• Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    10 months ago

    I mean, they didn’t get greedy, as far as everyone knows they are losing a ton of money (at least if you can extrapolate anytbing from the fact that twitch is massively unprofitable)

    • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      10 months ago

      Pretty sure YouTube has already been declared to be profitable. But frankly I’m pretty suspicious of claims of unprofitability for services being run for over a decade. Why would any for-profit company bankroll them if it wasn’t worth it? There has to be some creative accounting going on.

      • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Doubt it, if it was profitable, they would be announcing that to everyone as loud as they could. Besides, if twitch is unprofitable, I doubt that google is in a much better situation

        • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          I wouldn’t apply Twitch’s situation to YouTube, IF it’s even true, because YouTube got a much wider reach and more advertising possibilities than gaming and somewhat related audiences.

          It doesn’t seem to me a given that they’d boast about their success either. Because if they hide the situation the way they do, they can do this, turn to the customers saying “Welp, I guess this much is not enough. Gotta put more ads on it and raise prices 🤷”. It’s easier to placate the users if they are convinced it is inevitable. I imagine you are considering of what investors might think if products are said to be unprofitable, but overall Google/Alphabet still gets tens of billions in clean profits every year.

          Most of all, again, if this is such a money sink that in over a decade they couldn’t figure out how to make money of it, why would they still keep at it? Why wouldn’t they sell it off or close it? If I assume they are honest about unprofitability, as much as I doubt it, then they must be getting something else from it that is equally valuable as raw money. Maybe it’s user data. Maybe it’s the social clout of controlling a major media platform. But it has to be worth it to them or they wouldn’t be hosting it. It wouldn’t make sense.

          But personally I just think they are lying about unprofitability, including Twitch. It’s just a convenient excuse for layoffs and price hikes. It’s not like they are going to show everyone their full balance sheets.

          • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            Interest rates have been low enough for long enough that many companies have been running on the “fake it 'til you make it” philosophy forever. Air BnB, Door Dash, Lyft, and countless others have never been profitable. But they survive by constantly taking out loans and collecting new investor money to increase their market share (the infinite growth scheme), hoping that they’ll either eventually have enough impetus to monopolize a market and bully it into being profitable, or get bought up by Google and co for a rich payout.

            This is how YouTube and Netflix got profitable. They ran at a loss until they were popular enough to turn a profit, and then switched to maximizing that profit. I imagine the same is true for the big social media sites as well. Run at a loss until you have a big enough userbase to attract advertisers. And this is exactly why Tumblr was never profitable and Verizon basically killed it trying to make it profitable. Tumblr’s population has always been the groups advertisers like the least - minorities, LGBTQ groups, sex workers, and artists/creatives. So Verizon tried to sanitize it by purging them to make it attractive to advertisers, and consequently killed the userbase that gave it it’s potential for ad profits in the process.

            • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              10 months ago

              I see what you are saying, but Google is still not bleeding money and YouTube has become very well established already. In fact, for years YouTube contributes to Google’s primary revenue source: Advertising. Of course, this is why they are opposed to ad blockers, that much makes perfect sense.

              But I don’t see any indication that it’s not making ends meet. And I’m not taking an executive’s word as proof, much less one from a whole different company. It’s expected that they will say whatever make their actions look good, whether or not it’s true.

              • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                Yeah, I don’t mean that YouTube is unprofitable. It’s probably hugely profitable, and now they’re focusing on maximizing that profit.

                But with something like Twitch, which claims to have been unprofitable for a decade or more, I can believe that simply because of the low interest rates that allow them to perpetually keep burning money and that the value of these platforms is measured by the potential profit from the userbase - whether through ad revenue, data, or something else - rather than the money they’re making right now. This is why Verizon bought Tumblr for like a billion dollars or whatever. That was the estimated value of the company, despite it never turning a profit, simply based on the potential revenue from its userbase. It’s also why Verizon ended up selling Tumblr for like 1% of what they paid for it 3 years later. Because they ran off that userbase and the rest weren’t deemed valuable for advertisers.

    • eskimofry@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      If they want to, they can go 100% paywalled. But I guess people like to conveniently forget that YouTube wants to double-dip.

    • takeda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      That was the initially when YouTube was created. Everyone knows that Google has no problem cancelling anything that’s not profitable.

      • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        If it was profitable, then why did google stop posting the financial statistics for YouTube

        • eskimofry@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          to get the benefit of the doubt on unpopular decisions. Same thing with hiding thumbs down counter from videos.