![]() 40 million streams each in the neighborhood of 3.5 minutes comes to 140 million EMs per day.ĮMs for the WB are harder to track down, but we'll take a stab at it. YouTube EMs are fairly easy to calculate. We'll call it "Eyeball Minutes" or EMs for short. ![]() In order to properly compare YouTube to The WB, we'll need to invent a new metric. However, the WB might just be within YouTube's grasp. If you make the assumption that the average YouTube view is 3-4 minutes long ("Evolution of Dance" is actually 6 minutes long), you'd have to stream a whole lot more clips to come close to the networks with a three-hour primetime (e.g. The problem, of course, with this line of thinking is the length of the clips. Heck, 6+ million views is the pinnacle of success for WB shows. ![]() How does 6+ million views compare to network programming? Well, most weeks this would top comedy favorites like "The Office" and "My Name is Earl." Likewise, it would prove to be kryptonite to the WB's Smallville. That means the clip has accumulated 6+ million views this week alone. At this point last week "Evolution of Dance" had been watched a mere nine million times. Instead, let's use only one week's worth of data. Some might argue that, when all is said and done, that might not matter, but for argument's sake let's give in on that point. It's had months to hit those numbers." OK – that's true. You're counting the total times "Evolution of Dance" has been watched. How did it do when compared with a dude dancing? Not so well "Evolution of Dance" has now been watched more times than last week's episode of Lost (14.6 million viewers last week).Īt this point some of you might be muttering to yourselves, "That's not a fair comparison. Abrams' wildly-successful drama has been the geek favorite for almost two years. That might be true, but "Lost" sure isn't. 30 million eyeballs) is enough to best all but one of last week's sitcoms - the sole survivor being the "Will and Grace" series finale which drew a Nielsen-estimated 18.4 million viewers. For those keeping track at home, 15 million eyeballs (err. Let's start with the same example we used last week, Judson Laipply's "Evolution of Dance." As of this writing the clip has now been watched over 15 million times. In short, it would be ridiculous to take them too seriously.ĭon't think that it's right to compare an upstart web company to media giants like NBC, CBS, and ABC? Perhaps not, but it's fun and who knows – perhaps YouTube will fare better than you think. They're not intended to be a legitimate roadmap to success. They're meant to demonstrate the enormous potential of micro-content. ![]() Take these numbers and suggestions with a grain of salt. ![]() Whenever possible there will be an explanation, but not always. In this, the final installment in the YouTube trilogy, we ask the question "What if YouTube were treated like a broadcast network?" That is to say, what would happen if we used some (very) basic and simplified television economics to look at YouTube's success? The results might just explain why VCs are circling high over video startups.įirst, there's a disclaimer: wild assumptions will be used. In last week's The Clicker we suggested adding advertising to YouTube's streams in an effort to help alleviate what could soon become the crushing burden of their success. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |