Sorry but I think that’s nonsense. For one, not every kid wants to be a YouTube star.
Second, there are most definitely still kids that want to be footballers or musicians and I’m sure they all believe it’ll be easier than it truly is. What’s the difference?
Just looks like an opportunity to bash young people because it’s not something you can imagine you would’ve been interested in. Doesn’t sit right with me.
I'm a teacher and I'd say for boys currently in Primary School around 50%+ want to do something in the youtube/gaming space when asked what they want to do when they're older.
Sorry but I think that’s nonsense. For one, not every kid wants to be a YouTube star.
Second, there are most definitely still kids that want to be footballers or musicians and I’m sure they all believe it’ll be easier than it truly is. What’s the difference?
Just looks like an opportunity to bash young people because it’s not something you can imagine you would’ve been interested in. Doesn’t sit right with me.
I'm a teacher and I'd say for boys currently in Primary School around 50%+ want to do something in the youtube/gaming space when asked what they want to do when they're older.
Regarding the level of appeal, it’s just numbers, the entire planet can tap into a YouTube video, it’s about potential and the potential is infinite, that’s the appeal
For me, the obsession with You Tubers is an example of the ever lowering ambitions of young people and what they can 'achieve'. You can only achieve mastery of anything with minimum of 10,000 hours of practice (Malcolm Gladwell, Outliers) and a large proportion of kids don't want to put that kind of effort in to be a footballer, musician or other. It is plausible to be a successful youtuber without this level of commitment or effort. This is the sad facts of the youth of today (as a father of 10 and 12 year olds).
It's absolutely not. This shows how disconnected you are from the reality of what effort these young people go through to become worthy of earning a salary that makes it worthwhile. It's certainly not easy to get their content out there.
Sorry but I think that’s nonsense. For one, not every kid wants to be a YouTube star.
Second, there are most definitely still kids that want to be footballers or musicians and I’m sure they all believe it’ll be easier than it truly is. What’s the difference?
Just looks like an opportunity to bash young people because it’s not something you can imagine you would’ve been interested in. Doesn’t sit right with me.
I'm a teacher and I'd say for boys currently in Primary School around 50%+ want to do something in the youtube/gaming space when asked what they want to do when they're older.
So literally not every one of them, when I grew up most primary school kids wanted to be astronauts... How many achieve that dream? Not a single one.
FWIW I personally wouldn't ever want to make it on YouTube, as I know I'm not charismatic or resilient enough to do it. But also you become a celebrity ready to be cancelled or attacked for saying one thing people disagree with.
Sorry but I think that’s nonsense. For one, not every kid wants to be a YouTube star.
Second, there are most definitely still kids that want to be footballers or musicians and I’m sure they all believe it’ll be easier than it truly is. What’s the difference?
Just looks like an opportunity to bash young people because it’s not something you can imagine you would’ve been interested in. Doesn’t sit right with me.
I'm a teacher and I'd say for boys currently in Primary School around 50%+ want to do something in the youtube/gaming space when asked what they want to do when they're older.
So literally not every one of them, when I grew up most primary school kids wanted to be astronauts... How many achieve that dream? Not a single one.
FWIW I personally wouldn't ever want to make it on YouTube, as I know I'm not charismatic or resilient enough to do it. But also you become a celebrity ready to be cancelled or attacked for saying one thing people disagree with.
Sounds pretty stressful to be honest!
I was being generous with the 50% tbh. It is probably way higher but could just be this part of the country for example.
It's a pipe dream of course and not all of them will even attempt to become one. Just interesting that their 'heroes' tend to be from youtube rather than the television or watching sport live.
Probably due to the rise of smart phones and tablets.
My 10-year-old loves the Sidemen, Mr Beast etc and was gutted I didn't manage to get tickets for the game but the difference between him dreaming of becoming a successful Youtuber is that it's far more realistic than my dreams of becoming the next Colin Walsh were. With a few good ideas and a bit of luck he could do just that.
