Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Our two favourite full time internet nerds who never go outside!
Locked
User avatar
obvsly
phabergé
Posts: 277
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:58 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: Thailand

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by obvsly » Fri Sep 18, 2020 3:11 pm

madzilla84 wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 2:20 pm Or his own Topman collection :lol:
Topman! Yes! I remember seeing Jimmy with Topman spon and I just had to groan out loud. I mean, I love jimmy half to death but why can’t we see phil in model-y HD photos like that too when he’s already a walking topman commercial in his everyday life?? I’m still keeping my fingers crossed for it to happen one day.
Image



User avatar
inanerat
sofa crease
Posts: 92
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:27 am
Pronouns: he/she/they

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by inanerat » Fri Sep 18, 2020 3:17 pm

shan wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 2:24 pm
madzilla84 wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 2:20 pm
alittledizzy wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 2:01 pm
yellowsubmarine wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 1:45 am
Amiaw wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 12:24 am Phil followed and Square Enix followed back today so they may continue working together
Wow go Phil King of Sponsorships 🤴
Okay but he really is, though. I mean, outside of gamers who have a totally different demographic, he must be god tier for family friendly sponsorships with a very proven return rate on their money. The companies he works with just blow my mind. And also, somehow they seem perfect for Phil? I mean, just look at the ones over the past year - a Stephen King movie? Final Fantasy? An entire event about dogs? Disney - multiple times now?? Once he gets a Haribo deal he can officially retire, he'll have checked every box on his bucket list.
Or his own Topman collection :lol:
Don't forget NASA! At this rate I wouldn't be surprised if he uploaded a video from space
Candy Crush spons? boring. overdone. British Boy Tries American candy? So 2015. British Man Taste Tests Experimental Haribo- IN SPACE? Next fucking level.
:transheart: :transheart: :transheart:

User avatar
shan
squish
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:00 am

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by shan » Fri Sep 18, 2020 3:25 pm

inanerat wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 3:17 pm
shan wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 2:24 pm
madzilla84 wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 2:20 pm
alittledizzy wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 2:01 pm
yellowsubmarine wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 1:45 am
Amiaw wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 12:24 am Phil followed and Square Enix followed back today so they may continue working together
Wow go Phil King of Sponsorships 🤴
Okay but he really is, though. I mean, outside of gamers who have a totally different demographic, he must be god tier for family friendly sponsorships with a very proven return rate on their money. The companies he works with just blow my mind. And also, somehow they seem perfect for Phil? I mean, just look at the ones over the past year - a Stephen King movie? Final Fantasy? An entire event about dogs? Disney - multiple times now?? Once he gets a Haribo deal he can officially retire, he'll have checked every box on his bucket list.
Or his own Topman collection :lol:
Don't forget NASA! At this rate I wouldn't be surprised if he uploaded a video from space
Candy Crush spons? boring. overdone. British Boy Tries American candy? So 2015. British Man Taste Tests Experimental Haribo- IN SPACE? Next fucking level.
While trialing Topman's new collection of spacesuits

User avatar
Catallena
classy cat lady
classy cat lady
Posts: 2480
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 6:56 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by Catallena » Fri Sep 18, 2020 6:27 pm



Pretty Dan
Stan is only one letter away from Satan.
Twitter *•.(★).•* Tumblr
(inventor of capita£ester, will kick people who use it to slander phil)

User avatar
alittledizzy
actual demon phannie
actual demon phannie
Posts: 5953
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:09 pm
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by alittledizzy » Fri Sep 18, 2020 6:58 pm

Okay but Phil liked that picture almost immediately. Weird how they're so in love.

:rainbowtears:

Also I'm intrigued - I thought maybe they did the whole photoshoot in the flat but apparently not? I wonder where else they ventured out to for ~candid, thoughtful poses.

User avatar
yellowsubmarine
rainbow nerd
Posts: 232
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:27 pm
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by yellowsubmarine » Fri Sep 18, 2020 7:18 pm

Damn I missed that profile. I'm well fed and cared for thank you sir 😌
alittledizzy wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 6:58 pm Okay but Phil liked that picture almost immediately. Weird how they're so in love.

:rainbowtears:

Also I'm intrigued - I thought maybe they did the whole photoshoot in the flat but apparently not? I wonder where else they ventured out to for ~candid, thoughtful poses.
I wanna know too! A forest for sure but where exactly? And also it looks like the sepia filter is the book ~aesthetic~

I hope there's more he is willing to share
"Treat yourself, because you're special and you're worth it."

