It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
Sometimes it’s only fair to see both sides of the coin and I’m afraid some people class that as negativity.
I’m a URM academy member - their Nail The Mix Live sessions are done via YouTube (on private links). But there’s much more to it than that and it’s not sold as a YouTube company, it’s a company who happen to deliver some primary content behind a paywall on YT.
But the content is very in depth - they’re multi hour live events many are 6 hours + IIRC. I don’t think it’d be viable at all on the open Youtube market.
i remember Pre-streaming that people would Pirate successful band’s albums on the basis they were already rich because they’d sold out.
I’m not seeing how a review YouTube channel format is a viable business without having a huge amount of cash to keep buying all the latest stuff. Of course the big names have ties to the big companies, it’s the only realistic way to be trying out all the gear.
The only person I can think of who grew their audience pretty independently at first was Ola England who started off demoing his own amps and then borrowing amps from others. He now does all kinds of stuff. I like his channel, it’s the only guitar one I’ll watch these days.
Unfortunately, if That Pedal Show start running a similar campaign it'll cost about £50 a month to provide them with enough water, they might need some lozenges too.
I think that patronising Anderton's channel is like paying to watch QVC.
As has been said production costs are hard to recover and the margins from being a competitive online seller are not exactly massive. Yes they are selling stuff but a lot of the stuff is also Geek interest like squire v custom shop type of thing..
That said and I don't work in the Trade but I heard Andertons have for a while now been charging distributors/ manufacturers to review products this could be totally untrue.
That said I would not expect to get that sort of product coverage and audience access for nothing as a distributor.
Youtube sponsorship of a single channel is £4.99.
Been uploading old tracks I recorded ages ago and hopefully some new noodles here.
The yt model has no precedent that I am aware of. It's kind of grown organically to a point where I have picked up on comments about it being satchurated and can't be made to pay anymore. That's as maybe but I think (stand to be corrected) that Andertons were at the forefront of the yt wave (well for music shops anyway) with Chappers and it has evolved over time. As such there is no business model for it and they are simply compartmentalising revenue streams. The impact of the Internet continues to have a catastrophic effect on the high st- mothercare, house of Fraser etc etc. Don't forget we are a niche. The vloggers earning big bucks off the advertising have an all together different level of views.
A more traditional approach might be to write it off purely as part of an advertising budget.
Another point to consider is the infrastructure required. As mentioned above and iPhone and a £5 stand is one end of the scale. Separate premises, multi camera set ups, video editing and staff employed to focus on video content and production is the other. One might position that Andertons have got 'bloated' but on the other hand if you look back to some of their earlier content and look how it has evolved, the production value has got really good now. Have they got a bit carried away.....or have they determined that their turnover has grown as a result of the video marketing and therefore invested in that infrastructure.
Anyway there are a million different ways to argue it, fair play if he makes it work, and I can't be arsed to get upset. Sponsor and get offers and more content. Don't sponsor and continue to enjoy his content. Or turn it off. It's a free world and the sun will probably come up in the morning.
The flipside is that 99% of youtube channels don't deserve monetisation.
Of the youtube superstars I have done some work with (maybe 4 or 5), their money comes from endorsements or the opportunities afforded to them outside youtube. I remember seeing a breakdown from a full time make up tutorial youtuber who had 200,000 subs who was working 6 days a week to earn under £20,000 a year.
But once L'oreal gets involved she can be an overnight millionaire.
EDIT: Personally I feel Andertons' content has hit a ceiling and having Pete, Ariel, Rabea, Rob etc as satellite youtube channels using their gear and 'reviewing' the exact same things Andertons sell all starts to feel irritating and like it is smothering the voice of other decent content producers.
As an aside this week's simultaneous same day release of 100 youtube reviews of that Walrus Emissary tells you everything you need to know about who is objective and independent and who is playing the game. Ditto everyone having multiple Thomann videos this month.
Been uploading old tracks I recorded ages ago and hopefully some new noodles here.
I definitely agree with the Walrus pedal situation. The frontpage of my youtube page was plastered with video reviews of this pedal. I didn't watch one of them.
It is definitely becoming oversaturated.
I think I just wanted to know what our thoughts were, as musicians, who watch the channel.