One of the questions I get asked most is what I think about all the new “competition” with Patreon. It seems like some people are almost afraid to ask me about it. Sometimes they’ll start the question with an apology: “Gosh, I’m sorry for being so direct, and I hate to ask you about this, but what do you think about Facebook’s new subscription tool?” Of course Patreon has to think about defensibility and competitive strategy and bla bla bla. Of course... we’re a business! BUT... as a creator, I am ***wildly excited*** about what is happening in the world right now. There is a reckoning happening on the web. All the major distribution platforms are realizing that ad revenue isn’t enough -- ad dollars won’t be the primary financial mechanism to power the next generation of creative people around the globe. So the platforms are starting to build new tools to help creative people make money. Not only is this awesome because of the direct impact it will have on creators’ pocket books, but it’s awesome because of the way it’s going to change our culture. It's the beginning of a cyclical pattern that will push the world into a new phase of professional creativity. This video is how I see all of that unfolding over the next few decades.
Have you guys looked at a broader idea of funding creatives around groups/collective payment/channels of creators to grab a bigger share of people's spending on media/entertainment/education etc I think patreon really wins out as were able to directly pay creatives for their work and so you feel a real connection of where that money goes and the creator get a far bigger share than they would through say youtube premium sub. But I guess the reality of entertainment is you don't only consume 1 persons creation, you have fields or areas of interest (hence TV channels with themes i guess). Would there be broader reach for patreon and therefore creatives if you could band people together either on the creative side or the consumers side as you would then be battling with that consumers budget for entertainment as a whole over say a more specialised budget? Just a thought. Also love the vids :)
@@12pigeons-in-a-trench-coat hey dave. i know exactly what you're talking about. the idea of "bundling" is quite popular, and it also creates a much better "consumer experience." the danger with bundling is that the natural desire is to drive the price of the bundle down to get more consumers on board -- think Spotify: $10 per month for all-you-can-eat music. While this creates an amazing consumer experience, I get WAY MORE VALUE than $10 per month from Spotify. and spotify gets a ton of value because they get a retained subscriber who loves their service, which demonstrates potential for driving RPU (revenue per user), increasing investor belief in their potential and thus their market capitalization. the only person who loses is the CREATOR. when the price of the bundle drops, the consumer wins, the company wins, and the creator loses. at least... that's how it is NOW. so how might patreon do bundles differently? what could we do to group creators / categories / genres together and improve the consumer experience, but in a way that funnels the added value to creators instead of leaving them out? these are the types of questions i want patreon teammates to be asking themselves as the platform grows. at its core, patreon is a creator-first platform. we exist to solve the art-in-the-digital-age problem from the perspective of the creator -- and so whatever we build and however we do it, we have to ensure that creative people are properly compensated for the value they bring the world.
Please understand while my language may be very "matter-of-fact", it is intended to be more of a thought experiment and encourage dialogue. I think the type of content being produced is an important consideration to make. It feels like a lot of people these days are opening up an OnlyFans, and every Zoomer wants to be the next TikTok "influencer" just for being attractive, or providing fast, bite-size content. I don't mean to sound "angry Boomer", but my point is this.....how can millions of these next-gen creators make sustainable income when: 1. Their content is "fast fashion", here one minute and gone the next. Relying on meme culture and continuous DAILY maintenance of relevancy rather than providing something like The Sistine Chapel - or even more up-top-date; redefine daily storytelling like Casey Neistat. And.. 2. Social media is built on the idea of communication, interaction, and collaboration. Likes and comments and interactions. That is why every creator says "smash that like button and leave a comment below" There is always a call-to-action. Without that interaction, the algorithms don't favor the content and it gets buried. However, with the current trend in creation, it no longer becomes a photo book to buy and read at home, or a painting on a wall - it becomes a social obligation. It's not even about paying their patreon. It's about gaming the system to give them relevancy. Art IS subjective, but when it is created to BE a consumable, shareable, product, rather than an expression or narrative, I feel it can be argued it looses the momentum needed to be a renaissance in the way we think of it, when it doesn't push the boundaries of creativity and probe the depths of humanity, but fosters success based on videos of people pretending to be Holocaust victims. Even the creation of a "masterpiece" intended to sell to a buyer is still intended to be the best possible work by that creator. With so many creators building success off the support of those who just seek to replace them as soon as they can, how can anything be sustainable even in the mid-term?
Only flaw I see in your logic is as it gets easier to create, more creators will definitely appear. But supply and demand says that’s an issue for creators. Since there is more supply (creators) than demand (advertisers) the average reward per creator will go down not up. For example UA-cam stopped paying creators until you reach a specific sub/view level yet new creators show up every day on UA-cam basically working for free with the hope/dream their channels will grow. I hope they do grow but I just don’t see the incentive for content sites like UA-cam, Facebook, etc. to pay more when the content is growing faster than demand.
It seems like you missed the alternative monetization portion of this formula, which will normalize content creation as a legitimate business venture that ANYONE can pursue and succeed in financially. In Jack's future advertising revenue will be supplementary to alt-mon strategies like paid subscriptions, donations, merchandising, etc.
Bobby Halick - Yeah, guess I missed it. Because I just don’t see companies fighting to get creators paid. It’s the creators fighting to get paid. So they sell shirts and ask for donations and do all that themselves. What he’s describing is companies seeing an opportunity to make it bit easier in return for a cut of the action.
@@FilamentFriday Totally agree. I was following the video until that same "logic flaw". At some point so many creators are going to be too many. Money has to come from somewhere (either from add revenu or directly from my 'subscriber' pocket)
When mass produced fertilizers took hold of the corn market and corn exploded in production during the 70s (if I remember correctly) initially the rice of corn did fall- but then it stabalized/went back up because the market found all kinds of ways to make corn. There is hope if the internet doesn't become monopolistic as it is today. This book talks all about this: Free- the future of a radical price www.amazon.com/Free-Future-Radical-Chris-Anderson/dp/1401322905
I agree on the ad revenue being distributed over more creators means less for every individual , but you shouldn’t forget that ad revenue will increasingly be spent on online platforms and less and less on tv. So there is still potential for more ad revenue over time. I also see subscriptions and Patreon as a valid option. If more creators come online, fine - but to build a loyal fan base supporting you via those direct streams of income will become more and more important to get sustainable income. That is something only a fraction of creators will be able to build.
I've wanted to be a professional artist for pretty much ever. My entire life. And, after many doubts and sidetracks, I've finally decided to allow myself to pursue it; I'm going to launch a craft shop by the end of this year and work on game design projects in the coming years. So much of being able to move forward with these dreams is having to shove down the voices, real and imaginary, that tell us we can't do it, that it's unrealistic, that we'll starve. We have to motivate ourselves and believe in ourselves, in spite of those voices. I just wanted to let you know that you have been a great inspiration to me, and I really appreciate your voice of encouragement and optimism.
I love how Jack turned a video about creators and art…INTO ART! Like, the projector presentation on a multi level “screen” was so cool and engaging, and that just goes to show how he is, and has always been, a creator first, and a CEO second! I love your videos Jack, keep up the good work, and never stop making art!