Just a YouTube version of Socceraid etc isn't it, in effect?
People watch the celebs on that, they're just actors, comedians, Blue Peter presenters or whatever rather than Youtubers. And I'd guess that the Youtube channels get a lot more views than have those celebrity's shows do.
There's been celebrity football at charity events for years, 5 a sides with random EastEnders stars etc, doesn't appeal that much to me but obviously does to some.
As for why kids venerate Youtube stars, same reason kids would have wanted to meet people from TV shows 20 years ago, they watch them and they're famous.
My 10-year-old loves the Sidemen, Mr Beast etc and was gutted I didn't manage to get tickets for the game but the difference between him dreaming of becoming a successful Youtuber is that it's far more realistic than my dreams of becoming the next Colin Walsh were. With a few good ideas and a bit of luck he could do just that.
Have to argue it’s actually about the delivery and content more than how good the idea is, YouTube engagement is as much about very specific parameters that define how successful it is (ie how many subscribers you get; which is where the money comes in). My point is you can make quite average ideas successful with the right execution (quality of footage, using the algorithms etc) which is where the work comes in, so it could be argued successful YouTubers are good at the right things rather than lucky.
My 10-year-old loves the Sidemen, Mr Beast etc and was gutted I didn't manage to get tickets for the game but the difference between him dreaming of becoming a successful Youtuber is that it's far more realistic than my dreams of becoming the next Colin Walsh were. With a few good ideas and a bit of luck he could do just that.
Have to argue it’s actually about the delivery and content more than how good the idea is, YouTube engagement is as much about very specific parameters that define how successful it is (ie how many subscribers you get; which is where the money comes in). My point is you can make quite average ideas successful with the right execution (quality of footage, using the algorithms etc) which is where the work comes in, so it could be argued successful YouTubers are good at the right things rather than lucky.
Funnily enough, subscribers have little to no impact on earnings from YT. It’s all about viewer count, how long they stay watching the video without clicking off (retention), and the CPM (essentially what advertisers are prepared to pay per 1000 impressions).
The key to being rich on YouTube is high CPM, i.e ensure that your content is family friendly for advertisers, and lots of viewers who watch the entire video from start to end.
Mr Beast is someone who’s studied this since he was 11 years old, he’a 24 now and will likely be a billionaire within the next 5 years.
Sorry but I think that’s nonsense. For one, not every kid wants to be a YouTube star.
Second, there are most definitely still kids that want to be footballers or musicians and I’m sure they all believe it’ll be easier than it truly is. What’s the difference?
Just looks like an opportunity to bash young people because it’s not something you can imagine you would’ve been interested in. Doesn’t sit right with me.
I'm a teacher and I'd say for boys currently in Primary School around 50%+ want to do something in the youtube/gaming space when asked what they want to do when they're older.
So literally not every one of them, when I grew up most primary school kids wanted to be astronauts... How many achieve that dream? Not a single one.
FWIW I personally wouldn't ever want to make it on YouTube, as I know I'm not charismatic or resilient enough to do it. But also you become a celebrity ready to be cancelled or attacked for saying one thing people disagree with.
Sounds pretty stressful to be honest!
100%, I used to go to school with a kid called Neil Armstong, wanted to be an astronaut and walk on the moon. Tosser, probably ended up working in Kwik Fit?
My 10-year-old loves the Sidemen, Mr Beast etc and was gutted I didn't manage to get tickets for the game but the difference between him dreaming of becoming a successful Youtuber is that it's far more realistic than my dreams of becoming the next Colin Walsh were. With a few good ideas and a bit of luck he could do just that.
Have to argue it’s actually about the delivery and content more than how good the idea is, YouTube engagement is as much about very specific parameters that define how successful it is (ie how many subscribers you get; which is where the money comes in). My point is you can make quite average ideas successful with the right execution (quality of footage, using the algorithms etc) which is where the work comes in, so it could be argued successful YouTubers are good at the right things rather than lucky.
