Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics.
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
No platform pays nearly as well as YouTube does on average. If they upload to other platforms, and you watch the content on those other platforms, they’re going to make significantly less money than if you watch on YouTube. Even if there’s increased reach from uploading to multiple platforms, the creator will almost certainly make less—so there’s less than no incentive for them to upload elsewhere.
I believe Nebula pays fantastically well, at least according to Sam from Wendover Productions. This is attributed to the fact that Nebula charges a subscription and half the subscription fees are divvied up to the channels according to watch time.
However, he owns a significant portion of Nebula so he's not a disinterested information source.
It's creator owned. If they're on nebula, they have a stake in it, writ large
Nebula was also made by content creators in response to how bad YouTube is for them.
My annual subscription to Nebula expired last month. I didn't renew. They seemed to have a mix of exactly what you get on YouTube and some peculiar TV documentaries that weren't quite good enough to make brand name TV channels
I don't think that from a purely "rational consumer" perspective Nebula is worth the $30 per year demanded. But to me, it's like a Patreon subscription. I can support my favourite creators and I get some nice perks in return, like offline video downloads and advertising and sponsor-free programming. These perks are not worth $30 a year to me. But I will continue to support them anyway.
I'm broke, so if they exclusively upload to nebula, they aren't getting anything from my view because it doesn't happen.
Uploading to both though seems like a good idea
There are original series on Nebula that cost a lot to make so I understand that they need to recoup the investment on those.
But most videos are released on both platforms. The Nebula versions usually have extended cuts and are free of adverts and sponsors, but the programming is otherwise the same.
Some like Vimeo actually charge the uploader, I believe.
Yeah, Vimeo completely pivoted to basically being a white label video platform for business websites.
Also, YouTube is a removed to run, hardware wise, they must have farms upon farms of servers everywhere, on top of CND infrastructure. Do not envy their bandwidth bill. Few out there can or could compete, even if they wanted to.