Love this so much dude. This is stuff me and my creator friends in Chicago have been obsessively talking about for the past 5 years and keeps feeling like we're inching closer and closer to that becoming a reality. As an example me and my buddies youtube channel only has 30k subs and we've been able to make a living off of it for going on a year and a half now. The revolution is coming for us creators!
I want to believe this and appreciate your enthusiasm for sure. I feel like it isn't so simple though. What incentive do platforms have to create monetization strategies that will serve all creators equally regardless of their content? If you want to get big on a platform you have to fit into a mold and play by very specific rules. Those are what define the revenue streams for the platform. The ball is always in the platform's court. True, the barrier to entry is low, but the road to a successful business is still very long and comes at the cost of bending over backwards to fit monetization guidelines. It feels like the relationship of artists with their platforms will always be lopsided. We keep on pushing and creating though, because artists love what they do.. We'll work a job we hate whilst trying to run the artist side hustle, telling ourselves "someday I'll make it big". For a true Renaissance to occur there needs to be a power shift into the hands of creators.
Hey Jack I’m gonna see ya in a year after I change the entire world for the better, just wanna thank ya as being an inspiration with patreon for me as an artist to come up with something that fixes fucked up systems and to center these new systems around empathy, community, and autonomy. Love ya punk, see you next year.
Love your enthusiasm and positivity Jack! It is strange in our time of unprecedented information access that it's a distribution issue. The goorilla has such a scale and inertial advantage that they were able to massively increase advertising on UA-cam in the last few months and still make creator income go down. I'm really hoping Patreon, with your huge creator base, will start or partner an alternative form of content distribution to bypass/ compete. They don't care about creators. You do. Thanks for being you!
I really love how you mentioned it 5 minutes that it felt like a possible commercial for your own platform Right at the same moment that my brain couldn't stop thinking " is this a promotion for his own platform?" But I see the point of view. Everyone's stuck inside consuming media and then larger platforms fighting for more content in a variety of different ways change the entire landscape. It's the whole growth mindset that gives the whole idea of moving forward that has stagnated for the last 20 years in certain places. In 2005 when I ended my radio career because of a lack of ability to grow and automation taking away my job there was no obvious things to move. Nowadays I see friends of mine's kids accidentally put something together and have $40,000 to invest because of a bulldozer company buying the video. We're in for a wild ride that's for sure thanks for the good video
Really hope you're right, Jack! Me and my colleges LOVE creating insightful videos, podcasts and so on for our audience and community, but I'm not gonna lie: it's been a tough time lately. I 've been seeing more than ever creators simply stopping or, at least, reducing their output due to severe burnout and due to a big decrease on the reach of their work (views, revenue, subscriptions, etc.). We, at mimimidias, rely on a Brazilian crowdfunding platform called catarse (support us on www.catarse.me/mimimidias haha), and this platform have been what just keep us going, even in such rough times. I hope you're right, that platforms start financially valuing more creators as ourselves and those that you and your team support. Best regards! Thanks for funding Patreon. Even though we're not registered in your platform (due to several reasons, being the most important the fact that we're situated in Brazil - so payments in dollars via Paypal aren't practical for us - and that Catarse have such a lovely team), your legacy has given an AWESOME contribution to those kind of models worldwide. :) Thanks, and I hope too that we're heading towards those more prosperous times for creators!
This was the pick me up I needed today. I honestly didn’t think companies would ever realize that ad revenue isn’t enough. I created a web series a long while ago. It ran for 7 seasons, but of course never had the budget I wanted it to. My dream is really to be a TV series creator..but I don’t really want to work in “TV”. My only option right now is selling one of my ideas to a big network. I would love to see a world where you can find the budget you need without having to answer to huge company big wigs. I’ll be here waiting when the world is ready😄
Your walls and ceilings are so cool?! But also, I definitely agree with this sentiment and your description sums it up so well. I just redownloaded TikTok yesterday and was thinking about how it's so cool that so many more people now get to make their living as creatives, and especially young people can see themselves having a job in the creative field. What a cool time to be alive :')
This really gave me chills!! I have just graduated as a doctor but really what I want to do in life is creating art and making a living out of it, I'm going to work my way through it somehow
The business hole in this argument is that "more and more" creators is increasing supply, without an explanation of a corresponding increase in demand. That would lower the value of a given "unit of creation". I agree with the premise that platforms following the Patreon model is good for creators in the short and long term, I just think the argument presented lacks a discussion of the increase in demand that's happening at the same time.
The demand is everlasting though. I’ve never said to myself “I like jacks videos so I’m not allowed to watch Casey neistats videos” there’s always room for more creators because as consumers we watch multiple content creators every single day
I love the optimism. I can't help but offer the pessimistic flipside and feel that our capitalism will create monopolies, not competition. Perhaps they will be different monopolies then before, and perhaps they will pay more creators, but I just don't see the competition lasting in the feedback loop you described. If we take the current shakeup of the status quo and how long it took since the previous one, you might be looking at lifetimes lived between loops, with soul crushing monopolies in between. So it's exciting things are changing, but I doubt it will be utopia on the other side.
I think you'e right, I think that they who create in privilege do not create in freedom. The toy epidemic will not save the world but make us more desperate for waste storage and it's victims.
You are so right. My son and I make, what we think, great quality videos in Brazil. Our channel is very small and thus we don’t make any money and these videos take a lot of time and afford to make and edit. So yes it is difficult to go on!
Your focus is on the platforms that distribute the 'content' but don't forget that the manufacturers of content consumption and content creation devices play an important role too. Platforms were first developed for use on devices but now we are starting to see devices catering to platforms. Now find a way to move the creators into that mix as well....
One tidbit for thought here… one thing that characterized the first “renaissance” if we want to call it that, was a looking back through ancient forms of human expression and either modernizing then or sometimes just reviving them as is. The combination of reaching forward into the new world of amplified expression which was a big deal then with the printing press and early beginnings of larger regional economies, now looks tiny in comparison to the internet so I get that comparison, but also there was a real sense of reaching backward through history and pulling timeless forms of expression back into relevance. Also there was a huge emphasis on humanism and everything being seen through human perspective or humans being the main measure of all things. In a lot of ways with that mode of thinking we have an almost absurd amplification of that with the modern tech revolution (iPhones, MySpace etc… ) I wonder what era of responsibility might be implied with all of this “me first” centralized internet based “content creator market” hype shit. However, like some others have commented here… what type of approach is rewarded in the type of creator economy you are describing? And how likely is it to foster sustainable longevity for artists creating genuinely timeless work that’s not just “fast fashion” or trendy memes to stay relevant as some have mentioned here.
