MrBeast reveals he made $250k from X video
bbc.co.uk
bbc.co.uk
Youtube isn't a social network. Which means there isn't the possibility of someone popular e.g. Musk taking exception with a video, retweeting it with an inciteful comment and turning their followers against Mr Beast.
Which would be a problem given his whole strategy is to be apolitical and mass-market.
Certainly seems to be one to me?
>"I don't think another creator who pulls in 1% of those impressions is going to put in 1% of that money."
This is the key takeaway from this - MrBeast is big enough to defy gravity and come away with a big enough ad haul. But its no way indicative of other creators' potential for make money on the platform.
So there really is nothing to learn for other creators.
too many are quick to write off the qualitative in an obsessive focus on the quantitative.
He steps into 'problematic' occasionally with the 'make people do things for money' but generally it's all pretty inoffensive fun.
But then so did Netflix so who knows.
Apostrophe mistreatment is spreading :(
Because of this, it seems like there was a lot of incentive for Musk to try to do everything in his power to ensure this video in particular got promoted so that Mr. Beast would advertise the fact that he made a significant amount of money from it in order to send the message that X is a viable platform for creators, but for this reason, I would be dubious about drawing any conclusions about X as a video platform in general.
Even if Musk didn't somehow special case this video, there may not be that much monetized video content on X right now, so it's possible that if the X algorithm is attempting to promote monetized video content, that had the effect of mainly promoting this Mr. Beast video when he posted it, in which case the results might be very different once there are a larger number of people posting video content.
With more video content posted on X, I imagine over time this should approximate to how things are on YouTube as this is essentially how Youtube does it: Ads are before the content but hidden behind an innocuous thumbnail; being ad safe is incentivized. But perhaps the timeline approach is different enough that it won't be as ecosystem defining as on Youtube.
Today, we promote those who generate the most clicks (with clicks)
I genuienly dislike attempts of people to portray that the past was some how more refined or cultured. Low educational entertainment has always existed.
it's not
his video production cost tend to be in the low multiple millions (like e.g. 3M)
and on YouTube he still makes profited with it (in average, not every video)
he is one of the biggest independent video creators
has no competition on X
and still would have made a multi million loss
I say would because uploading some old video which get very little traction anymore on YT probably still would be a neat extra income.
And yes I'm aware that the reason his videos are that expensive to produce is because he wants it not because it must be that way.
So someone with the reach of MrBeast who decides to produce 10k cost videos would make nice money from it.
This is a weirdly hard number to know.
I believe he didn't fake any of the actual stunts. Here's a making-of of a jet car for MrBeast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rri83pDN6kc You'll notice it's a similar setup, but a red car instead of blue, 7 engines instead of 10, a landing ramp at the end, and it didn't clear the school busses. Meanwhile, in the released video, there's 10 engines on a blue car that makes it across the entire bus park. So assuming it's all real, that's at least 17 mini jet engines destroyed (at least I'd assume that none of them were reusable after this). I'd guess their price at $5-20k each (the latter is what I found for the PBS TJ-40 G1, which looks like the engine from the making-of). Add to it all the engineering work that was required, and I wouldn't be surprised if the jet car part alone exceeded half a million.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WEAJ-DFkHE is a more typical video, where he "reviews" expensive plane tickets. Starting by buying out an entire domestic first class section (let's guess this at 15k), two first-class seats on a long-distance flight with Emirates (~20k, going by the listed price which seems realistic), one of those first-class suits (~25k stated), a (again going by stated prices) $100k private flight, an advertising blimp ($300k), and a super-luxury private jet flight ($500k), so around a million dollars just for the flights before accounting for any other production costs.
https://www.creatorhandbook.net/mrbeast-reveals-ad-revenue-i...
He has been pretty vocal about his costs and I think most/all are minimum $1million for him.
This is a ton of money for a video platform.
Mr Beast makes all of his money to do his videos through sponsorships, partnerships, and by promoting his own product lines.
This is a WAY higher revenue share than YouTube does. He does not earn the full money for making his videos through YouTube ads, I can more or less guarantee this.
Source: I have a YouTube channel that was once very popular.
The CPM was $1.68. If he got that CPM on YouTube, I'm sure he would have far more choice words. A $1.68 CPM would be terrible for a creator of Mr. Beast's size, especially when by his own admission, the video was juiced due to the increased attention it got.
Sure the revenue share is higher, but the pie is almost 15x smaller.
158M views 26M followers
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1748803757389840416?s=20
>To the best of my knowledge, we have done nothing to amplify his viewers
"X's advertising revenue has plunged"
are these statements that can be made without citation?
In July, Mr Musk said ad revenues had dropped by 50%. [2]
Situation today is likely far worse. Also, Fidelity has rated the value of its investment in Twitter/X as -72%.
[1] https://au.pcmag.com/social-media/102174/twitter-traffic-on-...
[2] https://www.afr.com/companies/media-and-marketing/elon-musk-...
Common sense is not a good source for website and app analytics.
both statements have been widely reported
It would be cool if news articles had citations linking to previous reporting but I realize that's expecting too much.
TBH, I don't need a citation for every fact, but I'd like a little more for things where they cannot be directly observed.
And I'd like a lot less news laundering, but that's a whole different subject at this point.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/elon-musks-x-accused-of...
You can tell that they're ads because they're not from accounts you follow and nor retweeted, and you can verify that they are are ads because the three-dot menu includes the "Why this ad?" option.
“Per X, the MrBeast video is technically not an undisclosed ad. There is a pre-roll ad for Shopify in the video, which is labeled as such. X boosts posts containing pre-roll ads, but because the post itself is not the ad, it doesn't have the label.”