ViewStats – YouTube Channel Statistics
viewstats.com
viewstats.com
Given that specific subject did have a few follow-ups with no relevant notes published, my guess is that the site is mostly in maintenance mode/runs until it breaks with no active features being developed.
India, being a poor country, certainly will generate much less revenue than a country like US in the same category because the advertisers will be willing to pay much less per click.
If I do the napkin math: $600 million dollar revenue for Oppenheimer. A movie ticket costs about $10. That means Oppenheimer was viewed 60 million times. Mr. Beast JUST on his main channel has 1.6 BILLION views. And that only for the meager price of $4.6M. Oppenheimer cost $100M to make and it doesn't even touch Mr. Beast.
We're comparing apples and oranges.
Thats the nature of creator economy, his(creator) actions can influence audience reactions towards the channel, affecting the organic revenue drastically.
Why? For Youtube there is little money to be made from a tool like this. The target customers for tools like this are advertisers that interact directly with creators. E.g. that's also what nindo.de, a similar platform in the German social media space, built by a popular Youtuber pivoted to.
I think the only thing they are doing here that I haven't seen on any competitors website is the differentiation between shorts and normal videos. Last time I checked, there was no reliable way to detect whether a video is a short via the API, so you either have to build ugly heuristics for it or build a scraper that tries to access the video as a short. I think this might be quite valuable as the introductions of shorts has disturbed view numbers and accordingly channel/audience valuations quite a bit.
Per-video analytics are also not something that's freely available on competitor platforms IIRC.
Correct. This is what they say
We use a combination of channel performance along with detailed video performance history to break down longs versus shorts. If you'd like to learn more, please contact our team at...
$18.3M ( last 28 days) Crazy~
Shameless plug for them: https://www.viewstats.com/@nickandmaela/channelytics
If it works like on Socialblade, a drop in views usually indicates video delistings (potentially due to copyright claims as she runs a "reaction" channel). Detection of view botting is usually punished a lot more harshly with whole channel demonetization, which I'd be surprised if any big creator were to risk that.
Even if it were view botting, in those cases they rarely reverses payments AFAIK (as that would mean them having to pay back advertisers and losing out on revenue).
also, is it possible to see distribution of users based on geography? would be very interesting
I had thought this would long be a solved problem, but apparently not.
Right now it's pretty basic but I would bet it will become more complex and have some paid membership for advanced stats and suggestions for your videos.
What he's doing is making his videos "more effective at monetization" and that has fuck all to do with quality.
You may disagree with my tone here but I'm biting my tongue at the Little Bobby Tables view of children's attention and development (qualified Educator so I can talk shit about Mr Beast any day) so I'd like to keep it analytical as possible.
I very much appreciate Ed Bolian at VinWiki for his behind the scenes discussions about monetization. They are healthy! Because of those, I genuinely have tried to follow quality channels and bring them revenue via their presence (Ammo NYC, VinWIKI, TomleyRC) sitting through ads or maybe checking out sponsors. It's not that hard to be adult about it.
One of these days I hope we get to see a breakdown of where all Mr Beast's money is / was used, how it was sheltered, taxed, moved, or otherwise employed because that didn't just sit in the bank. Reference: Taylor Swift. Citation: Scott Swift FINA Report.
Optimizing for monetization seems to degrade quality most of the time. E.g. click bait video names/thumbnails that do not tell the viewer what they are about to watch. Or reducing the feature set of apps so no casual user is confused, but advanced users are left behind. Or stretching video lengths to improve ad income without actually adding any valuable content. ...
True, but it is also natural. The vast majority of businesses optimize for profit (the publically traded ones are even obliged to do so).
I agree a profit maximization motive doesn't lead to an absolute global maximum of quality, but it still generally leads to quality nevertheless.
Other creators will fight for different ways to improve their content, which can technically be 4K HDR or having better guests, etc.