I don't know if Jack is right...but I admire his optimism. I suspect this new renaissance may get stiff competition from old patterns...like the star system. It dictates that only a few creators will blow up. The advertisers/sponsors attach themselves to these stars and will spend most of their budget on them. Social media algorithms prefer the star system because it's simple and effective. Why promote long tail content, when short tail content has better ROI. The star system is a monopoly...a very old pattern in our species. Monopolies are everywhere and they always consolidate wealth & power...which in turn creates boom and bust cycles. Only those who thrive on chaos can prevail in a world like this. Regardless of what happens on the internet...the ability of an artist to adapt is more important than their creativity. The former should dictate the latter. Focus on your adaptation response and the creativity should follow.
I completely agree. We've seen high profile creators get massive payouts for exclusivity (Joe Rogan on Spotify for example), but he's definitely the exception, not the rule. Most artists are still going to struggle just like they have been. I think the other flaw in Conte's assertion here is the nature of content. In an age where videos/photos/audio can be uploaded to multiple platforms without any problems, it means that unless you build an enormous and loyal fanbase, you're probably going to put your content everywhere you can and those platforms will continue to pay you pennies so they can acquire the big fish. I just don't see platforms ever competing for creators by paying them more. Tiktok did a good job of attracting creatives by promising virality. Their model was so enticing in that anyone, no matter how big or small a following you had, could get in front of millions of viewers. They've only recently started paying people and that has not been anywhere nearly as attractive as the promise of building an audience so you can monetize other aspects of your online presence.
@@ampthebassplayer Well said. Something that might help the situation is if Patreon was a searchable content platform so that people could find/discover content more easily, and therefore grow their audience. Patreon should host videos as well, in order to get away from UA-cam. But hosting videos is very expensive, so that's a problem. A fusion of UA-cam and Patreon would be great, tho. With an algorithm that was tuned just right. In an overall sense, the idea of walled garden content is illogical as it fractures the internet. More social media platforms just divide the internet. What unites the internet is a kick-ass search engine that is able to locate all the content on the internet, and then serve it to people who may be interested in it. That's how everyone could find their micro-niche long-tail audience on the internet. And then all they would need is a simple website. Social media platforms would be less necessary.
I hope you're right. I'm not sure, but I think one element is a bit overlooked in your thinking model and that's the market cap of how much people are willing to spend on art. Art is a privilege of the reasonably wealthy. When I earn well, I have a lot of projects I support on Patreon, when I go through founding phases where I don't earn, I stop supporting projects on Patreon.
I'm scared about this and about who is currently in control. We need more artists like yourself in control of major tech companies. I'm worried about Patreon internally also, I hope you're doing ok.
Your editing and staging is great as always, but I think you're missing a very important point. A HUGE part of success nowadays has very little to do with creativity, skills or talent. Luck or looks are essential for success on the Internet jungle. Without one of those ingredients, you probably won't be able to make a living out of it. But thanks for your contagious energy.
Jack, here's my elevator pitch. I've been trying to create a company since I was 16 with the vision statement "Make Cool Stuff" and that goal has manifested into a plan to create, what I think, is the future of media consumption, distribution and advertising. I'm now 23 and have made little progress into shaping that future, that being said my determination has not faltered, I recently moved back in with my parents and I'm working 70 hours a week to get seed money to help build this future. My greatest fear is that the internet becomes television 2.0 where a handful of billion dollar companies control the content consumed by the masses. I love TV, movies and UA-cam and I see a future where they're all on the same playing field. Creators need an environment where they not only can survive but excel and to do this I believe they need a network of dedicated individuals and organizations to help them not only monetarily but as well as navigating the intricacies of legality, public relations and logistics that are involved when growing a creative business. If any of this sounds remotely interesting I implore you to reach out and give me 5 minutes to go into a little more detail of my vision and if your names not Jack maybe upvote this so he can see it! Hope to hear from you soon, Dallas.
Thanks for the video, it's energy charged! For me, it feels a bit like a Patreon pitch without the slides :) For those who talk about supply/demand in terms of advertisers, my feeling is that Jack is sidestepping them, looking for more direct support from consumers to creators (aka Patreons)
I think the concern that is going to pop up is the demand. We can't have a billion artists making money, because there is not enough demand. People just physically don't have enough time to sit and consume this much content. It will slowly increase, but I don't think it will be a sudden change.
Noerdy Personally, I believe what Jack is saying. There’s TONS of money being thrown out to creators already, but by way of paying the platform first. As we see more and more companies begin to pay the creators directly, that’s going to change a lot of things. Plus - I believe it’ll be similar to people going to concerts. You won’t always go to the same concert and support the same group, the money will be moved around based on your preferences at the time. I believe it plays a lot into HOW we consume (which is not always the same creator) and how the ad money is being distributed. It could potentially level out where we see the top creators making a little less, but more being able to survive with a smaller audience.
with a renaissance there is a lot to think about with so many creators being able to create, not all of it will be seen and thus would not fit into the cannon of the renaissance model.
Really exciting ideas! I think one of the issues, at least for the moment, is that not all web-engine-room-companies share the same values. Particularly in getting the creators of art paid. Patreon is certainly one of the top companies in terms of monetizing content for creators. But then we have Spotify, whose CEO's are making billions of dollars a year, yet the musicians, the creators, are being paid effectively zero per stream. This is unsustainable. As a musician, a creator, I'm not sure what the answers are just yet to ensure a more equitable/level playing field. Again, Patreon is certainly in the right direction. How do we get Spotify to adjust its per stream model to properly compensate the creators?
There are fixed and variable costs on a per artist basis. Publishers, distributors and marketers will always overemphasize the gold mines and consider everyone else a lottery ticket that they will ignore until an artist starts to generate noticeable revenue. As such we can expect to see platforms compete for the Stars and everyone else they will only wish to control as capital efficiently as possible.
Advertising models like AdSense pay out differently based on your niche. One of the reasons Jack's video payout for his video was so low despite getting over a million views/minutes watched is because that niche (creative talk) doesn't pay as well as say cryptocurrency, passive income, real estate, etc. How this could change is if more diversified advertisers invested in more advertisements onto the internet, in this case specifically UA-cam, so that way, more Creators from different niches can get a bigger cut. Otherwise, the way things are going, UA-cam is gonna turn into a website to just learn about BitCoin.
The positive cicle you are showing is inspiring! I just feel there's a missing part in this equation, the lower valuation of professional creators, cause the more creators the more competition and the less will them be paid for... it is just not totally proportional, btw still aligned with the tendency you'r talking about.
I'm a real estate photographer and I've seen this in the photography world. DSLRs have decreased the technical skill needed to photograph. So less skilled photographers have come into the market, decreasing the costs (good for consumers), but also decreasing the quality (bad for consumers). The trick for us photographers is to convince consumers that the better quality is worth the extra cost. But in a Walmart world, this is increasingly difficult.