Funnily enough, subscribers have little to no impact on earnings from YT. It’s all about viewer count, how long they stay watching the video without clicking off (retention), and the CPM (essentially what advertisers are prepared to pay per 1000 impressions).
The key to being rich on YouTube is high CPM, i.e ensure that your content is family friendly for advertisers, and lots of viewers who watch the entire video from start to end.
Mr Beast is someone who’s studied this since he was 11 years old, he’a 24 now and will likely be a billionaire within the next 5 years.
Ah ok noted 👍🏻
I’ve confused the 1000 impressions for 1k subscribers.
My 10-year-old loves the Sidemen, Mr Beast etc and was gutted I didn't manage to get tickets for the game but the difference between him dreaming of becoming a successful Youtuber is that it's far more realistic than my dreams of becoming the next Colin Walsh were. With a few good ideas and a bit of luck he could do just that.
Have to argue it’s actually about the delivery and content more than how good the idea is, YouTube engagement is as much about very specific parameters that define how successful it is (ie how many subscribers you get; which is where the money comes in). My point is you can make quite average ideas successful with the right execution (quality of footage, using the algorithms etc) which is where the work comes in, so it could be argued successful YouTubers are good at the right things rather than lucky.
Funnily enough, subscribers have little to no impact on earnings from YT. It’s all about viewer count, how long they stay watching the video without clicking off (retention), and the CPM (essentially what advertisers are prepared to pay per 1000 impressions).
The key to being rich on YouTube is high CPM, i.e ensure that your content is family friendly for advertisers, and lots of viewers who watch the entire video from start to end.
Mr Beast is someone who’s studied this since he was 11 years old, he’a 24 now and will likely be a billionaire within the next 5 years.
Even he took almost 5 years of posting videos before one went viral and his channel took off. Full credit to him for sticking with it as i can imagine 99% of people would lose patience with it.
I'd bet a lot of money that most of these kids today who want to be YouTubers have absolutely no idea of the time and effort that needs to go into growing a channel and in the early years you won't make any money and would need to do it as a second job before it's grown enough to become your full time job. Most probably think they can start a channel, get a 1m subscribers in a few weeks and become rich. They would simply lose interest in it after 1/2/3 years if it isn't making them money.
My 10-year-old loves the Sidemen, Mr Beast etc and was gutted I didn't manage to get tickets for the game but the difference between him dreaming of becoming a successful Youtuber is that it's far more realistic than my dreams of becoming the next Colin Walsh were. With a few good ideas and a bit of luck he could do just that.
Have to argue it’s actually about the delivery and content more than how good the idea is, YouTube engagement is as much about very specific parameters that define how successful it is (ie how many subscribers you get; which is where the money comes in). My point is you can make quite average ideas successful with the right execution (quality of footage, using the algorithms etc) which is where the work comes in, so it could be argued successful YouTubers are good at the right things rather than lucky.
Funnily enough, subscribers have little to no impact on earnings from YT. It’s all about viewer count, how long they stay watching the video without clicking off (retention), and the CPM (essentially what advertisers are prepared to pay per 1000 impressions).
The key to being rich on YouTube is high CPM, i.e ensure that your content is family friendly for advertisers, and lots of viewers who watch the entire video from start to end.
Mr Beast is someone who’s studied this since he was 11 years old, he’a 24 now and will likely be a billionaire within the next 5 years.
Even he took almost 5 years of posting videos before one went viral and his channel took off. Full credit to him for sticking with it as i can imagine 99% of people would lose patience with it.
I'd bet a lot of money that most of these kids today who want to be YouTubers have absolutely no idea of the time and effort that needs to go into growing a channel and in the early years you won't make any money and would need to do it as a second job before it's grown enough to become your full time job. Most probably think they can start a channel, get a 1m subscribers in a few weeks and become rich. They would simply lose interest in it after 1/2/3 years if it isn't making them money.