User avatar
kavat
cat whiskers
Posts: 937
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:36 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: sthlm

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by kavat » Fri Sep 18, 2020 8:40 pm

This is a really sweet comment from the photographer: The painting she refers to:
Image

User avatar
inanerat
sofa crease
Posts: 92
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:27 am
Pronouns: he/she/they

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by inanerat » Fri Sep 18, 2020 10:36 pm

alittledizzy wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 6:58 pm Okay but Phil liked that picture almost immediately. Weird how they're so in love.

:rainbowtears:

Also I'm intrigued - I thought maybe they did the whole photoshoot in the flat but apparently not? I wonder where else they ventured out to for ~candid, thoughtful poses.
I had seen a brightened version of one of the previous set of pictures that made it visible that it was outside, seems like they did some in the flat and some in some outdoor/park area. It made me wonder, idk what turn around time for profesh photagraphers usually is but maybe Phil's recent selfie in a park was from the same day? Since I don't think they've been going out much and he's also wearing a sweater.
:transheart: :transheart: :transheart:

User avatar
glitterintheair
blobfish
Posts: 673
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2017 9:56 am
Pronouns: she/her
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by glitterintheair » Sat Sep 19, 2020 10:29 am

I came across this tweet and I am wondering what the future could be for dapg and dinof:
I don’t know if this applies to every channel on YouTube that has been inactive or not, though (especially for channels like dapg and dinof that yeah are inactive but still bring in a lot of views, so I wonder if channels with high views don’t have to go through this new monetisation threshold).
I'm a winter flower underground, always thirsty for summer rain.

User avatar
shan
squish
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:00 am

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by shan » Sat Sep 19, 2020 10:38 am

glitterintheair wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 10:29 am I came across this tweet and I am wondering what the future could be for dapg and dinof:
I don’t know if this applies to every channel on YouTube that has been inactive or not, though.
I think I remember reading that it's a combination of number of subscribers and views? I think they'll probably be ok on views alone. I did notice recently that dnpg has fallen below 3mil subs though

User avatar
liola
full-time internet hobo
Posts: 1572
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 3:09 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: Italy

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by liola » Sat Sep 19, 2020 10:54 am

glitterintheair wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 10:29 am I came across this tweet and I am wondering what the future could be for dapg and dinof:
I don’t know if this applies to every channel on YouTube that has been inactive or not, though (especially for channels like dapg and dinof that yeah are inactive but still bring in a lot of views, so I wonder if channels with high views don’t have to go through this new monetisation threshold).
There are two sides of my brain fighting over this lmao one is the sympathetic one when it comes to creators who might have fallen behind for whatever reason but might lose the money they get (hoever much or little it might be bc Lord knows with Google Ads)

On the other hand I'm like ya, sounds fair. I mean, in any other job if you don't do your job for months or years you're not getting paid anymore. And with YouTube, well, why would advertisers want to have their ads roll on channels with only old content and might yeah have tons of views, but the percentage of recent viewership is actually low and the engagement is probably down to levels they might not be interested in?

Like if I think of Dan's channel or DAPG especially, yeah they get views still and might even get a few comment but I'm sure looking at the percentage of new engagement that would be really low for industry standards so makes sense that If they have no intention to come back to it they would lose monetization from it. It's been, what, more than a year and a half since the last video of DAPG so I think that channel might be involved.

Dan posted a bit more than one year ago last time so who knows, he might be in the clear or he/his managed might negotiate something with youtube if he has plans to post again in the next couple of months to promo his book. And anyway from my understanding if they posted again in the future and the new video would reach the threshold of views necessary for partner level again it would happen again.

Basically who knows. But imagine if that prompted a,new video lmao
Will probably never be over the BONCAS and the beauty of Phil Lester.

User avatar
Phanshy
lady door
Posts: 195
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2019 8:01 pm

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by Phanshy » Sat Sep 19, 2020 12:14 pm

Can I finally get a Dab and Evan wedding please, even without Dan and Phil on screen would be fine , even without their voices just a few minutes of montage footage of their wedding I hate that it's unresolved.