I really hope you're right, but what's the incentive for the monopoly platforms (UA-cam in particular) to compete in this race of who can get creators paid best? Surely people will use those platforms regardless because they have such a larger userbase in comparison to the smaller platforms who try to abandon the ad model?
i hear you, but that's where the tech platforms are today -- not where they're going, and not what's happened in other parts of the world. Look at UA-cam's attempts at adding consumer payments systems into the platform over the last few years: 1) paid channels (launched around 2011 I think), 2) Fan funding (launched around 2014 and didn't work, but they tried), 3) UA-cam Red which became UA-cam premium, then UA-cam music, then back to premium, then, who knows what it is, i've lost track, then 4) channel memberships which is basically a copy of Patreon inside the youtube ecosystem, 5) super chat and super stickers, and more. They're taking swing after swing to try to integrate consumer payments systems directly into UA-cam. I'm not saying they're trying to replace ads -- they're not. but they're trying to build new lines of revenue, and they are absolutely betting on direct fan payments to creators. WHY?! because creators started using twitch to distribute gaming content instead of UA-cam. why were creators using Twitch? Because, among several other reasons, Twitch was better at getting creators paid. This competitive dynamic -- this battle to be better at paying creators in an attempt to keep creators uploading on their platforms -- is already happening. Another example: facebook is trying to lure creators away from UA-cam with their "watch" product (which is attempting to copy youtube). One of the table stakes feature sets at this point, is direct payments from fan to creators (after all, Twitch has it, Patreon does it, now UA-cam has it, so if Facebook DOESN'T have it, why would anyone use FB watch instead?) So Facebook launched a fan subscription tool that allows creators to accept direct subscription payments from fans.... so again, this is ALREADY happening. Facebook isn't building direct-fan-subscriptions out of the goodness of their heart -- I don't think they particularly care about ensuring that creative people are properly compensated for their work. They're doing it for defensibility and to drive adoption of their creators products. why do they want creators? because creators fill their platform with content. THAT'S the cycle i'm talking about. platforms need content. so they're going to have to get good at keeping the CREATORS of that content happy. and one of the feature sets that is already starting to emerge as table stakes is better payments systems. so to answer your question directly" what is the incentive for monopoly platforms like UA-cam to compete in this race?" In short: defensibility against Twitch, Facebook, Tik Tok, Patreon, Substack, Spotify and everyone else starting to make headway on creator payments.
I desperately hope that this is true. I'm an artist and I am SO exhausted from a life spent just barely scraping by when I put so much time and love into my work.
I suspect being a creator on the internet will end up like being an actor or musician or professional sportsman, with lots of people trying it as a career option but very few making money out of it. Eventually some sort of equilibrium will be reached.
I love your ideas and am deeply interested. There is another socioeconomic element to this that is critical to the ecosystem that you envision. This is the somewhat broken trickle down economic model that is being and has been embraced in the U.S. for decades. I think that the dearth of revenue for creatives is to a fairly large degree influenced by a economic system that encourages revenue to concentrate as opposed to spread out. We would all be better off in every way if the revenues created by all human endeavor were to spread out to a much greater degree. It seems, however, at present almost half of the U.S. population would rather sacrifice economic security and liberty in exchange for being told how to think and what to do. This is balanced by the reality that with the rise of automation and the elimination of rote activity as well as the more basic analysis based tasks within the realm of work, creativity will probably be one of the very few growth sectors with regard to employment moving forward. You are clearly part of a revolution that is going to happen. There is, however, quite a lot of work to do in other areas to make this revolution the bright future that you envision. It seems like I need to get to work.
On the definition of "creator"... there's an untapped pool of creators who make amazing art in their respective domains, but don't have the tools, knowhow, desire to translate that art into a format that fits the mold of current distribution channels (e.g., video, photo format). Can we usher in a strong Second Renaissance by finding more effective ways to get this hidden art/ value into the world? The reality is not everyone wants to, can, or has the patients to to learn Premier Pro or video editing software.
I'd be interested to see a video made on how musicians are making money these days. As someone who is recording an album, and hasn't released an album for about a decade, the market has changed substantially. Spotify numbers are pretty discouraging and no one seems to be buying albums anymore. Just not really sure how it works these days.
Don't forget that "Renaissance" wasn't just about art. It was a fundamental shift of focus, putting the Human at the center of the stage, instead of God, provoking a dramatic shift in arts, yes, but also in sciences and philosophy. All this turmoil ultimately leading to a change in society and even in the nature of the governing power (Republic for France and parliamentary monarchy in England for instance)
My guess is that, companies like UA-cam and Facebook will bw working on ways for them to make money, while giving as little as possible to the creators. A platform like UA-cam, really do not have any competition. Tell me where you would go if UA-cam shut down your channel, because I can not think of any place to go.
Jack, I've been following your work for a while. You are really inspiring. I was able to pitch Zach Klein, Fred Wilson and a few others on my startup Kinio- a simple way to sell videos online. This was in 2011, around when Casey Pugh started VHX. As we know the path to non - advertising supported short form / independent content has been on its way to a revolution that was inevitable due to your points regarding the reduction of production/increased distribution. However, I'm not sure we will reach a big inflection point until we see government regulation step in and de-monopolize Facebook/Alphabet/Amazon and maybe a few others. What are your thoughts on monopolies holding back distribution / platform innovation/models?
In the 9 platforms there is Wordpress... which is not a platform. It's the only one you can have complete control on and host on your own server, and run according to your own rules. Just wanted to add this nuance ;)
One of the questions I get asked most is what I think about all the new “competition” with Patreon. It seems like some people are almost afraid to ask me about it. Sometimes they’ll start the question with an apology: “Gosh, I’m sorry for being so direct, and I hate to ask you about this, but what do you think about Facebook’s new subscription tool?” Of course Patreon has to think about defensibility and competitive strategy and bla bla bla. Of course... we’re a business! BUT... as a creator, I am ***wildly excited*** about what is happening in the world right now. There is a reckoning happening on the web. All the major distribution platforms are realizing that ad revenue isn’t enough -- ad dollars won’t be the primary financial mechanism to power the next generation of creative people around the globe. So the platforms are starting to build new tools to help creative people make money. Not only is this awesome because of the direct impact it will have on creators’ pocket books, but it’s awesome because of the way it’s going to change our culture. It's the beginning of a cyclical pattern that will push the world into a new phase of professional creativity. This video is how I see all of that unfolding over the next few decades.
Have you guys looked at a broader idea of funding creatives around groups/collective payment/channels of creators to grab a bigger share of people's spending on media/entertainment/education etc I think patreon really wins out as were able to directly pay creatives for their work and so you feel a real connection of where that money goes and the creator get a far bigger share than they would through say youtube premium sub. But I guess the reality of entertainment is you don't only consume 1 persons creation, you have fields or areas of interest (hence TV channels with themes i guess). Would there be broader reach for patreon and therefore creatives if you could band people together either on the creative side or the consumers side as you would then be battling with that consumers budget for entertainment as a whole over say a more specialised budget? Just a thought. Also love the vids :)
trapone in travicee o
3:14 ht ann racee is gocuism coupsee
@@12pigeons-in-a-trench-coat hey dave. i know exactly what you're talking about. the idea of "bundling" is quite popular, and it also creates a much better "consumer experience." the danger with bundling is that the natural desire is to drive the price of the bundle down to get more consumers on board -- think Spotify: $10 per month for all-you-can-eat music. While this creates an amazing consumer experience, I get WAY MORE VALUE than $10 per month from Spotify. and spotify gets a ton of value because they get a retained subscriber who loves their service, which demonstrates potential for driving RPU (revenue per user), increasing investor belief in their potential and thus their market capitalization. the only person who loses is the CREATOR. when the price of the bundle drops, the consumer wins, the company wins, and the creator loses. at least... that's how it is NOW. so how might patreon do bundles differently? what could we do to group creators / categories / genres together and improve the consumer experience, but in a way that funnels the added value to creators instead of leaving them out? these are the types of questions i want patreon teammates to be asking themselves as the platform grows. at its core, patreon is a creator-first platform. we exist to solve the art-in-the-digital-age problem from the perspective of the creator -- and so whatever we build and however we do it, we have to ensure that creative people are properly compensated for the value they bring the world.
