Sounds like even if he's not interested in cross posting to Twitter immediately for monetisation reasons, he may make some non-trivial amounts by posting videos which are past the peak on YT. If he's not lowering the total YT view, that's almost pure profit.
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.
>"This was a one-off from the biggest YouTuber on earth that got international media attention," Mr Wiskus added.
>"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.
I don’t know that the rename is going to stick. The logo is still an X in blackboard bold, but https://x.com/ links now redirect to https://twitter.com/.
My first introduction to Mr. Beast was when he participated in Chess.com's tournament of famous streamers. I think he was rated around 280 elo at the time, which was lower than anyone I had ever seen. I think he's gotten somewhat better since then though.
I may be the only one who has never seen any of MrBeast's video. I looked at some of his videos on youtube, and interestingly, they are overdubbed in my native language (French). Quality is so so though.
My kids watch it. I know some people have mixed feelings about him, but honestly, I don't really see the problem. There's far worse crap on TV, and every now and then, he's really helping people who need it, so I'm fine with it.
"In the screenshot shared by MrBeast, he reported $263,655 in revenue from nearly 156.7 million "impressions" or about $1.68 per 1,000 impressions."
The CPM number is not back for X, but if you compare it with other platforms, you know why X is struggling.
CPM trend tracking:
https://www.guptamedia.com/social-media-ads-cost
Musk was specifically trying to get Mr. Beast to post videos on X after Mr. Beast was saying it didn't generate enough revenue to be worth the effort the last time he tried.
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.
I guess with this style of ad, ad buyers get to make organic content part of the ad while still taking the ad directly to the type of people they want... As a broad appeal content creator you can get hitched along for the ride and experience an exposure boost.
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.
Readit News
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.
Apostrophe mistreatment is spreading :(
Deleted Comment
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.