If its Google we're talking about even if the youtube portion of the company is losing money, does it matter? I think its pretty safe to assume that youtube will survive.
I mean, I'd assume that the idea of a loss leader somewhat applies here as well. Youtube is the leading brand for video on the internet, and that's worth something to the bigger Google brand.
Don't get me wrong, I think the debate about "free" is a debate worth having, I just don't like the misleading/sensational headline.
They'll survive as long as google is footing the bill. Note that they've started to be more aggressive with their advertising on youtube lately, especially ads overlaying the video in the beginning.
I'm pretty sure they'll find a way sooner or later. It took them a while to come up with adsense as well.
OP doesn't even mention the most likely scenario: Google has something else up it's sleeve.
With their technical prowess, it could be anything. Perhaps embedding ad placements within existing videos. Or assembling sellable demographics about who watches what, a distinct possibility once Chrome reaches critical mass. Or acquiring copyrights. Who knows?
One thing's for sure, Google was always one step ahead of mainstream media. Probably still is.
I figure they pay $2.50 / M / month or less, the best deals that I can find when I go shop for high volume is about $4 / Meg, that's when you're committing to 10G or thereabouts.
Youtube definately will survive, once Google introduces the YouTube Marketplace, it will allow producers to sell products directly from the video. Call to action, buy now videos. Google is positioning itself to become a serious platform (better & bigger then TV), think iTunes but not limited to just creative content.
I am adding what I said on a previous thread. it is not direct profits but it is indirect profits and strategic intentions as the reason google bought it. google wants you to use its services, the more you do the more you depend on them. video, voice, data, etc. they make profit as a whole, so you cant look at one unit and say it doesnt bring in profit. the longer you associate google with your video, voice and data needs they win. brand recognition and dominance.
8 comments
[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 26.6 ms ] threadI mean, I'd assume that the idea of a loss leader somewhat applies here as well. Youtube is the leading brand for video on the internet, and that's worth something to the bigger Google brand.
Don't get me wrong, I think the debate about "free" is a debate worth having, I just don't like the misleading/sensational headline.
I'm pretty sure they'll find a way sooner or later. It took them a while to come up with adsense as well.
With their technical prowess, it could be anything. Perhaps embedding ad placements within existing videos. Or assembling sellable demographics about who watches what, a distinct possibility once Chrome reaches critical mass. Or acquiring copyrights. Who knows?
One thing's for sure, Google was always one step ahead of mainstream media. Probably still is.
Here's a newsflash: Google pays a lot less for bandwidth than you do. They've got peering agreements everywhere.