Please understand while my language may be very "matter-of-fact", it is intended to be more of a thought experiment and encourage dialogue.
I think the type of content being produced is an important consideration to make.
It feels like a lot of people these days are opening up an OnlyFans, and every Zoomer wants to be the next TikTok "influencer" just for being attractive, or providing fast, bite-size content.
I don't mean to sound "angry Boomer", but my point is this.....how can millions of these next-gen creators make sustainable income when:
1. Their content is "fast fashion", here one minute and gone the next. Relying on meme culture and continuous DAILY maintenance of relevancy rather than providing something like The Sistine Chapel - or even more up-top-date; redefine daily storytelling like Casey Neistat.
And..
2. Social media is built on the idea of communication, interaction, and collaboration. Likes and comments and interactions. That is why every creator says "smash that like button and leave a comment below" There is always a call-to-action. Without that interaction, the algorithms don't favor the content and it gets buried.
However, with the current trend in creation, it no longer becomes a photo book to buy and read at home, or a painting on a wall - it becomes a social obligation. It's not even about paying their patreon. It's about gaming the system to give them relevancy.
Art IS subjective, but when it is created to BE a consumable, shareable, product, rather than an expression or narrative, I feel it can be argued it looses the momentum needed to be a renaissance in the way we think of it, when it doesn't push the boundaries of creativity and probe the depths of humanity, but fosters success based on videos of people pretending to be Holocaust victims.
Even the creation of a "masterpiece" intended to sell to a buyer is still intended to be the best possible work by that creator.
With so many creators building success off the support of those who just seek to replace them as soon as they can, how can anything be sustainable even in the mid-term?
The optimisms contained within your expressions are infectious.
This was insane to watch. The ceiling in your attic is magical.
Only flaw I see in your logic is as it gets easier to create, more creators will definitely appear. But supply and demand says that’s an issue for creators. Since there is more supply (creators) than demand (advertisers) the average reward per creator will go down not up. For example UA-cam stopped paying creators until you reach a specific sub/view level yet new creators show up every day on UA-cam basically working for free with the hope/dream their channels will grow. I hope they do grow but I just don’t see the incentive for content sites like UA-cam, Facebook, etc. to pay more when the content is growing faster than demand.
It seems like you missed the alternative monetization portion of this formula, which will normalize content creation as a legitimate business venture that ANYONE can pursue and succeed in financially. In Jack's future advertising revenue will be supplementary to alt-mon strategies like paid subscriptions, donations, merchandising, etc.
Bobby Halick - Yeah, guess I missed it. Because I just don’t see companies fighting to get creators paid. It’s the creators fighting to get paid. So they sell shirts and ask for donations and do all that themselves. What he’s describing is companies seeing an opportunity to make it bit easier in return for a cut of the action.
@@FilamentFriday Totally agree. I was following the video until that same "logic flaw". At some point so many creators are going to be too many. Money has to come from somewhere (either from add revenu or directly from my 'subscriber' pocket)
When mass produced fertilizers took hold of the corn market and corn exploded in production during the 70s (if I remember correctly) initially the rice of corn did fall- but then it stabalized/went back up because the market found all kinds of ways to make corn. There is hope if the internet doesn't become monopolistic as it is today. This book talks all about this: Free- the future of a radical price www.amazon.com/Free-Future-Radical-Chris-Anderson/dp/1401322905
I agree on the ad revenue being distributed over more creators means less for every individual , but you shouldn’t forget that ad revenue will increasingly be spent on online platforms and less and less on tv. So there is still potential for more ad revenue over time. I also see subscriptions and Patreon as a valid option. If more creators come online, fine - but to build a loyal fan base supporting you via those direct streams of income will become more and more important to get sustainable income. That is something only a fraction of creators will be able to build.
So, you’re sayin’ there’s a chance...
I love this quote
in fact it more in line with the odds of this happening,
Always
I set my UA-cam channel to publish my first video tomorrow because of you. Thanks Jack, your enthusiasm is contagious! :)
I've wanted to be a professional artist for pretty much ever. My entire life. And, after many doubts and sidetracks, I've finally decided to allow myself to pursue it; I'm going to launch a craft shop by the end of this year and work on game design projects in the coming years. So much of being able to move forward with these dreams is having to shove down the voices, real and imaginary, that tell us we can't do it, that it's unrealistic, that we'll starve. We have to motivate ourselves and believe in ourselves, in spite of those voices. I just wanted to let you know that you have been a great inspiration to me, and I really appreciate your voice of encouragement and optimism.
How is it going?
Love this video. Love you. Thanks for everything you've done for us all ♥️♥️♥️
Love you and your positivity, Jack. Thanks for doing your part to allow artists to do what they love for a living!
I love how Jack turned a video about creators and art…INTO ART! Like, the projector presentation on a multi level “screen” was so cool and engaging, and that just goes to show how he is, and has always been, a creator first, and a CEO second! I love your videos Jack, keep up the good work, and never stop making art!
Great start to my day filming online educational courses 🤗🎬
Thanks for the perspective!
Came here after watching your last vid, super pumped, and agree "something is happening" the second renaissance is coming. 🚀
Wow! Soo inspiring to hear it as creator! Love you Jack❤️ Keep inspiring!☺
Love this so much dude. This is stuff me and my creator friends in Chicago have been obsessively talking about for the past 5 years and keeps feeling like we're inching closer and closer to that becoming a reality. As an example me and my buddies youtube channel only has 30k subs and we've been able to make a living off of it for going on a year and a half now. The revolution is coming for us creators!
This projections are awesome!!
Jack, your videos are getting me so pumped to keep working on my UA-cam channel! Change is coming and I'm 100% ready for it🤙🏿🤙🏿
I love your work man.thanks so much
chillz at the end. love u Jack. thanks for being a Captain of this ship
This was the dose of hope and optimism that I needed today. Thank you.
Your videos inspire me so much
this is such a positive video - thank you for your words Jack, really comforting for people a little scared to dip their toes in to this!
Brilliant as always!!
You're easily one of the humblest and coolest human beans on this planet!
Wow this is a breathe of fresh air for this conversation!!