He actually turned down 1bn recently for the rights to his channel and become an employee for it.
My 10-year-old loves the Sidemen, Mr Beast etc and was gutted I didn't manage to get tickets for the game but the difference between him dreaming of becoming a successful Youtuber is that it's far more realistic than my dreams of becoming the next Colin Walsh were. With a few good ideas and a bit of luck he could do just that.
Have to argue it’s actually about the delivery and content more than how good the idea is, YouTube engagement is as much about very specific parameters that define how successful it is (ie how many subscribers you get; which is where the money comes in). My point is you can make quite average ideas successful with the right execution (quality of footage, using the algorithms etc) which is where the work comes in, so it could be argued successful YouTubers are good at the right things rather than lucky.
Funnily enough, subscribers have little to no impact on earnings from YT. It’s all about viewer count, how long they stay watching the video without clicking off (retention), and the CPM (essentially what advertisers are prepared to pay per 1000 impressions).
The key to being rich on YouTube is high CPM, i.e ensure that your content is family friendly for advertisers, and lots of viewers who watch the entire video from start to end.
Mr Beast is someone who’s studied this since he was 11 years old, he’a 24 now and will likely be a billionaire within the next 5 years.
Even he took almost 5 years of posting videos before one went viral and his channel took off. Full credit to him for sticking with it as i can imagine 99% of people would lose patience with it.
I'd bet a lot of money that most of these kids today who want to be YouTubers have absolutely no idea of the time and effort that needs to go into growing a channel and in the early years you won't make any money and would need to do it as a second job before it's grown enough to become your full time job. Most probably think they can start a channel, get a 1m subscribers in a few weeks and become rich. They would simply lose interest in it after 1/2/3 years if it isn't making them money.
He actually turned down 1bn recently for the rights to his channel and become an employee for it.
My 10-year-old loves the Sidemen, Mr Beast etc and was gutted I didn't manage to get tickets for the game but the difference between him dreaming of becoming a successful Youtuber is that it's far more realistic than my dreams of becoming the next Colin Walsh were. With a few good ideas and a bit of luck he could do just that.
Have to argue it’s actually about the delivery and content more than how good the idea is, YouTube engagement is as much about very specific parameters that define how successful it is (ie how many subscribers you get; which is where the money comes in). My point is you can make quite average ideas successful with the right execution (quality of footage, using the algorithms etc) which is where the work comes in, so it could be argued successful YouTubers are good at the right things rather than lucky.
Funnily enough, subscribers have little to no impact on earnings from YT. It’s all about viewer count, how long they stay watching the video without clicking off (retention), and the CPM (essentially what advertisers are prepared to pay per 1000 impressions).
The key to being rich on YouTube is high CPM, i.e ensure that your content is family friendly for advertisers, and lots of viewers who watch the entire video from start to end.
Mr Beast is someone who’s studied this since he was 11 years old, he’a 24 now and will likely be a billionaire within the next 5 years.
Even he took almost 5 years of posting videos before one went viral and his channel took off. Full credit to him for sticking with it as i can imagine 99% of people would lose patience with it.
I'd bet a lot of money that most of these kids today who want to be YouTubers have absolutely no idea of the time and effort that needs to go into growing a channel and in the early years you won't make any money and would need to do it as a second job before it's grown enough to become your full time job. Most probably think they can start a channel, get a 1m subscribers in a few weeks and become rich. They would simply lose interest in it after 1/2/3 years if it isn't making them money.
He actually turned down 1bn recently for the rights to his channel and become an employee for it.
My 10-year-old loves the Sidemen, Mr Beast etc and was gutted I didn't manage to get tickets for the game but the difference between him dreaming of becoming a successful Youtuber is that it's far more realistic than my dreams of becoming the next Colin Walsh were. With a few good ideas and a bit of luck he could do just that.
