Not making money as a YouTube partner? Here are some tips from YouTube itself
YouTube hosted a live event today to help partners get the most out of their YouTube revenue.
Phil Farhi of YouTube, began the event by telling partners about a few of the new initiatives that YouTube is working on, to help make partners as successful as possible. He started by bringing us through the history of advertising on YouTube.
Phil mentioned that just 3 short years ago, YouTube began using in-video and overlay ads, the first step in monetizing videos. And following the first format of ads, YouTube brought Ad Sense ads, enabling smaller advertisers/customers to get on board, allowing YouTube to capture a broader range of advertisers.
Next came in-Stream Ads (mid and pre-roll ads), a format that was launched about two years ago. YouTube said this has been popular because advertisers will pay more for ads that are similar to the format on TV. At almost the same time, promoted ads were introduced and it was proven to drive traffic to videos that were featured using the ‘promoted video’ format.
A few months ago, a new ad format for partners called TrueView was rolled-out. This format lets users watching a video skip the ad after five seconds. An ad format that YouTube says is less interruptive and doesn’t risk annoying your audience because it gives them the chance to hit stop.
Phil asked the question “ What makes a movie a successful?” Using the movie industry as an analogy, he went on to explain that there are many factors that come into play that make up the overall picture; ticket prices, seats filled, distribution etc. It’s the same with YouTube as he pointed out. Partners shouldn’t look at one aspect such as RPM (revenue per thousand page views) or CPM (cost per thousand, as an example $1 or $5 per thousand views), they should look at everything including geography.
A few points to take away
Good partners focus on overall revenue and aren’t fixated on “ticket price”. They also work hard at building a strong audience as well as trying to increase views. Good partners look at geography, RPM and CPM.
Bad partners look at the wrong metrics and don’t build up their audience. Partners who only focus on RPM might think everything is fine however, it’s critical that users concentrate on CPM as well and continue to build audience loyalty.
YouTube says advertisers are creating content that competes with user content, and millions of users are watching advertisements on the site. Think about the popularity of Superbowl ads.
Keep experimenting! Compare ad formats by type and geography and play around with different scenarios. Try enabling ads after your loyal audience has seen them or try it in reverse. Play with different recipes and see what happens when ad formats are enabled/disabled. There is a wide variety of ways to make revenue.
Take a good look at revenue break downs and compare formats; True View, in-Stream, etc.
Better reporting for ad formats coming soon. YouTube admits that partners don’t have the best reporting feature right now.
YouTube will be adding an option for partners to opt-in to just TrueView Ads without needing to be signed up with other formats.
Ensure the metadata on videos have the correct information and enough words to help YouTube’s algorithm bring the best targeted ads to your videos
This occurred on a panel at a meeting of the Mortgage Bankers Association, where Platt appeared with Georgetown Law Professor Adam Levitin, who has been critical of MERS. I corresponded with Levitin, and this was an accurate rendering of Platt’s remarks.
“My response was that’s nonsense,” Levitin wrote in an email. “No one, absolutely no one, is arguing that a valid security agreement should not be enforced. Instead, the issue is whether we should enforce invalid security interests or let parties that do not hold a security interest enforce someone else’s. I hardly think that denying parties that right will result in a change in the cost of credit. It might result in them changing law firms, however, to ones that didn’t screw up their securitization deals.”
MERS, an electronic database created and funded by the banks to avoid land recording fees at county offices, has been criticized on multiple fronts. First of all, they don’t track the information inputted in the database, leading to inaccuracies between what appears in MERS and what appears on the note. Second, they stand in as the mortgagee and sell Vice Presidencies in their company when servicers attempt to foreclose, at the same time saying they have no financial interest in the loan. Third, banks using MERS failed to convey mortgages and notes properly, instead using this unregulated private system, and have broken chain of title in many circumstances, voiding their right to foreclose or even collect payments from a borrower.
Platt clearly wants to threaten the political system here. He’s saying that mortgage interest rates will skyrocket and constituents will become angered if the banks aren’t allowed to do what they want. That aims at a political settlement that stops the courts from making findings of the banks’ wrongdoing under the law. “If we want to have a well functioning credit system, we need to enforce security interests when they are done in compliance with the law, and not enforce them when they fail to comply,” Levitin wrote. “This is fundamental commercial law—you screw up on dotting the I’s and crossing the T’s in a security interest and you’re SOL. Everyone knows the rules of the game going in and there’s no reason to bailout sophisticated parties who failed to comply with the law.”
The notion that MERS saves the banks so much money that they can offer loans at multiple percentage points less than what they’d have to without it is extremely puzzling. “I don’t know of anyone who has argued that MERS lowered interest rates,” Levitin wrote. He estimated that the banks saved “maybe $50 per loan” using MERS, which certainly makes it worthwhile from their perspective, given the millions of loans on the system, but which makes the claim of massive savings to interest rates just foolish. “Of course, even if MERS lowers interest rates, we have to ask at what cost, and a screwed up title system is a pretty high cost for saving a few bps (basis points),” Levitin concluded.
Looking at this chart of mortgage rates from before and after MERS came into existence in 1995, you can see no evidentiary basis for the claim that MERS lowered interest rates; the mortgage lending rate basically tracks the prime interest rate.
At the root, this is a scare tactic. The banks don’t want to change their systems, and they certainly don’t want them found illegal. So they trot out corporate lawyers to make baseless charges that will be taken in Washington as conventional wisdom. And the politicians will scramble to make sure the inaccurate consequences never take place.
rock tops granite rip off, rock tops granite horrible experience, rock tops granite horrible experience, rock tops granite scam, rock tops granite scam, rock tops granite, rock tops granite, rock tops granite scam, rock tops granite rip off, rock tops granite rip off, rock tops granite, rock tops granite rip off, rock tops granite, rock tops granite rip off, rock tops granite, rock tops granite horrible experience
<b>News</b> Corp has spent $30M on The Daily iPad newspaper | VentureBeat
Anthony is a senior editor at VentureBeat, as well as its reporter on media, advertising, and social networks. Before joining ...
Was Fox <b>News</b> really straw that broke Camille marriage's back <b>...</b>
Was Fox News really the straw that broke Camille and Kelsey Grammer's 14-year marriage's.
The First Look At <b>News</b> Corp.'s 'The Daily' - NYTimes.com
'The Daily,' unveiled today, combines print, video and graphics.
No comments:
Post a Comment