I am always impressed by your content, and ideas. Surface mapping with your projector was next level.
Yo this is Epic AF!
Awesome as always Jack!
Incredible video as usual. Love the effort you've put in to keep viewers engaged with the topic!
I want to believe this and appreciate your enthusiasm for sure. I feel like it isn't so simple though. What incentive do platforms have to create monetization strategies that will serve all creators equally regardless of their content? If you want to get big on a platform you have to fit into a mold and play by very specific rules. Those are what define the revenue streams for the platform. The ball is always in the platform's court. True, the barrier to entry is low, but the road to a successful business is still very long and comes at the cost of bending over backwards to fit monetization guidelines. It feels like the relationship of artists with their platforms will always be lopsided. We keep on pushing and creating though, because artists love what they do.. We'll work a job we hate whilst trying to run the artist side hustle, telling ourselves "someday I'll make it big". For a true Renaissance to occur there needs to be a power shift into the hands of creators.
Hey Jack I’m gonna see ya in a year after I change the entire world for the better, just wanna thank ya as being an inspiration with patreon for me as an artist to come up with something that fixes fucked up systems and to center these new systems around empathy, community, and autonomy. Love ya punk, see you next year.
Love your enthusiasm and positivity Jack!
It is strange in our time of unprecedented information access that it's a distribution issue. The goorilla has such a scale and inertial advantage that they were able to massively increase advertising on UA-cam in the last few months and still make creator income go down.
I'm really hoping Patreon, with your huge creator base, will start or partner an alternative form of content distribution to bypass/ compete. They don't care about creators. You do.
Thanks for being you!
I really love how you mentioned it 5 minutes that it felt like a possible commercial for your own platform Right at the same moment that my brain couldn't stop thinking " is this a promotion for his own platform?"
But I see the point of view. Everyone's stuck inside consuming media and then larger platforms fighting for more content in a variety of different ways change the entire landscape. It's the whole growth mindset that gives the whole idea of moving forward that has stagnated for the last 20 years in certain places. In 2005 when I ended my radio career because of a lack of ability to grow and automation taking away my job there was no obvious things to move. Nowadays I see friends of mine's kids accidentally put something together and have $40,000 to invest because of a bulldozer company buying the video. We're in for a wild ride that's for sure thanks for the good video
Glad to discover your channel man. I believe second one is coming, no is happening
Your projector game is on point (y)
Need this. Thanks Jack.
Really hope you're right, Jack!
Me and my colleges LOVE creating insightful videos, podcasts and so on for our audience and community, but I'm not gonna lie: it's been a tough time lately. I 've been seeing more than ever creators simply stopping or, at least, reducing their output due to severe burnout and due to a big decrease on the reach of their work (views, revenue, subscriptions, etc.). We, at mimimidias, rely on a Brazilian crowdfunding platform called catarse (support us on www.catarse.me/mimimidias haha), and this platform have been what just keep us going, even in such rough times. I hope you're right, that platforms start financially valuing more creators as ourselves and those that you and your team support.
Best regards! Thanks for funding Patreon. Even though we're not registered in your platform (due to several reasons, being the most important the fact that we're situated in Brazil - so payments in dollars via Paypal aren't practical for us - and that Catarse have such a lovely team), your legacy has given an AWESOME contribution to those kind of models worldwide. :) Thanks, and I hope too that we're heading towards those more prosperous times for creators!
Bro, your mind... and storytelling... 🤯 🙏
This gave me hope thank you for making such an impactful video appreciate it ✨
This was the pick me up I needed today. I honestly didn’t think companies would ever realize that ad revenue isn’t enough. I created a web series a long while ago. It ran for 7 seasons, but of course never had the budget I wanted it to. My dream is really to be a TV series creator..but I don’t really want to work in “TV”. My only option right now is selling one of my ideas to a big network. I would love to see a world where you can find the budget you need without having to answer to huge company big wigs. I’ll be here waiting when the world is ready😄
100% on board with this idea. Been thinking about it A LOT.. Also, Patreon is a critical platform for me.
Your walls and ceilings are so cool?! But also, I definitely agree with this sentiment and your description sums it up so well. I just redownloaded TikTok yesterday and was thinking about how it's so cool that so many more people now get to make their living as creatives, and especially young people can see themselves having a job in the creative field. What a cool time to be alive :')
Gonna hand it to you this was heavy af✨💨
wtf this projector jack!!!! So good to have your thoughts explained this classy!!!!
This really gave me chills!! I have just graduated as a doctor but really what I want to do in life is creating art and making a living out of it, I'm going to work my way through it somehow
The business hole in this argument is that "more and more" creators is increasing supply, without an explanation of a corresponding increase in demand. That would lower the value of a given "unit of creation". I agree with the premise that platforms following the Patreon model is good for creators in the short and long term, I just think the argument presented lacks a discussion of the increase in demand that's happening at the same time.
The demand is everlasting though. I’ve never said to myself “I like jacks videos so I’m not allowed to watch Casey neistats videos” there’s always room for more creators because as consumers we watch multiple content creators every single day
Jack I just wanted to come back and say this video started a domino effect that I believe is changing my life
I love the optimism. I can't help but offer the pessimistic flipside and feel that our capitalism will create monopolies, not competition.
Perhaps they will be different monopolies then before, and perhaps they will pay more creators, but I just don't see the competition lasting in the feedback loop you described.
If we take the current shakeup of the status quo and how long it took since the previous one, you might be looking at lifetimes lived between loops, with soul crushing monopolies in between.
So it's exciting things are changing, but I doubt it will be utopia on the other side.
I think you'e right, I think that they who create in privilege do not create in freedom. The toy epidemic will not save the world but make us more desperate for waste storage and it's victims.
You are so right. My son and I make, what we think, great quality videos in Brazil. Our channel is very small and thus we don’t make any money and these videos take a lot of time and afford to make and edit.
So yes it is difficult to go on!
wow... now I'm really hyped for the future :D
⚡⚡This is an important video.⚡⚡
I really like this guy's videos.
Your focus is on the platforms that distribute the 'content' but don't forget that the manufacturers of content consumption and content creation devices play an important role too. Platforms were first developed for use on devices but now we are starting to see devices catering to platforms. Now find a way to move the creators into that mix as well....
One tidbit for thought here… one thing that characterized the first “renaissance” if we want to call it that, was a looking back through ancient forms of human expression and either modernizing then or sometimes just reviving them as is. The combination of reaching forward into the new world of amplified expression which was a big deal then with the printing press and early beginnings of larger regional economies, now looks tiny in comparison to the internet so I get that comparison, but also there was a real sense of reaching backward through history and pulling timeless forms of expression back into relevance. Also there was a huge emphasis on humanism and everything being seen through human perspective or humans being the main measure of all things. In a lot of ways with that mode of thinking we have an almost absurd amplification of that with the modern tech revolution (iPhones, MySpace etc… ) I wonder what era of responsibility might be implied with all of this “me first” centralized internet based “content creator market” hype shit.
