Hey Tyler,

I should've mentioned this in my post, but you have to watch that Smosh video on the YouTube site in order to see the ad! So just click anywhere on the player as it's embedded here and it will land you on that page.

Sorry for the confusion!

AD

Previously Tyler Gibb wrote:

Bummer - for some reason I'm not seeing the ad in the "axe murderer" video... Maybe they're regionally targeted. Often my North of the border affliction causes me to miss out on such campaigns.



As for YouTube going ad-driven it was bound to happen. Frankly not offering the compensation to uploaders is why I've kept my (boneland.com) content off YouTube. I went for Revver instead which was ridiculously sweet in returns (a 16% click-through ratio on post-roll ads) up until the beginning of August. Now - for some reason that could not really be explained by Revver to my satisfaction - the CTR has dropped to 0% and I'm making roughly 10 to 20% of what I was making before...



But this, I feel, was bound to happen as well.



Advertisers seem love a new thing. Then, after the initial buy, they seem to become less enchanted. Much less enchanted and the "Cursor Manias" of the world sweep in to buy up the inventory for pitiful returns.



I suspect this cycle will repeat itself with YouTube, when initial advertisers get in there with big bucks to spend and then quickly lose interest when the next big thing comes along. Probably best to collect while you can but don't count on the YouTube effort to be the cash cow for your next web series.



... I'm such a downer, eh?



T

You can see another example here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ee_rDSvOSnY

I also can't see the advert on that particular video, on the website or embedded!

I made a video regarding the issue which can be seen here: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=MfKIVQ4buEU

To summarise, I think that there are pros and cons to these ads, as there always are with new features, but I think the cons outweight the pros. YouTube is, and has always been, a website where people view videos. An advert popping up 15 seconds into the video is a nuisance and will annoy users and potentially put them off visiting YouTube to watch videos, perhaps making them go to one of its competitors instead which has no adverts. I understand that this is beneficial to the advertisers and to YouTube, and that it <i>can</i> be clicked, but that adds effort to watching videos ― if you know you're going to have to click to make an ad disappear, or that you're going to have to put up with an obstruction for 10 seconds, it's very offputting, as opposed to if it were effortless enough to click a video and just be able to watch it all the way through with no problems or obstructions.

I suggested some alternatives in the video.

Oddly enough, it doesn't show on that either. Does my being in the UK have something to do with that, do you think?

You can see another example here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ee_rDSvOSnY

I also can't see the ad. Probably it is targeted to us users only.

I think someone else in the UK mentioned they couldn't see the ads either.

here's the NY Times piece:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/22/technology/22google.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Previously Clive Newstead wrote:

Oddly enough, it doesn't show on that either. Does my being in the UK have something to do with that, do you think?

You can see another example here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ee_rDSvOSnY

Okay I've seen them, some show up, some dont, but either way I find them annoying.

I as a user dont want my videos or the videos I'm watching to have advertisments in them, its almost as annoying as the 10-20 live ads that are shown on TV being on before a video you're watching as say IGN for example.

Id rather have a good old banner ad at the top of my page, why? Because I dont notice them! I've grown up with the internet my whole life, I'm 21 and I've had a computer since I was like 4, well in our family, but still I've grown up with the internet and I'm used to banner ads, so used to them, I dont even noticed them anymore. Hence why I'd want a banner ad on my pages/video pages because I dont notice.

Second off, Who seriously clicks on these ads? I dont know one singler person I know that goes "oooh look at that 'click' " No no no, no one clicks on these ads, they all make you pay for something stupid or outragously pricey, and you've learned your lession once if you click on them

I made a video regarding this earlier today.

I use blip.tv for the embedded video on my web site which has a similar kind of overlay ad to what YouTube have just announced. With Blip.tv you can opt in or out of their advertising - so you can choose if you wish to monetize your videos or not. You can also do this on a video by video basis.

