IDB

madzilla84 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 18, 2020 2:20 pm Or his own Topman collection

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

Don't forget NASA! At this rate I wouldn't be surprised if he uploaded a video from space

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

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.

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



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.

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



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.

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.

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).

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

Pretty Dan

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.