However, like some others have commented here… what type of approach is rewarded in the type of creator economy you are describing? And how likely is it to foster sustainable longevity for artists creating genuinely timeless work that’s not just “fast fashion” or trendy memes to stay relevant as some have mentioned here.
Great news!
I don't know if Jack is right...but I admire his optimism. I suspect this new renaissance may get stiff competition from old patterns...like the star system. It dictates that only a few creators will blow up. The advertisers/sponsors attach themselves to these stars and will spend most of their budget on them. Social media algorithms prefer the star system because it's simple and effective. Why promote long tail content, when short tail content has better ROI. The star system is a monopoly...a very old pattern in our species. Monopolies are everywhere and they always consolidate wealth & power...which in turn creates boom and bust cycles. Only those who thrive on chaos can prevail in a world like this. Regardless of what happens on the internet...the ability of an artist to adapt is more important than their creativity. The former should dictate the latter. Focus on your adaptation response and the creativity should follow.
I completely agree. We've seen high profile creators get massive payouts for exclusivity (Joe Rogan on Spotify for example), but he's definitely the exception, not the rule. Most artists are still going to struggle just like they have been. I think the other flaw in Conte's assertion here is the nature of content. In an age where videos/photos/audio can be uploaded to multiple platforms without any problems, it means that unless you build an enormous and loyal fanbase, you're probably going to put your content everywhere you can and those platforms will continue to pay you pennies so they can acquire the big fish. I just don't see platforms ever competing for creators by paying them more. Tiktok did a good job of attracting creatives by promising virality. Their model was so enticing in that anyone, no matter how big or small a following you had, could get in front of millions of viewers. They've only recently started paying people and that has not been anywhere nearly as attractive as the promise of building an audience so you can monetize other aspects of your online presence.
@@ampthebassplayer Well said. Something that might help the situation is if Patreon was a searchable content platform so that people could find/discover content more easily, and therefore grow their audience. Patreon should host videos as well, in order to get away from UA-cam. But hosting videos is very expensive, so that's a problem. A fusion of UA-cam and Patreon would be great, tho. With an algorithm that was tuned just right. In an overall sense, the idea of walled garden content is illogical as it fractures the internet. More social media platforms just divide the internet. What unites the internet is a kick-ass search engine that is able to locate all the content on the internet, and then serve it to people who may be interested in it. That's how everyone could find their micro-niche long-tail audience on the internet. And then all they would need is a simple website. Social media platforms would be less necessary.
I hope you're right. I'm not sure, but I think one element is a bit overlooked in your thinking model and that's the market cap of how much people are willing to spend on art. Art is a privilege of the reasonably wealthy. When I earn well, I have a lot of projects I support on Patreon, when I go through founding phases where I don't earn, I stop supporting projects on Patreon.
You are marvellous
I'm 10 months late to this video but hot damn this is amazing!
Well done Jack!!!! :)
here we go
amén!
ESTOY MUY EMOCIONADOOOO
When I think of the 2nd renaissance I feel despair as the machines have won.
I hope you are right my man.
At the same time, I don't doubt it..it's as if the rocket has left and will get there without fail
I'm scared about this and about who is currently in control. We need more artists like yourself in control of major tech companies. I'm worried about Patreon internally also, I hope you're doing ok.
Nice unique use of projection mapping
Since ad revenue isn't enough to pay the creators, viewers will have to pay to see the best creations.
Your editing and staging is great as always, but I think you're missing a very important point. A HUGE part of success nowadays has very little to do with creativity, skills or talent. Luck or looks are essential for success on the Internet jungle. Without one of those ingredients, you probably won't be able to make a living out of it. But thanks for your contagious energy.
Jack, here's my elevator pitch.
I've been trying to create a company since I was 16 with the vision statement "Make Cool Stuff" and that goal has manifested into a plan to create, what I think, is the future of media consumption, distribution and advertising. I'm now 23 and have made little progress into shaping that future, that being said my determination has not faltered, I recently moved back in with my parents and I'm working 70 hours a week to get seed money to help build this future. My greatest fear is that the internet becomes television 2.0 where a handful of billion dollar companies control the content consumed by the masses. I love TV, movies and UA-cam and I see a future where they're all on the same playing field. Creators need an environment where they not only can survive but excel and to do this I believe they need a network of dedicated individuals and organizations to help them not only monetarily but as well as navigating the intricacies of legality, public relations and logistics that are involved when growing a creative business.
If any of this sounds remotely interesting I implore you to reach out and give me 5 minutes to go into a little more detail of my vision and if your names not Jack maybe upvote this so he can see it!
Hope to hear from you soon, Dallas.
Thanks for the video, it's energy charged! For me, it feels a bit like a Patreon pitch without the slides :)
For those who talk about supply/demand in terms of advertisers, my feeling is that Jack is sidestepping them, looking for more direct support from consumers to creators (aka Patreons)
I think the concern that is going to pop up is the demand. We can't have a billion artists making money, because there is not enough demand. People just physically don't have enough time to sit and consume this much content. It will slowly increase, but I don't think it will be a sudden change.
Noerdy Personally, I believe what Jack is saying. There’s TONS of money being thrown out to creators already, but by way of paying the platform first. As we see more and more companies begin to pay the creators directly, that’s going to change a lot of things. Plus - I believe it’ll be similar to people going to concerts. You won’t always go to the same concert and support the same group, the money will be moved around based on your preferences at the time. I believe it plays a lot into HOW we consume (which is not always the same creator) and how the ad money is being distributed. It could potentially level out where we see the top creators making a little less, but more being able to survive with a smaller audience.
YES Skatune Network is one of my fav tiktoks!
this felt good
with a renaissance there is a lot to think about with so many creators being able to create, not all of it will be seen and thus would not fit into the cannon of the renaissance model.
Insta360 FTW!
Really exciting ideas! I think one of the issues, at least for the moment, is that not all web-engine-room-companies share the same values. Particularly in getting the creators of art paid. Patreon is certainly one of the top companies in terms of monetizing content for creators. But then we have Spotify, whose CEO's are making billions of dollars a year, yet the musicians, the creators, are being paid effectively zero per stream. This is unsustainable. As a musician, a creator, I'm not sure what the answers are just yet to ensure a more equitable/level playing field. Again, Patreon is certainly in the right direction. How do we get Spotify to adjust its per stream model to properly compensate the creators?
I'm looking forward to that renaissance. @JackConteExtras
Just hoping it'll happen when the US is more united.
6:33 wait, wait, whoa... wait... If there are MORE CREATORS, than why is there (6:36) more competition to get creators paid ?
This is so inspiring, I do hope he's right.
There are fixed and variable costs on a per artist basis. Publishers, distributors and marketers will always overemphasize the gold mines and consider everyone else a lottery ticket that they will ignore until an artist starts to generate noticeable revenue. As such we can expect to see platforms compete for the Stars and everyone else they will only wish to control as capital efficiently as possible.