Have to argue it’s actually about the delivery and content more than how good the idea is, YouTube engagement is as much about very specific parameters that define how successful it is (ie how many subscribers you get; which is where the money comes in). My point is you can make quite average ideas successful with the right execution (quality of footage, using the algorithms etc) which is where the work comes in, so it could be argued successful YouTubers are good at the right things rather than lucky.
Funnily enough, subscribers have little to no impact on earnings from YT. It’s all about viewer count, how long they stay watching the video without clicking off (retention), and the CPM (essentially what advertisers are prepared to pay per 1000 impressions).
The key to being rich on YouTube is high CPM, i.e ensure that your content is family friendly for advertisers, and lots of viewers who watch the entire video from start to end.
Mr Beast is someone who’s studied this since he was 11 years old, he’a 24 now and will likely be a billionaire within the next 5 years.
Even he took almost 5 years of posting videos before one went viral and his channel took off. Full credit to him for sticking with it as i can imagine 99% of people would lose patience with it.
I'd bet a lot of money that most of these kids today who want to be YouTubers have absolutely no idea of the time and effort that needs to go into growing a channel and in the early years you won't make any money and would need to do it as a second job before it's grown enough to become your full time job. Most probably think they can start a channel, get a 1m subscribers in a few weeks and become rich. They would simply lose interest in it after 1/2/3 years if it isn't making them money.
He actually turned down 1bn recently for the rights to his channel and become an employee for it.
£1BN? Surely not, that’s crazy!
Somebody said above he will be a billionaire in the next five years keeping the channel and content so to sell for a billion now would be crazy. If I were him I would not take less than three billion as things stand.
My 10-year-old loves the Sidemen, Mr Beast etc and was gutted I didn't manage to get tickets for the game but the difference between him dreaming of becoming a successful Youtuber is that it's far more realistic than my dreams of becoming the next Colin Walsh were. With a few good ideas and a bit of luck he could do just that.
Have to argue it’s actually about the delivery and content more than how good the idea is, YouTube engagement is as much about very specific parameters that define how successful it is (ie how many subscribers you get; which is where the money comes in). My point is you can make quite average ideas successful with the right execution (quality of footage, using the algorithms etc) which is where the work comes in, so it could be argued successful YouTubers are good at the right things rather than lucky.
Funnily enough, subscribers have little to no impact on earnings from YT. It’s all about viewer count, how long they stay watching the video without clicking off (retention), and the CPM (essentially what advertisers are prepared to pay per 1000 impressions).
The key to being rich on YouTube is high CPM, i.e ensure that your content is family friendly for advertisers, and lots of viewers who watch the entire video from start to end.
Mr Beast is someone who’s studied this since he was 11 years old, he’a 24 now and will likely be a billionaire within the next 5 years.
Even he took almost 5 years of posting videos before one went viral and his channel took off. Full credit to him for sticking with it as i can imagine 99% of people would lose patience with it.
I'd bet a lot of money that most of these kids today who want to be YouTubers have absolutely no idea of the time and effort that needs to go into growing a channel and in the early years you won't make any money and would need to do it as a second job before it's grown enough to become your full time job. Most probably think they can start a channel, get a 1m subscribers in a few weeks and become rich. They would simply lose interest in it after 1/2/3 years if it isn't making them money.
He actually turned down 1bn recently for the rights to his channel and become an employee for it.
Regarding the level of appeal, it’s just numbers, the entire planet can tap into a YouTube video, it’s about potential and the potential is infinite, that’s the appeal
Although I’d never say it out loud I’m technically a YouTuber, in that my main income comes from sponsorship and YT ad revenue. The potential is indeed infinite but the reality is quite different. YT gives people a sense of an achievable dream that, for 99% of people, will never materialise.
I use the platform as a distribution system rather than play to the rules that would inevitably lead to more money/ success as @ElliotCAFC and @EugenesAxe quite rightly explain above. A good idea and high quality content don’t guarantee anything. Maybe I’ll eventually relent and play that game if I don’t make a better living off it in the next year or two.
