YouTube Advertising Problems
- 12
- Add a Comment
There’s a vocal majority (or is it a minority?) up in arms about the addition of advertising to certain YouTube channels. In many ways, the community-at-large is upset for good reason - and in other ways, they’re shortsighted.
Lower-third “pop up” advertising doesn’t impress me at all - the model is intrusive and overtly unintuitive. Why would I want to interrupt the playback of one video to watch yet another video that I know full well is an advertisement? It’s a poor way to integrate sponsorship!
I also don’t like pre-roll or post-roll placements (which is the primary reason I don’t have an intro or outtro in most of my recordings). However, if there is an evil to be chosen - this is likely to be the advertising model that most people would accept (though not necessarily appreciate). Why didn’t YouTube go this route to begin with? I bet most viewers wouldn’t have noticed this change at all - since MANY of them have some kind of intro / outtro integrated into their videos already.
My videos are obviously sponsored - and through YouTube, the community is growing every day. Of course, my advertising model isn’t as scalable as the one YouTube is trying to seed - but that’s what makes my approach work well for sponsors. We’re able to tailor integration so that people who are active with our efforts aren’t necessarily turned off by the presence of outside brands. I’ve written about this at length, and have compiled quite a nice “call to action” for potential sponsors.
This can be a win-win-win-win - but only if it’s done in a more proper fashion for all. I wish YouTube would have consulted members of their own community before deciding what would be best for them (or for advertisers, for that matter). I bet they’d have just as many people complaining about a logo change, let alone a strategy to help offset costs for the service that has been free from the very beginning.
And those naïve enough to believe that other video networks would never put them in such a position will wake up to reality soon enough. Fleeing YouTube is done at your own peril - if, as expected, those complaining about any kind of change are in a vocal minority.
12 Comments
YouTube is back online! ~ Mushiku
August 24th, 2007
at 9:13pm
[...] learn more about what you can run into with the new Adverts, check out YouTube Advertising Problems written by Chris Pirillo. Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where [...]
David Risley
August 25th, 2007
at 6:56am
It really was only a matter of time, Chris. Google spent $1.65 billion (if I recall correctly) on Youtube, and we both know how intensive video hosting like that can be on resources. They simply HAVE to monetize it somehow, otherwise I don’t see how it could be economically viable.
Sure, it might be a little intrusive, but isn’t all advertising? If it weren’t at least a little intrusive, it wouldn’t work. In an ideal world, we could all use Youtube all day without seeing an ad. But, that isn’t reality. I think this method Youtube is trying is perhaps the best compromise between viewer preferences and need to make a buck.
Scott Mead
August 25th, 2007
at 2:57pm
I dont have problem with YouTube putting ads in videos or creating pop-ups. YouTube is a free service and you cant complain as far as a source to upload videos too. If this becomes a big deal I think Google should charge for the service monthly. Bandwidth/servers are not cheap. I would be willing to pay monthly. Thats just because I do enjoy the YouTube Service.
Scott
http://www.scottmead.info
IceArdor
August 27th, 2007
at 12:26am
YouTube was free before the purchase. It managed to make money, and even though it’s grown, it doesn’t seem like it should need these additional ads. Why doesn’t AdSense work for YouTube videos?
UncleJohn
August 27th, 2007
at 9:31am
Awhile back I told a friend of mine who knows some people, that a 3 second advertisment should be placed infront of all partner members. Why?
Because as it stands a partner to my knowledge only gets paid “per click” of a banner, which is not that much. However with a 3 second ad at the start of every video they would get payed a “per watch” instead, and increase there earnings from advertisements.
The way I see it, a partner in the program should make more then they are, right now its pretty much free advertisement for YouTube with really no gain to the partner who hosts the ad banners. Honestly how many of you click on one of those banners? Not me, if I like what I see, I google it! And look for a cheaper price, dont you?
So there ya have it im sure ill be hated for my comment but its the truth.
Monetizing YouTube - What About Micropayment Downloads? : Forecast-Blog
August 27th, 2007
at 12:54pm
[...] far to early to judge YouTube’s just launched video overlay ads, but early user reviews are mixed, at best. Morgan Stanley’s Mary Meeker estimates (after some revised math) that YouTube’s ads [...]
The Top 10 Online Video Advertising - The3dtechnologies | Graphics and Innovation
August 27th, 2007
at 3:41pm
[...] far from ideal of video advertising like the classic contextual advertising. In a recent article, Chris pirillo, make a comment on the intrusive model of this new advertising system. Chris said: [...]
Read/WriteWeb
August 27th, 2007
at 8:46pm
Certainly, it is far too early to judge YouTube’s just launched video overlay ads, but early user reviews are mixed, at best. Morgan Stanley’s Mary Meeker estimates (after some revised math) that YouTube’s ads will pull in between$75 and $189 million gross revenueper year — which, with the astronomical cost of streaming video, won’t really cut it. So what about charging small amounts for high quality, downloadable versions of commercial content on YouTube as a way to bring in money? Sure, Google already tried
Evsion Lab
August 27th, 2007
at 10:00pm
sites earn whenever someone clicks on the ads on their pages. Some stock-photography companies sell pictures for as little as $1 each.” Certainly, it is far to early to judge YouTube’s just launched video overlay ads, but early user reviews aremixed, at best. Morgan Stanley’s Mary Meeker estimates (after some revised math) that YouTube’s ads will pull in between $75 and $189 million gross revenue per year — which, with the astronomical cost of streaming video
Monetizing YouTube - What About Micropayment Downloads? : Forecast-Blog
August 28th, 2007
at 12:06pm
[...] far too early to judge YouTube’s just launched video overlay ads, but early user reviews are mixed, at best. Morgan Stanley’s Mary Meeker estimates (after some revised math) that YouTube’s ads [...]
Web Trends
August 28th, 2007
at 11:04pm
someone clicks on the ads on their pages. Some stock-photography companies sell pictures for as little as $1 each.” Certainly, it is far too early to judge YouTube’s just launched video overlay ads, but early user reviews aremixed, at best[IMG]. Morgan Stanley’s Mary Meeker estimates (after some revised math) that YouTube’s ads will pull in between $75 and $189 million gross revenue[IMG] per year — which, with the astronomical cost of streaming video
Jamie Jahnke
May 23rd, 2008
at 7:42pm
They’ve got to make money somehow, hopefully they do it in a tasteful way and don’t start randomly inserting commercials every xx seconds.