Adult Industry awards for Best Hosting Company and professional excellence. WP Stuff

03-17-2009, 06:50 PM	#6
mynameisjim Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 2,985	They don't post revenue for youtube on the Google public discolures. But a research group put their total revenue at about $75 million in 2008. Do the math. __________________ jim (at) amateursconvert . com Amateurs Convert

03-17-2009, 08:29 PM	#8
Sam Granger Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NL (Eindhoven), CZ(Prague), FR(Concarneau) Posts: 3,958	Well, what do you expect. It's not a regular site. Vids require shitloads of BW. Especially now with HD enabled on youtube! Nothing compared to most of our sites with images, text anf externally hosted flv's __________________ [img]http://**************/sig/fhv3_j2_624x80_2.gif[/img] $35-40 Per Signup, 60-70% Rev Share, over 80 Sites, Exclusive Sites, tons of free content 14,000+ Free hosted Galleries, RSS feeds, Domain Hosting, Embedded Flash Movies Join Fetish Hits now! ICQ:** 358652230

03-18-2009, 03:56 PM	#15
mynameisjim Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 2,985	Well, Google can afford to lose money on it, but for how long. Don't forget, they only have one profitable product and everything else pretty much loses money. You can't ride that forever. I'm not saying they are in any immediate danger, but at some point they need these things to become profitable, not just dominant. __________________ jim (at) amateursconvert . com Amateurs Convert

03-17-2009, 05:21 PM	#1
teh ghey Guest Posts: n/a	Does YouTube turn a profit? I was wonderhing this while I was on it today. Do you think they have more money comin gin than going out? Yeah I know its Google and a billion dollars is nothing to them, but Im wondering if YouTube is in the black or in the red

03-17-2009, 06:02 PM	#4
Si Such Fun! Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 13,900	YouTube deserves to lose money because it has made society lose wisdom.

03-17-2009, 08:44 PM	#9
RogerV Banned! Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 12,591	they made alot when they bought it off wallstreet when there stock jumped. doesnt matter if it made money or not people bought more stock etc. all hype like most of wallstreet

03-17-2009, 09:02 PM	#10
Ozarkz So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 2,377	http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=10054

03-18-2009, 03:08 PM	#12
cali_22 Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Whistler BC Posts: 2,330	Dont kid youself youtube makes lots of money u morons.

03-18-2009, 03:13 PM	#13
Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life (felis madjewicus) Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: In Mom & Dad's Basement Posts: 20,368	youtube could cost google millions a day, and it's still worth it for them in their domination plan.

03-18-2009, 03:35 PM	#14
xentech Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: England Posts: 1,405	Google can afford to lose money on YouTube just to remain the #1 on that niche. It may become profitable in the future, they are already making steps towards it. YouTube is now the second largest search engine in the world so I think in their eyes that loss is worth it.

03-18-2009, 04:09 PM	#16
Blazed Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: London Posts: 1,701	If video advertising ever kicks off like it was expected then things could change very quickly, is that not the reason they bought it in the first place because they saw video advertising as the future? __________________ ☻

03-18-2009, 05:07 PM	#18
Snake Doctor I'm Lenny2 Bitch Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: On top of my soapbox Posts: 13,449	The big thing holding youtube back right now is the Viacom lawsuit. Until the legal issues there get sorted out, and they have a clear idea of what they can and can't do, what and how they can advertise etc, they're just going to spin their wheels. The case law for their business model doesn't exist yet, it's going to be decided by the judge(s) hearing this suit. __________________ sig too big

03-18-2009, 05:47 PM	#19
Cutty So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 1,265	All of your answers are invalid unless one of you works for youtube.

03-18-2009, 06:13 PM	#20
$5 submissions I help you SUCCEED Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: The Pearl of the Orient Seas Posts: 32,195	Probably still in the money losing stage of any business' evolution. __________________ Need a NON-ADULT income stream? We build your YOUTUBE CHANNEL for only $20 per video! For Hire: $3/hour or $400 per month Marketing Specialist Virtual Assistants

03-19-2009, 06:51 AM	#24
leek Confirmed User Join Date: May 2008 Location: Charlotte, NC Posts: 342	Google does not release YouTube's numbers publicly so everything everyone says here is just speculation. Here is the latest guesstimates: http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/24/hul...idcontent.html

03-19-2009, 06:58 AM	#25
HorseShit Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 17,513	imagine if they started charging $5 a member per month, people that like it would definitely pay $5 a month or $50 for a years access, they'd be making nice money then

03-19-2009, 08:13 AM	#26
Zorgman Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 6,103	It's a tax right off. __________________ ---

03-19-2009, 08:19 AM	#27
Twistys Tim Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Twistys HQ Posts: 1,923	I think the important thing for Google was making sure that nobody else owned it. __________________ $100 PPS Xmas Promo [email protected] ICQ 311545482 Skype timmy_vee

03-19-2009, 10:50 AM	#29
CarlosTheGaucho Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 9,510	The model doesn't work and never will be profitable. I would expect the only point of the acquisition was to try to get that huge mass of visitors who are mainly kids used to using the google applications etc. to secure the dominant piece of the pie in the future - a strategical acquisition. Also, the popular fairy tale that this was started in someone's garage is a non sense. They had $ 8 M of financing for the start and additional investments afterwards - it's significant for the whole web 2.0. bubble that probably bursted already. No one will ever be able to pull such a trick again. Not to mention the whole popularity was only enabled by a loophole in the copyrights, so they could attract people to find their favorite stuff at you tube - all inclusive. No one is really interested in Johnny from Nebraska playing guitar, everyone wants to see the celebrities, movies stars, music videos, politics, sports etc. - the real thing and real content. __________________ CTG Media \| skype: carlosprague \| cb \|at\| ctgmedia \|dot\| net \| Want to make more with your Dating Traffic? \| Read My Educational Series \| Read my Adult Biz Chronicles \| Did your ad revenue drop by 40 pct. or more last year? Last edited by CarlosTheGaucho; 03-19-2009 at 10:52 AM..

03-19-2009, 11:25 AM	#31
Reak AGV Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Unknown Posts: 4,283	I'm pretty sure YouTube turns profit __________________ Need Mainstream Content and SEO? SEO * Website Copy * Blogs Blogging - PR Work - Forum Marketing - Social Marketing - Link building - Articles 100% Guaranteed Content!

03-19-2009, 02:01 PM	#33
HomerSimpson Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Springfield Posts: 13,826	I doubt they are making profit from YT just because the costs are too big... __________________ Make a bank with Chaturbate - the best selling webcam program Ads that can't be block with AdBlockers !!! /// Best paying popup program (Bitcoin payouts) !!! PHP, MySql, Smarty, CodeIgniter, Laravel, WordPress, NATS... fixing stuff, server migrations & optimizations... My ICQ: 27429884 \| Email:

03-19-2009, 02:14 PM	#34
mynameisjim Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 2,985	I have more confidence in hulu.com one day being profitable than youtube. If fact, I visit hulu way more than youtube. I use to visit youtube daily, but now the only time I watch a youtube video is when someone embeds it on a forum or blog or something. __________________ jim (at) amateursconvert . com Amateurs Convert

03-19-2009, 02:50 PM	#35
Ron2k1 Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 1,573	YouTube is a perfect marketing tool for Google, it's an extremely well known brand So Google doesn't really give a fuck about bandwidth cost.