Advertising models like AdSense pay out differently based on your niche. One of the reasons Jack's video payout for his video was so low despite getting over a million views/minutes watched is because that niche (creative talk) doesn't pay as well as say cryptocurrency, passive income, real estate, etc. How this could change is if more diversified advertisers invested in more advertisements onto the internet, in this case specifically UA-cam, so that way, more Creators from different niches can get a bigger cut. Otherwise, the way things are going, UA-cam is gonna turn into a website to just learn about BitCoin.
The positive cicle you are showing is inspiring! I just feel there's a missing part in this equation, the lower valuation of professional creators, cause the more creators the more competition and the less will them be paid for... it is just not totally proportional, btw still aligned with the tendency you'r talking about.
I'm a real estate photographer and I've seen this in the photography world. DSLRs have decreased the technical skill needed to photograph. So less skilled photographers have come into the market, decreasing the costs (good for consumers), but also decreasing the quality (bad for consumers). The trick for us photographers is to convince consumers that the better quality is worth the extra cost. But in a Walmart world, this is increasingly difficult.
Same thing is happening in dron world, now anyone can buy a mavic mini and say they can make 3Dmaps, 1/4th of the price for sure.
I really hope you're right, but what's the incentive for the monopoly platforms (UA-cam in particular) to compete in this race of who can get creators paid best?
Surely people will use those platforms regardless because they have such a larger userbase in comparison to the smaller platforms who try to abandon the ad model?
i hear you, but that's where the tech platforms are today -- not where they're going, and not what's happened in other parts of the world. Look at UA-cam's attempts at adding consumer payments systems into the platform over the last few years: 1) paid channels (launched around 2011 I think), 2) Fan funding (launched around 2014 and didn't work, but they tried), 3) UA-cam Red which became UA-cam premium, then UA-cam music, then back to premium, then, who knows what it is, i've lost track, then 4) channel memberships which is basically a copy of Patreon inside the youtube ecosystem, 5) super chat and super stickers, and more. They're taking swing after swing to try to integrate consumer payments systems directly into UA-cam. I'm not saying they're trying to replace ads -- they're not. but they're trying to build new lines of revenue, and they are absolutely betting on direct fan payments to creators. WHY?! because creators started using twitch to distribute gaming content instead of UA-cam. why were creators using Twitch? Because, among several other reasons, Twitch was better at getting creators paid. This competitive dynamic -- this battle to be better at paying creators in an attempt to keep creators uploading on their platforms -- is already happening. Another example: facebook is trying to lure creators away from UA-cam with their "watch" product (which is attempting to copy youtube). One of the table stakes feature sets at this point, is direct payments from fan to creators (after all, Twitch has it, Patreon does it, now UA-cam has it, so if Facebook DOESN'T have it, why would anyone use FB watch instead?) So Facebook launched a fan subscription tool that allows creators to accept direct subscription payments from fans.... so again, this is ALREADY happening. Facebook isn't building direct-fan-subscriptions out of the goodness of their heart -- I don't think they particularly care about ensuring that creative people are properly compensated for their work. They're doing it for defensibility and to drive adoption of their creators products. why do they want creators? because creators fill their platform with content. THAT'S the cycle i'm talking about. platforms need content. so they're going to have to get good at keeping the CREATORS of that content happy. and one of the feature sets that is already starting to emerge as table stakes is better payments systems. so to answer your question directly" what is the incentive for monopoly platforms like UA-cam to compete in this race?" In short: defensibility against Twitch, Facebook, Tik Tok, Patreon, Substack, Spotify and everyone else starting to make headway on creator payments.
Ah, I get you now - The Twitch example in particular has been very true the last few years. Cheers for the detailed response!
I desperately hope that this is true. I'm an artist and I am SO exhausted from a life spent just barely scraping by when I put so much time and love into my work.
Brillant!
I suspect being a creator on the internet will end up like being an actor or musician or professional sportsman, with lots of people trying it as a career option but very few making money out of it. Eventually some sort of equilibrium will be reached.
Great video! Let's hope it is so, Jack!! :-)
See you on the vault of the Sistine Chapel! :-)
I love your ideas and am deeply interested. There is another socioeconomic element to this that is critical to the ecosystem that you envision. This is the somewhat broken trickle down economic model that is being and has been embraced in the U.S. for decades. I think that the dearth of revenue for creatives is to a fairly large degree influenced by a economic system that encourages revenue to concentrate as opposed to spread out. We would all be better off in every way if the revenues created by all human endeavor were to spread out to a much greater degree. It seems, however, at present almost half of the U.S. population would rather sacrifice economic security and liberty in exchange for being told how to think and what to do.
This is balanced by the reality that with the rise of automation and the elimination of rote activity as well as the more basic analysis based tasks within the realm of work, creativity will probably be one of the very few growth sectors with regard to employment moving forward.
You are clearly part of a revolution that is going to happen.
There is, however, quite a lot of work to do in other areas to make this revolution the bright future that you envision. It seems like I need to get to work.
On the definition of "creator"... there's an untapped pool of creators who make amazing art in their respective domains, but don't have the tools, knowhow, desire to translate that art into a format that fits the mold of current distribution channels (e.g., video, photo format). Can we usher in a strong Second Renaissance by finding more effective ways to get this hidden art/ value into the world? The reality is not everyone wants to, can, or has the patients to to learn Premier Pro or video editing software.
I think with free markets creators will be driven to sell their products for less money as competition grows.
I enjoy you!!
🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥👌🏼😄
I'd be interested to see a video made on how musicians are making money these days. As someone who is recording an album, and hasn't released an album for about a decade, the market has changed substantially. Spotify numbers are pretty discouraging and no one seems to be buying albums anymore. Just not really sure how it works these days.
Don't forget that "Renaissance" wasn't just about art. It was a fundamental shift of focus, putting the Human at the center of the stage, instead of God, provoking a dramatic shift in arts, yes, but also in sciences and philosophy. All this turmoil ultimately leading to a change in society and even in the nature of the governing power (Republic for France and parliamentary monarchy in England for instance)
My guess is that, companies like UA-cam and Facebook will bw working on ways for them to make money, while giving as little as possible to the creators. A platform like UA-cam, really do not have any competition. Tell me where you would go if UA-cam shut down your channel, because I can not think of any place to go.
Haha I did just watch 5 minutes of content marketing AND I LOVED IT
MIGALA!!!!!!!
Jack, I've been following your work for a while. You are really inspiring. I was able to pitch Zach Klein, Fred Wilson and a few others on my startup Kinio- a simple way to sell videos online. This was in 2011, around when Casey Pugh started VHX. As we know the path to non - advertising supported short form / independent content has been on its way to a revolution that was inevitable due to your points regarding the reduction of production/increased distribution. However, I'm not sure we will reach a big inflection point until we see government regulation step in and de-monopolize Facebook/Alphabet/Amazon and maybe a few others. What are your thoughts on monopolies holding back distribution / platform innovation/models?
In the 9 platforms there is Wordpress... which is not a platform. It's the only one you can have complete control on and host on your own server, and run according to your own rules. Just wanted to add this nuance ;)