Do youn't like Mr. Beast's "empty" content? Then you don't like society, which is the one taking MrBeast to the top, and I would completely agree with you.
If the revenue numbers are right, I'm strongly considering opening my own Youtube channel.
Edit: And if the numbers are right, why are so many mid-sized creators begging people for more money on their Patreon?
And Patreon is kind a exactly what every creator want - to just get support from dedicated fans who going to stick to their content no matter what platform they're on.
If life were that easy, we'd all be at the top making millions. The amount of effort it takes to nurture and maintain a successful YouTube channel is staggering...not to mention a lot of luck involved because you could put in all the energy and make nothing at the end.
... or fair. Check some channels you enjoy on the site and mentally rank them by quality. The ones you've unsubscribed from (or are considering) seem to be among the top of the revenue. Quality doesn't pay; superficially that suits a broader audience and jokes do. In other areas, encouraging healthy competition doesn't pay as much as shoring up your duopoly. Etc.
Nobody is so fast that they can outrun what five others can transport. Nobody so strong that they can replace five others can lift. Nobody so smart that they get five times as much office work done as anyone else. Yet many people make five times more money than others. Looking at the channel stats, more like thousands of times more.
Success has very little to do with one's individual performance (although it certainly plays a role) and much more with luck
(I am well off in life, but I don't think that's because I've worked harder than the average person. I just liked learning about computers as a kid and that's what got me where I am.)
Starting the channel is the easy bit. Gaining any sort of traction whatsoever is the difficult bit.
I mean, what do I loose? 2 to 3 hours per week, half of it for editing? Some $$ for equipment? If I get some 1k subscribers, it's already worth the ongoing effort. If not I can still drop it and look out for another hobby.
However, I've seen enough people babbling into a 720p web cam already having a 10k subscription base to assume it's possible to start something without spending whole days every week on the channel.
Sure, but for every channel like that with 10k subs there'll be another 100 with no subs. It's a reasonable starting assumption that you'll need to put some effort in to video production if you want to start a yt channel.
Unless you are extremely lucky or already have things set for you, building an audience is a very long-term grind, and typically a large percentage of those with some potential get burned out after 1, 2, or 5 years.
(None of this to say you shouldn't try, especially if you love the work... I enjoyed editing video since grade school when my Dad first bought an analog video capture card so I could dump a few minutes of VHS footage into a video editor and make dumb family videos.)
Edit: on second read I realized the tone of this comment could be read as dissuasive. I wanna clarify that I mean the opposite, I do support you in trying to launch a YouTube channel, I know far too many people who I think would make for great YouTubers I'd watch! But I do feel like you're underestimating aspects of this just based on a figure estimated by a web-site which probably doesn't have fine-enough grained access to YouTube data anyway and I think it would be better to come into it with realistic expectations.
Bro 0 -> 1 is always the hardest part. How many videos do you think you'd need to make to hit 1k subs? It's probably a lot more than you think.
I'm sure success will heavily depend on my personality and the topics I choose. I may not ever reach 10 subscribers. But every shot you don't take is a missed shot.
Sure if it's a hobby that's fine but you don't have a topic yet and it seems the money is your motivating factor, not a good start IMHO.
CPM varies drastically based on your category. Finance-related channels for example are known for having extremely high CPMs.
Ad revenue can also be fairly unreliable. Patreon is recurring income.
I'm aware that chances of becoming rich as a creator are minimal, but it may develop into a worthwhile hobby with an active community nonetheless. And if I utterly fail, I still have some experiences and a story to tell.
Are there YouTube API rate limits? I'm sure YouTube can pull the plug anytime, like other platforms did recently.
edit: clarifying the last sentence
Yes. I've used the Youtube API and its not easy to pull these types of analytics across a broad base of channels. Wonder how it came about...
If anything this is an anti-grift as it's most useful only to existing high follower count type "creators" and will illuminate lack of success to those who might otherwise be pulled into buying BS how-to content.