User avatar
alittledizzy
actual demon phannie
actual demon phannie
Posts: 5953
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:09 pm
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by alittledizzy » Sat Sep 19, 2020 12:19 pm

I’m on my phone so not quoting but entertainment industry jobs definitely do continue getting you paid even if you aren’t doing the job anymore - authors continue to get returns on a book they published even if they don’t write anymore, actors get residuals for shows that aren’t making new episodes/movies if the old ones keep airing. Authors don’t get paid for books that don’t sell, actors don’t get paid for things that won’t keep airing. But the value is in new people that watch it. On YouTuber advertisers pay for the views that happen.

The requirements for channel monetization are 4000 hours watch time in the past twelve months and 1000 subscribers so yeah DAPG is gonna keep paying them for a long time.

User avatar
shan
squish
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:00 am

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by shan » Sat Sep 19, 2020 12:29 pm

Catallena wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 6:27 pm

Pretty Dan
Back on this, I thought it was photoshopped from the couch photos when I first saw it. He actually went outside?!

User avatar
liola
full-time internet hobo
Posts: 1572
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 3:09 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: Italy

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by liola » Sat Sep 19, 2020 3:35 pm

alittledizzy wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 12:19 pm I’m on my phone so not quoting but entertainment industry jobs definitely do continue getting you paid even if you aren’t doing the job anymore - authors continue to get returns on a book they published even if they don’t write anymore, actors get residuals for shows that aren’t making new episodes/movies if the old ones keep airing. Authors don’t get paid for books that don’t sell, actors don’t get paid for things that won’t keep airing. But the value is in new people that watch it. On YouTuber advertisers pay for the views that happen.

The requirements for channel monetization are 4000 hours watch time in the past twelve months and 1000 subscribers so yeah DAPG is gonna keep paying them for a long time.
I agree with you, but on one hand I'm not sure I 100% think it's fair, and I think given how saturated the platform is there is a reason why YouTube would demonetize old channels even if they did qualify for partner status, and that might be because advertisers want yes views, but views that are from engaged people. I mean it totally depends tbh and I don't really know if it actually involves dnp and their channels but I think it's a different comparison between a book/movie bc the rights from that have been acquired while content on YouTube is not paid to be published so it's all a matter of whether or not advertisers choose the channel, and it's not always just a matter of views

But again I don't think we'll know unless they also tweet about it. They definitely have the requirements for partner, there's no doubting that
Will probably never be over the BONCAS and the beauty of Phil Lester.

User avatar
alittledizzy
actual demon phannie
actual demon phannie
Posts: 5953
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:09 pm
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by alittledizzy » Sat Sep 19, 2020 6:58 pm

First of all: PHIL SO PRETTY.
liola wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 3:35 pm
alittledizzy wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 12:19 pm I’m on my phone so not quoting but entertainment industry jobs definitely do continue getting you paid even if you aren’t doing the job anymore - authors continue to get returns on a book they published even if they don’t write anymore, actors get residuals for shows that aren’t making new episodes/movies if the old ones keep airing. Authors don’t get paid for books that don’t sell, actors don’t get paid for things that won’t keep airing. But the value is in new people that watch it. On YouTuber advertisers pay for the views that happen.

The requirements for channel monetization are 4000 hours watch time in the past twelve months and 1000 subscribers so yeah DAPG is gonna keep paying them for a long time.
I agree with you, but on one hand I'm not sure I 100% think it's fair, and I think given how saturated the platform is there is a reason why YouTube would demonetize old channels even if they did qualify for partner status, and that might be because advertisers want yes views, but views that are from engaged people. I mean it totally depends tbh and I don't really know if it actually involves dnp and their channels but I think it's a different comparison between a book/movie bc the rights from that have been acquired while content on YouTube is not paid to be published so it's all a matter of whether or not advertisers choose the channel, and it's not always just a matter of views

But again I don't think we'll know unless they also tweet about it. They definitely have the requirements for partner, there's no doubting that
If youtube were demonetizing channels that still hold partnership qualifications, trust me, we'd know. We'd totally know. That would not be a thing they could or would quietly get rid of. There would be massive, massive backlash.

I also think I'd personally be pissed if youtubers were not getting money made off of content they created just depending on how old it is if it's still getting views. I guess I just can't wrap my mind around there being a difference in creators like that. Even the engaged audience argument doesn't work for me; Dan and Phil also still have an insanely engaged audience - look at Dan's book response and Phil's sponsorships he's rolling in. I checked the channel Luke tweeted about and the top end of what socialblade said it would have made in the past twelve months is $116. For DAPG it's $876K. To me there's just literally no argument for why their channel would be demonetized.