As a video maker,

i have to say this advertising practice is disturbing.... YouTube would take copyrighted contents off the network, because viacom or whatever asks, but when it's user copyrights, they dont care as much! These videos are made by users, for users, and should not see their creative content impeded !! Imagine I decided to place my logo on a disney film !! do you think they would like that ?? Place the ads around the video You Tube, or we will revolt !

As an advertiser, I know this will not work. It might sell well, because YouTube is young and this breaks the mould, but here's a detailed analysis of why it won't work

nic pfost,

I agree with you that youtube is huge. I can also say with no shame that youtube can do whatever they want, they could charge people for watching videos, or charge people to register in orer to view videos... they have decided to place advertising on user generated contents, which is one way f doing it.

My point is that this advertising is not going to be effective because of the state of might you need to be in order to make a purchase, or even a purchasing move: do you go into argos accidently? no...think of impulse buying: there is something driving the sale in the first place, even though it doesnt look so, the consumer is already in the buying frame of mind, maybe because he s on oxford street, maybe because he s hungry...

But on youtube, this advertising will create irritation and frustration with the brand which will be seen as intrusive by the viewer who has made decisions to watch a video (opened browser, typed you tube, search videos, browsed a few more, got a message, and found one he wanted to watch) and is therefore not in a 'consumption mode' but in an entertainment mode.

I think advertisers pay for eyeballs, and while Revver and other services offer a revenue split with content creators, Revver doesn't have nearly enough eyeballs to sell sustainable advertising accounts. Look at the numbers. YT is huge. Nobody else even comes close right now.

Nic, what you are saying is 20% true: advertisers who pay for eyeballs exist off the internet, they make posters and put them on the bus or in the subway. online, the advertising model is different, and advertisers pay by the click, or sometimes by the link. And this advertising scheme goes against this business model, for the only reason that it will get huge budgets from big companies.

However, these companies will never get ROI.

It s all explaine in my latest blog entry, check it out. I appreciate your comments Nic, but hum, this advertising scheme is doomed because users do not like it. Look around, i d say 80% users unhappy 10% dont mind 10% happy. If viewers are unhappy how can advertisers be happy... everyone has already stopped watching the ads on tv, do you really think these ones will work ? course you don't...

Wow. This is a heated discussion. We thought since we have a unique perspective - As Cinemafreaks we are Youtube "Partners" - we should throw in our 2 cents worth.

We should point out first that we are not running the InVideo ads yet, although we are looking forward to the opportunity to try them out. Right now we are benefiting from banner ads, etc..

One thing we can clarify is the way in which monetization works with youtube partners. We don't have to monetize every video that we upload. We can choose which to include in our monetization program and which to exclude. I don't imagine anyone will ever force a creator to put an ad on their content.

As for how people will feel about the ads, for what it's worth, the Simpsons movie ad has run on Smosh vids for a while now, and they are still the most-subscribed channel, and growing like crazy. Their vids' ratings don't seem to be impacted either.

Will people click? We'll have to wait and see. Tests seem to show they will, at least at a higher rate than they do on banners. Also, they're getting exposure with the ads, even if no one clicks. 8)

Hi everyone

Google would never implement a premium membership on Youtube for not watching ads because it's too difficult to manage and so they'll definitely have an opt-in option for publishers that want to split ad revenue.

As pointed out earlier in the in-video ads are only available to partner accounts right now and not across the board, so I don't think you'll see ads in your vids any time soon. Without your content there is no YouTube, so I don't see this as anymore more than a test to see what the market response will be. In saying that, I don't think you will see the ads going away any time soon either. People that own Google stock love the idea of more ads after paying the $1.7 billion asking price for YouTube, the general community at large hates the idea because it pollutes the site with even more ads -- So this is nothing more than a litmus test to see what the response is and if you read around the various posts about the in-video ads, you'll see this is NOT a huge revenue driver for them short-term, long-term over the years it can be though.

I know our Lonelybloggers YouTube channel is up to around 900,000 total views with about 8000-10,000 views per day, I for one wouldn't mind monetizing that activity. So I'm not 100% against the idea, but more so I want control to what advertising (if any) are displayed in the content I create. We should always have the choice to opt-out and that's really my main concern at this point. Don't mess with my videos unless I give you permission to do so and give me a piece of the action.

