Question about YouTube

Rurouni

Veteran
I want to ask how YouTube works in terms of monetization. I know that you can choose to monetize your channel or not, but can a big channel actually opt out from monetization? I imagine a video with little view isn't going to cause much harm in terms of operation. But if a video get 1m or even 10m views, can the owner of the video still turn of monetization?
I ask this because as you guys provably know, there are this thing called YouTube RED that made ESPN pulled their videos (and channels?) from YouTube because they can't put their content in subscription service. But can ESPN opt out from monetization thus their content shoulf always be available for free and they probably wouldn't get any money from the subscriber which in effect they aren't using the subscription service?

Btw, I don't want a debate about whether RED is good or bad, I just want to know about the above question.

Hopefully someone can answer that because my google-fu is failing me.
 
I don't actually know, but I'd imagine you can still opt-out. For one thing, few people with millions of views would want to do that to begin with, and besides, it would probably be in YouTube's interest to let them do it: they'd avoid bad publicity and the videos would still attract traffic to the website.
 
So why ESPN not opt out from monetization? Or their channel already free from ads in the first place? Because afaik, if you opt out from monetization then your content will not benefit from YouTube RED so ESPN shouldn't be forced to pull out from YouTube.
 
Sorry, I don't know what YouTube RED is, or how it relates to ESPN.

Edit: apparently it's just a subscription that lets you remove all ads, right? I don't know why ESPN would care.
 
Espn makes more money on Youtube ads than what they would make in sharing YoutubeRED subscription fees.So why would they opt into a system where they make less money? They also have their own apllication on numerious platforms that they dont need YouTube.

Youtube does not want its most popular content to have ads, because that would completely undermine the value of YouTubeRED subscription service.

I wouldnt be surprised if more of the popular content owners yank their content off of YouTube completely. It is no longer profitable enough for them to provide content on YouTube.
 
But the reasoning ESPN gave was brcause the copyright owner prevented them to put the content behind a subscription service (or something like that). Do they lied?
And is it proven that you'll make less/more money from ads vs subscriber?

edit: of course my main point is about whether it is possible for the bigger channel or video with a lot of views opt out from monetization if by principle they don't want to put their content behind subscription service? The reason for my question is that hosting those video do have cost. If a channel got a lot of views then it would probably cost a lot to stream those content. Like if I tried to exaggerate it, a channel got a lot of video with 100m views (thus will cost relatively high for Google to keep that channel), will Google actually let the channel operate without monetization or will Google charge something from the channel/content owner some money to keep it from displaying ads? Or if all the content owner/channel decided to disable monetization, can YouTube survive with the same quality as they are in right now (same quality as in the fastest and most responsive streaming service, at least from what I experienced vs other streaming service like DM, Vimeo)?
 
Last edited:
opt out from monetization
All youtube videos have ads opting out of monetisation just means saying to youtube "i dont want a share of the revenue" espn can do that if they want
You cant say to youtube "dont put ads in my videos"
 
edit: of course my main point is about whether it is possible for the bigger channel or video with a lot of views opt out from monetization if by principle they don't want to put their content behind subscription service? The reason for my question is that hosting those video do have cost. If a channel got a lot of views then it would probably cost a lot to stream those content. Like if I tried to exaggerate it, a channel got a lot of video with 100m views (thus will cost relatively high for Google to keep that channel), will Google actually let the channel operate without monetization or will Google charge something from the channel/content owner some money to keep it from displaying ads? Or if all the content owner/channel decided to disable monetization, can YouTube survive with the same quality as they are in right now (same quality as in the fastest and most responsive streaming service, at least from what I experienced vs other streaming service like DM, Vimeo)?


Yep like Davros said you can't take ads out of your videos by opting out of monetisation.

ESPN took out of their videos because they are contractually disallowed to have their content in a subscription service, Youtube Red is subscription service. This has nothing to do with adds or revenue coming from them, but due to contracts with other third parties disallowing this option for ESPN.

edit: I still can't believe they named it Youtube Red by the way...
 
Yup. They should have named it RedTube ...

:runaway:
 
Back
Top