I often wonder how YouTube is still in business. YouTube is owned by Google and provides free video content to millions of people. Although, let's think about this if I never pay YouTube a penny for using it I get a free service since advertisers are paying to place their ads on the site. YouTube may have millions of viewers buy how many of them actually look at or use the product advertised? This is probably why I have a problem with marketing in general. Marketing can rarely be quantified or measured for success. It is not like investing where you can see your return or how much you made. With marketing it is almost impossible to quantify how much of an impact the advertisement made. This brings me back to YouTube.
"An April 2009 report from Credit Suisse did nothing to suggest that YouTube had finally figured things out: It predicted that Google would spend $470 million this year on YouTube, the result of high infrastructure costs without revenue to match" according to InformationWeek.
Google bought YouTube for $1.65 billion in 2006. YouTube manages 200 million uploads per day! The cost of storing data, video, and music on a hard drive has decreased dramatically. YouTube will eventually have to increase storage or figure out some way to get more revenue if they want to remain in business. My own personal view is that Google which is full of free cash flow will hold onto YouTube as a loss leader and either have to either a)start charging people b) restrict the amount of uploads c) go out of business. YouTube can't sustain its exponential growth rate without some serious changes.
However, the positive is that YouTube has benefited many businesses, doctors, performers, and entrepreneurs by allowing people to share their content and to use as a marketing strategy to leverage for their business. This group has benefitted from the ability of posting free content since it is free advertising to help get the word out.
I personally wouldn't mind paying for YouTube if it was relatively cheap and was constantly adding quality material. For instance, why can't I buy or find online an interview on The Tonight Show unless it was a memorable interview? Couldn't the companies that own this content release it and charge it similar to an I-Tunes system? With millions of hours of content somewhere companies that own the content could increase revenue but letting people buy it. The content has opportunity costs since it is isn’t broadcasted and could be making money for the owners of the content. Maybe Hollywood needs to take some business classes.
"An April 2009 report from Credit Suisse did nothing to suggest that YouTube had finally figured things out: It predicted that Google would spend $470 million this year on YouTube, the result of high infrastructure costs without revenue to match" according to InformationWeek.
Google bought YouTube for $1.65 billion in 2006. YouTube manages 200 million uploads per day! The cost of storing data, video, and music on a hard drive has decreased dramatically. YouTube will eventually have to increase storage or figure out some way to get more revenue if they want to remain in business. My own personal view is that Google which is full of free cash flow will hold onto YouTube as a loss leader and either have to either a)start charging people b) restrict the amount of uploads c) go out of business. YouTube can't sustain its exponential growth rate without some serious changes.
However, the positive is that YouTube has benefited many businesses, doctors, performers, and entrepreneurs by allowing people to share their content and to use as a marketing strategy to leverage for their business. This group has benefitted from the ability of posting free content since it is free advertising to help get the word out.
I personally wouldn't mind paying for YouTube if it was relatively cheap and was constantly adding quality material. For instance, why can't I buy or find online an interview on The Tonight Show unless it was a memorable interview? Couldn't the companies that own this content release it and charge it similar to an I-Tunes system? With millions of hours of content somewhere companies that own the content could increase revenue but letting people buy it. The content has opportunity costs since it is isn’t broadcasted and could be making money for the owners of the content. Maybe Hollywood needs to take some business classes.
No comments:
Post a Comment