User avatar
alittledizzy
actual demon phannie
actual demon phannie
Posts: 5953
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:09 pm
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by alittledizzy » Sat Sep 19, 2020 7:14 pm

Phil and his Disney spon while wearing his Disney shirt.

User avatar
rizzo
unduly facetious
unduly facetious
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2016 3:18 am

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by rizzo » Sat Sep 19, 2020 7:19 pm

liola wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 3:35 pm
alittledizzy wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 12:19 pm I’m on my phone so not quoting but entertainment industry jobs definitely do continue getting you paid even if you aren’t doing the job anymore - authors continue to get returns on a book they published even if they don’t write anymore, actors get residuals for shows that aren’t making new episodes/movies if the old ones keep airing. Authors don’t get paid for books that don’t sell, actors don’t get paid for things that won’t keep airing. But the value is in new people that watch it. On YouTuber advertisers pay for the views that happen.

The requirements for channel monetization are 4000 hours watch time in the past twelve months and 1000 subscribers so yeah DAPG is gonna keep paying them for a long time.
I agree with you, but on one hand I'm not sure I 100% think it's fair, and I think given how saturated the platform is there is a reason why YouTube would demonetize old channels even if they did qualify for partner status, and that might be because advertisers want yes views, but views that are from engaged people. I mean it totally depends tbh and I don't really know if it actually involves dnp and their channels but I think it's a different comparison between a book/movie bc the rights from that have been acquired while content on YouTube is not paid to be published so it's all a matter of whether or not advertisers choose the channel, and it's not always just a matter of views

But again I don't think we'll know unless they also tweet about it. They definitely have the requirements for partner, there's no doubting that
I think in this instance it really is a matter of views. Every view is an engaged view because it’s active, recent view. YouTubers get paid primarily on the past month’s (or whatever time period’s) views on their channel regardless of which video drove those views. Naturally, the newest video will be the primary driver of that revenue, but other videos also get views at any given time. And people rewatch D&P CONSTANTLY. I’d bet my money on DAPG still hitting partner status to this day.

As long as people are watching D&P’s videos, YouTube is serving ads on them, and as long as YouTube is serving ads on them.... D&P should be getting paid. Much like any other entertainer in any other industry.

I feel like it’s also worth clarifying that YouTube doesn’t and can’t serve an ad on a video that isn’t being watched. If a video’s not being watched, the YouTuber doesn’t make money. So, in that way.... yeah. D&P probably make less than they did when they actively posted, but.... they only make $0 if people stopped watching completely.

I’d honestly be more enraged if they weren’t getting paid. That would mean YouTube is taking their money.

User avatar
liola
full-time internet hobo
Posts: 1572
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 3:09 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: Italy

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by liola » Sat Sep 19, 2020 7:38 pm

rizzo wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 7:19 pm
liola wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 3:35 pm
alittledizzy wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 12:19 pm I’m on my phone so not quoting but entertainment industry jobs definitely do continue getting you paid even if you aren’t doing the job anymore - authors continue to get returns on a book they published even if they don’t write anymore, actors get residuals for shows that aren’t making new episodes/movies if the old ones keep airing. Authors don’t get paid for books that don’t sell, actors don’t get paid for things that won’t keep airing. But the value is in new people that watch it. On YouTuber advertisers pay for the views that happen.

The requirements for channel monetization are 4000 hours watch time in the past twelve months and 1000 subscribers so yeah DAPG is gonna keep paying them for a long time.
I agree with you, but on one hand I'm not sure I 100% think it's fair, and I think given how saturated the platform is there is a reason why YouTube would demonetize old channels even if they did qualify for partner status, and that might be because advertisers want yes views, but views that are from engaged people. I mean it totally depends tbh and I don't really know if it actually involves dnp and their channels but I think it's a different comparison between a book/movie bc the rights from that have been acquired while content on YouTube is not paid to be published so it's all a matter of whether or not advertisers choose the channel, and it's not always just a matter of views

But again I don't think we'll know unless they also tweet about it. They definitely have the requirements for partner, there's no doubting that
I think in this instance it really is a matter of views. Every view is an engaged view because it’s active, recent view. YouTubers get paid primarily on the past month’s (or whatever time period’s) views on their channel regardless of which video drove those views. Naturally, the newest video will be the primary driver of that revenue, but other videos also get views at any given time. And people rewatch D&P CONSTANTLY. I’d bet my money on DAPG still hitting partner status to this day.