My 6 year old granddaughter stayed over last night and set up an obstacle course that involved a lot of bouncing on my furniture.
The stern warning that this was not Grandad Raith's soft play centre was summarily dismissed as she handed me my phone - with an instruction to video her. During the course she did 'three bits to camera'. (i) Don't forget to subscribe, (ii) Hit the like button (iii) check and press the happy face below.
After completion of the first lap she returned to camera to demand more subscribers for the second lap to take place. After other (imaginary) subscribers had joined she went off again.
The third lap was brought to a premature end after the 'wall of cushions' collapsed on her ... which was very good news for my furniture ... and it was bed time anyway
It seems this Youtube malarky is now part of modern kid's DNA. I can't see cowboys and Indians making a comeback anytime soon.
Regarding the level of appeal, it’s just numbers, the entire planet can tap into a YouTube video, it’s about potential and the potential is infinite, that’s the appeal
Although I’d never say it out loud I’m technically a YouTuber, in that my main income comes from sponsorship and YT ad revenue. The potential is indeed infinite but the reality is quite different. YT gives people a sense of an achievable dream that, for 99% of people, will never materialise.
I use the platform as a distribution system rather than play to the rules that would inevitably lead to more money/ success as @ElliotCAFC and @EugenesAxe quite rightly explain above. A good idea and high quality content don’t guarantee anything. Maybe I’ll eventually relent and play that game if I don’t make a better living off it in the next year or two.
I 've never quite understood the money side of YouTube? How do those that have a huge following base of kids with next to no money make these amounts?
I can kind of understand 'onlyfans' (not personally you understand!) where dirty old men sitting on pots and pots of money that they usually just keep in the bank regularly splurging it on some young girl getting her kit off. I guess I just don't get the distribution of money these days. Economics has changed so dramatically in recent years.
Regarding the level of appeal, it’s just numbers, the entire planet can tap into a YouTube video, it’s about potential and the potential is infinite, that’s the appeal
Although I’d never say it out loud I’m technically a YouTuber, in that my main income comes from sponsorship and YT ad revenue. The potential is indeed infinite but the reality is quite different. YT gives people a sense of an achievable dream that, for 99% of people, will never materialise.
I use the platform as a distribution system rather than play to the rules that would inevitably lead to more money/ success as @ElliotCAFC and @EugenesAxe quite rightly explain above. A good idea and high quality content don’t guarantee anything. Maybe I’ll eventually relent and play that game if I don’t make a better living off it in the next year or two.
I 've never quite understood the money side of YouTube? How do those that have a huge following base of kids with next to no money make these amounts?
I can kind of understand 'onlyfans' (not personally you understand!) where dirty old men sitting on pots and pots of money that they usually just keep in the bank regularly splurging it on some young girl getting her kit off. I guess I just don't get the distribution of money these days. Economics has changed so dramatically in recent years.
It’s pretty straight forward on the surface. Once you have 1k subscribers on YT you’re able to join the advertising revenues scheme. It requires some hoop-jumping but once sorted you’ll receive ad revenue relating to your content. You get to decide a few options (when you want the ads to play ie before, during and after your videos) and at the end of the month Google transfers the money into your account.
There are other ways to make cash through YT. Such as on a live premiere of a video users can gift money via the chat system. Otherwise it’s all about sponsorship and product placement, which is external to YT.
My 10-year-old loves the Sidemen, Mr Beast etc and was gutted I didn't manage to get tickets for the game but the difference between him dreaming of becoming a successful Youtuber is that it's far more realistic than my dreams of becoming the next Colin Walsh were. With a few good ideas and a bit of luck he could do just that.
Have to argue it’s actually about the delivery and content more than how good the idea is, YouTube engagement is as much about very specific parameters that define how successful it is (ie how many subscribers you get; which is where the money comes in). My point is you can make quite average ideas successful with the right execution (quality of footage, using the algorithms etc) which is where the work comes in, so it could be argued successful YouTubers are good at the right things rather than lucky.