Like any form of media whether it be radio, TV, print .. there will always be advertising. That's a given, so it should come to no surprise that YouTube at some point wants to monitize any/all revenue streams possible and you can't really get upset at that. Google is a business and beyond search, with things like AdWords etc Google is more so an advertising network than anything else. So this is an expected evil that was bound to happen eventually.

One thing I don't like is the fact that YB definitely plays favourites to who they feature and partner with from their editorial team. It seems the same group of people get featured over and over again, while other content providers are completely ignored despite contacting them. I know a lot of YouTube publishers that feel that way and that has to change to where it's a more democratic system over what's in place now.

As much anger as integrating ads into YouTube has created, I also point out that if all publishers had the option to generate revenue from their videos.. perhaps perception would change about advertising. Right now it's simply upload your videos that you've worked hard on making and hey thanks for your content. That has to change... If you provide content to YouTube the revenues should be shared. In the case of text advertising, you agree to place ads on your site and you get a % cut of the revenue.. It has to work the same way across the board for Youtube or else people will start to migrate to other sites to post their videos to.

In the end Youtube definitely still creates the most impressions as the largest video sharing site, which is great for getting your videos seen. I appreciate that fact and can't be lost in the shuffle, but the management team there definitely needs to listen to all of the feedback and come up with a solution that will keep everyone happy. Not easy to do, not likely to happen, but that's the challenge they face.

1) Give us a choice

2) Share in the upside

3) Listen to feedback to what the community wants and treat everyone fairly

It will be very interesting to see how this plays out.

So here's my two cents And I've done a video on this (click to see: http://youtube.com/watch?v=BXDlfSrm2ZQ)

If you hate these, you're probably either a purist that hates ads completely or resent that you're not in the advertising sharing program. Both of those are legitimate positions. I can respect either.

But if you want to argue that these are the wrong WAY to monetize the site, then I beg you to come up with something that commands this type of price from marketers (and worth the premium from low-end banners) and doesn't create a horrible interuption for the viewer. Seriously. If not this, what?

The only post I've seen about this today (and I've been reading them in amazement all over the web) is the one above... where someone would rather pay to avoid ads. I can imagine that service eventually being offered. But very few would do that. I might... because I value the content I watch and I'm not crazy about ads. But I don't hold any pretentions that my viewers would EVER cover the cost (time) of my videos. Advertisers? Maybe...

P.S. I'm biased because I'm in the partners program. If I wasn't, I'd be grumbling about that. And I'd probably grumble about the ads, but I don't think I can think of a better way to compromise financial realities with user experience.

Previously Kevin Nalts wrote:

But I don't hold any pretentions that my viewers would EVER cover the cost (time) of my videos. Advertisers? Maybe...

Nalts, your videos are priceless!

See this gem?

I think that's gonna be one of the worst idea ever and i would hate it, I do not want a Add poping up and cover my video, it can be by it self at the end or else. if It is placed at the end of my video, it could be playing for long as it like and many as it like during the time i select my next video..

Malcolm

I agree one of the biggest problems facing YouTube right now is the spam issue.. Not that it wasn't bad before, but there is a lot of automated software out there now that allows people to set up 100's of dummy accounts and leave tons of comment spam across all of those dummy accounts. I would like to see YouTube put stopguards in place to help combat all of the clear comment spam. I've put it where I manually approve all comments now, which takes time every day to manage....

The spam is truly out of control. I noticed YT added the "thumbs up" and "thumbs down" and you can set which comments are visible according to the rating system, but I'm not sure how that stops them.

Previously lonelybloggers wrote:

Malcolm

I agree one of the biggest problems facing YouTube right now is the spam issue.. Not that it wasn't bad before, but there is a lot of automated software out there now that allows people to set up 100's of dummy accounts and leave tons of comment spam across all of those dummy accounts. I would like to see YouTube put stopguards in place to help combat all of the clear comment spam. I've put it where I manually approve all comments now, which takes time every day to manage....