As long as people are watching D&P’s videos, YouTube is serving ads on them, and as long as YouTube is serving ads on them.... D&P should be getting paid. Much like any other entertainer in any other industry.

I feel like it’s also worth clarifying that YouTube doesn’t and can’t serve an ad on a video that isn’t being watched. If a video’s not being watched, the YouTuber doesn’t make money. So, in that way.... yeah. D&P probably make less than they did when they actively posted, but.... they only make $0 if people stopped watching completely.

I’d honestly be more enraged if they weren’t getting paid. That would mean YouTube is taking their money.
I think we are talking about different things to be honest. Like I said, I do think without a doubt their channel qualify for partner status and monetization. However, as a platform with its own T&C I don't find it surprising if they want to redistribute advertising on channels that are active. Advertisers are not paying creators. Advertisers pay the Google Ad platform and Youtube distributes part of that money around channels. Imo it is fundamentally wrong to say if they weren't being paid youtube would be taking their money, because the money is ultimately paid to youtube first and foremost (and yes, youtube's value is only because of the content on it, absolutely, but creators aren't selling their content, they're hosting it ultimately free on a platform and receive benefits out of this somewhat dual partnership). Life.. if you're not using the platform, why would you still get the benefit? It would be enraging to me if youtube said "okay, all old channels with no new content will now get 1/3 of ad revenue as we're getting a bigger cut!" But.. they're not. They're not taking away the videos they're just... letting you still host the videos for free but not monetize off it idk

And it's true, advertisers pay per view. But, considering how many youtubers are out there, and how many join everyday, an advertiser would rather have their ads run on channels that post a lot, with lots of constant and recent views than videos that people still watch but on channels that are ultimately stopped, because engaged viewers are more likely to be returning viewers. Sure, not every advertiser might think so, but it's not just a matter of the big boy number in a lot of cases - at least, this is what it was up until one year ago when i was still managing ads accounts

I just think this is an instance where they need to have a generalized rule about use of their platform and the way ads are served - dnp aren't the rule of youtubers whose channels have been abandoned but still mantain high engagement, they've always been somewhat of an exception.
Will probably never be over the BONCAS and the beauty of Phil Lester.

User avatar
rizzo
unduly facetious
unduly facetious
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2016 3:18 am

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by rizzo » Sat Sep 19, 2020 7:49 pm

liola wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 7:38 pm
rizzo wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 7:19 pm
liola wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 3:35 pm
alittledizzy wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 12:19 pm I’m on my phone so not quoting but entertainment industry jobs definitely do continue getting you paid even if you aren’t doing the job anymore - authors continue to get returns on a book they published even if they don’t write anymore, actors get residuals for shows that aren’t making new episodes/movies if the old ones keep airing. Authors don’t get paid for books that don’t sell, actors don’t get paid for things that won’t keep airing. But the value is in new people that watch it. On YouTuber advertisers pay for the views that happen.

The requirements for channel monetization are 4000 hours watch time in the past twelve months and 1000 subscribers so yeah DAPG is gonna keep paying them for a long time.
I agree with you, but on one hand I'm not sure I 100% think it's fair, and I think given how saturated the platform is there is a reason why YouTube would demonetize old channels even if they did qualify for partner status, and that might be because advertisers want yes views, but views that are from engaged people. I mean it totally depends tbh and I don't really know if it actually involves dnp and their channels but I think it's a different comparison between a book/movie bc the rights from that have been acquired while content on YouTube is not paid to be published so it's all a matter of whether or not advertisers choose the channel, and it's not always just a matter of views

But again I don't think we'll know unless they also tweet about it. They definitely have the requirements for partner, there's no doubting that
I think in this instance it really is a matter of views. Every view is an engaged view because it’s active, recent view. YouTubers get paid primarily on the past month’s (or whatever time period’s) views on their channel regardless of which video drove those views. Naturally, the newest video will be the primary driver of that revenue, but other videos also get views at any given time. And people rewatch D&P CONSTANTLY. I’d bet my money on DAPG still hitting partner status to this day.