Funnily enough, subscribers have little to no impact on earnings from YT. It’s all about viewer count, how long they stay watching the video without clicking off (retention), and the CPM (essentially what advertisers are prepared to pay per 1000 impressions).
The key to being rich on YouTube is high CPM, i.e ensure that your content is family friendly for advertisers, and lots of viewers who watch the entire video from start to end.
Mr Beast is someone who’s studied this since he was 11 years old, he’a 24 now and will likely be a billionaire within the next 5 years.
Even he took almost 5 years of posting videos before one went viral and his channel took off. Full credit to him for sticking with it as i can imagine 99% of people would lose patience with it.
I'd bet a lot of money that most of these kids today who want to be YouTubers have absolutely no idea of the time and effort that needs to go into growing a channel and in the early years you won't make any money and would need to do it as a second job before it's grown enough to become your full time job. Most probably think they can start a channel, get a 1m subscribers in a few weeks and become rich. They would simply lose interest in it after 1/2/3 years if it isn't making them money.
He actually turned down 1bn recently for the rights to his channel and become an employee for it.
Crazy. I’ve never heard of him until this thread
Same.
The bloke could potentially be richer than Cristiano Ronaldo, Paul McCartney and Floyd Mayweather and yet most people over the age of 30 will have never heard of the bloke. It’s madness.
Comments
FWIW I personally wouldn't ever want to make it on YouTube, as I know I'm not charismatic or resilient enough to do it. But also you become a celebrity ready to be cancelled or attacked for saying one thing people disagree with.
Sounds pretty stressful to be honest!
It's a pipe dream of course and not all of them will even attempt to become one. Just interesting that their 'heroes' tend to be from youtube rather than the television or watching sport live.
Probably due to the rise of smart phones and tablets.
People watch the celebs on that, they're just actors, comedians, Blue Peter presenters or whatever rather than Youtubers. And I'd guess that the Youtube channels get a lot more views than have those celebrity's shows do.
There's been celebrity football at charity events for years, 5 a sides with random EastEnders stars etc, doesn't appeal that much to me but obviously does to some.
As for why kids venerate Youtube stars, same reason kids would have wanted to meet people from TV shows 20 years ago, they watch them and they're famous.
My point is you can make quite average ideas successful with the right execution (quality of footage, using the algorithms etc) which is where the work comes in, so it could be argued successful YouTubers are good at the right things rather than lucky.
Mr Beast is someone who’s studied this since he was 11 years old, he’a 24 now and will likely be a billionaire within the next 5 years.
I'd bet a lot of money that most of these kids today who want to be YouTubers have absolutely no idea of the time and effort that needs to go into growing a channel and in the early years you won't make any money and would need to do it as a second job before it's grown enough to become your full time job. Most probably think they can start a channel, get a 1m subscribers in a few weeks and become rich. They would simply lose interest in it after 1/2/3 years if it isn't making them money.
The stern warning that this was not Grandad Raith's soft play centre was summarily dismissed as she handed me my phone - with an instruction to video her. During the course she did 'three bits to camera'. (i) Don't forget to subscribe, (ii) Hit the like button (iii) check and press the happy face below.
After completion of the first lap she returned to camera to demand more subscribers for the second lap to take place. After other (imaginary) subscribers had joined she went off again.
The third lap was brought to a premature end after the 'wall of cushions' collapsed on her ... which was very good news for my furniture ... and it was bed time anyway
It seems this Youtube malarky is now part of modern kid's DNA. I can't see cowboys and Indians making a comeback anytime soon.
I can kind of understand 'onlyfans' (not personally you understand!) where dirty old men sitting on pots and pots of money that they usually just keep in the bank regularly splurging it on some young girl getting her kit off.
I guess I just don't get the distribution of money these days. Economics has changed so dramatically in recent years.
https://f1feederseries.com/2022/10/03/streamers-set-to-take-part-in-ambitious-new-project-gp-explorer/