As long as people are watching D&P’s videos, YouTube is serving ads on them, and as long as YouTube is serving ads on them.... D&P should be getting paid. Much like any other entertainer in any other industry.

I feel like it’s also worth clarifying that YouTube doesn’t and can’t serve an ad on a video that isn’t being watched. If a video’s not being watched, the YouTuber doesn’t make money. So, in that way.... yeah. D&P probably make less than they did when they actively posted, but.... they only make $0 if people stopped watching completely.

I’d honestly be more enraged if they weren’t getting paid. That would mean YouTube is taking their money.
I think we are talking about different things to be honest. Like I said, I do think without a doubt their channel qualify for partner status and monetization. However, as a platform with its own T&C I don't find it surprising if they want to redistribute advertising on channels that are active. Advertisers are not paying creators. Advertisers pay the Google Ad platform and Youtube distributes part of that money around channels. Imo it is fundamentally wrong to say if they weren't being paid youtube would be taking their money, because the money is ultimately paid to youtube first and foremost (and yes, youtube's value is only because of the content on it, absolutely, but creators aren't selling their content, they're hosting it ultimately free on a platform and receive benefits out of this somewhat dual partnership). Life.. if you're not using the platform, why would you still get the benefit? It would be enraging to me if youtube said "okay, all old channels with no new content will now get 1/3 of ad revenue as we're getting a bigger cut!" But.. they're not. They're not taking away the videos they're just... letting you still host the videos for free but not monetize off it idk

And it's true, advertisers pay per view. But, considering how many youtubers are out there, and how many join everyday, an advertiser would rather have their ads run on channels that post a lot, with lots of constant and recent views than videos that people still watch but on channels that are ultimately stopped, because engaged viewers are more likely to be returning viewers. Sure, not every advertiser might think so, but it's not just a matter of the big boy number in a lot of cases - at least, this is what it was up until one year ago when i was still managing ads accounts

I just think this is an instance where they need to have a generalized rule about use of their platform and the way ads are served - dnp aren't the rule of youtubers whose channels have been abandoned but still mantain high engagement, they've always been somewhat of an exception.
Right but.... that’s not how it works and never will. YouTube doesn’t make decisions based on how active a channel is. It makes highly intelligent algorithmic decisions based on one video at a time. And their videos are watched. That’s all it comes down to.

Is a person watching this video? Yes? Show them an ad. The end.

The only thing outside of that is whether it’s in YouTube’s interest to send a paycheck for just a few cents.... and that’s why they have a rule about minimum hours viewed.

So... a channel could post only once a year (see... idk... Seth Everman?) but if people are viewing the videos constantly... and ads are being shown. He’s making money.

There doesn’t need to be anymore to that. Books and shows work the same way. If a book is sold, an author makes money. It doesn’t matter if that author hasn’t written a book in 2 decades.

User avatar
liola
full-time internet hobo
Posts: 1572
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 3:09 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: Italy

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by liola » Sat Sep 19, 2020 7:59 pm

Book and shows have different contracts though, and rely on royalties (if the contract specificy royalties and wasn't just a lump sum payment at first)

The algorithm of youtube works with specific criteria set up by the developers, so if there is they add a rule that says that ads can run only if channel has posted in specific timeframe AND qualify the other requiremens, then it can be done.

Google would have way more interest in keeping channels with monetization running, because it means more advertisers can win the auction (and if you don't win the action over someone else, your ads don't run and google doesn't take the money). The more ads run, the more cut youtube gets.

This is getting off topic, and we don't know yet what is happening since there isn't much info online at the moment, actually, I haven't seen any article or anything besides that one tweet, but I personally don't think it would be such a wild thing to implement. However, when it comes to DnP I doubt Adsense is the major income they get so I think they're probably less worried about it than most.
Will probably never be over the BONCAS and the beauty of Phil Lester.

User avatar
alittledizzy
actual demon phannie
actual demon phannie
Posts: 5953
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:09 pm
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by alittledizzy » Sat Sep 19, 2020 8:23 pm

liola wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 7:59 pm This is getting off topic, and we don't know yet what is happening since there isn't much info online at the moment, actually, I haven't seen any article or anything besides that one tweet, but I personally don't think it would be such a wild thing to implement. However, when it comes to DnP I doubt Adsense is the major income they get so I think they're probably less worried about it than most.
I'm gonna a leave the conversation about the other stuff to you and rizzo, because I know you're both people that work in that field and I'm not.

But I think the thing confusing me about this conversation is that it seems clear that luke's second channel fell below standards for the partner program terms of views, and that's why he was removed from monetization? It doesn't seem to indicate anything changing within youtube. So I'm not really sure why anyone would be assuming it's going to impact Dan and Phil's channel at all. When they changed the partner program guidelines in 2018, they gave people who had partner guidelines under the previous program a certain period of time to work toward meeting the new guidelines before they were made ineligible. The message just makes it seem like they do that as a standard now.

I think if anything there's a better argument for danisnotinteresting or lessamazingphil to lose monetization eventually for the same reasons, but even with those two channels both get 15x more views than Luke's side channel so they've really not in any danger of not hitting 4000 hours watch them in a year either.

User avatar
liola
full-time internet hobo
Posts: 1572
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 3:09 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: Italy

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by liola » Sat Sep 19, 2020 8:39 pm

alittledizzy wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 8:23 pm
liola wrote: Sat Sep 19, 2020 7:59 pm This is getting off topic, and we don't know yet what is happening since there isn't much info online at the moment, actually, I haven't seen any article or anything besides that one tweet, but I personally don't think it would be such a wild thing to implement. However, when it comes to DnP I doubt Adsense is the major income they get so I think they're probably less worried about it than most.
I'm gonna a leave the conversation about the other stuff to you and rizzo, because I know you're both people that work in that field and I'm not.

But I think the thing confusing me about this conversation is that it seems clear that luke's second channel fell below standards for the partner program terms of views, and that's why he was removed from monetization? It doesn't seem to indicate anything changing within youtube. So I'm not really sure why anyone would be assuming it's going to impact Dan and Phil's channel at all. When they changed the partner program guidelines in 2018, they gave people who had partner guidelines under the previous program a certain period of time to work toward meeting the new guidelines before they were made ineligible. The message just makes it seem like they do that as a standard now.

I think if anything there's a better argument for danisnotinteresting or lessamazingphil to lose monetization eventually for the same reasons, but even with those two channels both get 15x more views than Luke's side channel so they've really not in any danger of not hitting 4000 hours watch them in a year either.
Ah I see, I think we got into hypothesis territory at this point. That's why I said we don't know anything for sure and nothing besides that tweets and random word of mouth has been found. Tbf this might just be a giant discussion out of nothing (though particularly interesting to me) but I think it's the beginning of "You haven't posted in months" that have pause.

Or maybe I'm just dumb today honestly Idk but yeah I'm sure dnp and all their channels still qualify for monetization, but if those terms changed I wouldn't find it weird I guess that's my final point :shrug:
Will probably never be over the BONCAS and the beauty of Phil Lester.

User avatar
actualsoulmates
phillion/danosaur <//3
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2016 7:35 am
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by actualsoulmates » Sun Sep 20, 2020 9:51 am

Dan is going to be part of an event for SDG Action Zone on the 24th!

https://sdgactionzone.org/class/a-new-g ... 1600940700

:prideheart2: once in twenty lifetimes :biheart:

User avatar
lefthandedism
inveterate introvert
inveterate introvert
Posts: 1401
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2016 10:16 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: New England

Re: Dan & Phil Part 96: AmazingPhil (and his cameraman)

Post by lefthandedism » Sun Sep 20, 2020 11:40 am

The text on the webpage linked above:
Daniel Howell
Writer and Comedian

For 10 years he has written and produced comedy videos on YouTube that have gained over 1 billion views and millions of followers, along with an award winning BBC Radio 1 show, #1 New York Times Best Selling Book and two stage shows with sellout world tours. Known for his self-deprecating and sarcastic humour, Dan has also spoken about his real struggles with depression and sexuality and it is this mix of entertainment with the profound and deeply personal that has given Dan a devoted following of fans - as well as becoming an activist and ambassador for the Royal Foundation charity Young Minds.
Dan has firmly left "YouTuber" behind. Now that he has multiple book writing credentials, he can say he's a writer and comedian who happens to have written comedy for YouTube. I think it's not just rebranding, but claiming the essential aspects of his art. Writers can write in any medium and comedy can be part of any artistic output. I say good for him.
"If you're left-handed, ask a friend."
"Why am I left-handed?"
"Everybody makes mistakes."

Locked