Automotive Vloggers (Vol. 5)

[wpa1975]

DannyScene said:

Same here, no idea what advert everyone is on about, I'm quite bored of hearing about squarespace though, they're on almost every channel I watch be it cars, camping anything.
Their marketing budget must be pretty sizeable!

Not as much as sodding car vertical, every youtuber at the moment seems to have jumped on that bandwagon, even Jayemm's Porsche video had a 2/3 minute plug for them.

[WelshGTI]

Sweet Fantastic said:

Spends fortunes of other people’s money on automotive exotica but his clothes don’t fit and has a ten bob haircut …

"other people's money" who's exactly is he using now? his dads? Santa clause? The pope?

[Sweet Fantastic]

WelshGTI said:

"other people's money" who's exactly is he using now? his dads? Santa clause? The pope?

Finance companies money maybe….?

[WarrenB]

Sweet Fantastic said:

WelshGTI said:

"other people's money" who's exactly is he using now? his dads? Santa clause? The pope?

Finance companies money maybe….?

Are you not allowed to finance cars AND not have a Sweet Fantastic approved hair cut?

[Sweet Fantastic]

WarrenB said:

Are you not allowed to finance cars AND not have a Sweet Fantastic approved hair cut?

Haha…..who said he couldn’t use other people’s money and have a st barnet…..?
….I didn’t

[C70R]

wpa1975 said:

DannyScene said:

Same here, no idea what advert everyone is on about, I'm quite bored of hearing about squarespace though, they're on almost every channel I watch be it cars, camping anything.
Their marketing budget must be pretty sizeable!

Not as much as sodding car vertical, every youtuber at the moment seems to have jumped on that bandwagon, even Jayemm's Porsche video had a 2/3 minute plug for them.

I don't think you quite understand how sponsored content works.

Creators aren't "jumping on" any "bandwagon". CarVertical will have decided they want to spend money on marketing, and decided that YT was the best place to reach their audience. They will have then approached a number of Content Creators and offered them money to create sponsored content to promote their product. These Creators will typically have a fixed fee that they charge for a short piece of sponsored content (a "rate card") which is based on things like their average number of views and number of subscribers.

This, along with platform advertising revenues, is how many Content Creators are able to make the videos we enjoy. How else do you think many of these people can afford to buy cars, parts and tools? (hint: very few of them are independently wealthy)

Personally, I find sponsored content much less intrusive and egregious than random YT ads for crisps and chocolate - and you'd have to be particularly dense to object to people being paid to make content you enjoy.

Edited by C70R on Tuesday 28th March 10:09

[wpa1975]

C70R said:

wpa1975 said:

DannyScene said:

Same here, no idea what advert everyone is on about, I'm quite bored of hearing about squarespace though, they're on almost every channel I watch be it cars, camping anything.
Their marketing budget must be pretty sizeable!

Not as much as sodding car vertical, every youtuber at the moment seems to have jumped on that bandwagon, even Jayemm's Porsche video had a 2/3 minute plug for them.

I don't think you quite understand how sponsored content works.

Creators aren't "jumping on" any "bandwagon". CarVertical will have decided they want to spend money on marketing, and decided that YT was the best place to reach their audience. They will have then approached a number of Content Creators and offered them money to create sponsored content to promote their product. These Creators will typically have a fixed fee that they charge for a short piece of sponsored content (a "rate card") which is based on things like their average number of views and number of subscribers.

This, along with platform advertising revenues, is how many Content Creators are able to make the videos we enjoy. How else do you think many of these people can afford to buy cars, parts and tools? (hint: very few of them are independently wealthy)

Personally, I find sponsored content much less intrusive and egregious than random YT ads for crisps and chocolate - and you'd have to be particularly dense to object to people being paid to make content you enjoy.

Edited by C70R on Tuesday 28th March 10:09

I fully understand how these things work but it does not stop it being bloody annoying.

[ThomW]

wpa1975 said:

I fully understand how these things work but it does not stop it being bloody annoying.

If it annoys you so much, don't watch. The free content you're getting for free.

If your user name gives a hint to your age, you're a couple fo years older than me, so you very much must remember when watching anything on ITV, Channel4 or Channel 5 when it launched (!!) meant you had to sit through adverts mid-way through. This is exactly the same.

[C70R]

wpa1975 said:

C70R said:

wpa1975 said:

DannyScene said:

Same here, no idea what advert everyone is on about, I'm quite bored of hearing about squarespace though, they're on almost every channel I watch be it cars, camping anything.
Their marketing budget must be pretty sizeable!

Not as much as sodding car vertical, every youtuber at the moment seems to have jumped on that bandwagon, even Jayemm's Porsche video had a 2/3 minute plug for them.

I don't think you quite understand how sponsored content works.

Creators aren't "jumping on" any "bandwagon". CarVertical will have decided they want to spend money on marketing, and decided that YT was the best place to reach their audience. They will have then approached a number of Content Creators and offered them money to create sponsored content to promote their product. These Creators will typically have a fixed fee that they charge for a short piece of sponsored content (a "rate card") which is based on things like their average number of views and number of subscribers.

This, along with platform advertising revenues, is how many Content Creators are able to make the videos we enjoy. How else do you think many of these people can afford to buy cars, parts and tools? (hint: very few of them are independently wealthy)

Personally, I find sponsored content much less intrusive and egregious than random YT ads for crisps and chocolate - and you'd have to be particularly dense to object to people being paid to make content you enjoy.

Edited by C70R on Tuesday 28th March 10:09

I fully understand how these things work but it does not stop it being bloody annoying.

In which case, I don't think you quite understand the expression "to jump on the/a bandwagon".

[Pommy]

ThomW said:

wpa1975 said:

I fully understand how these things work but it does not stop it being bloody annoying.

If it annoys you so much, don't watch. The free content you're getting for free.

If your user name gives a hint to your age, you're a couple fo years older than me, so you very much must remember when watching anything on ITV, Channel4 or Channel 5 when it launched (!!) meant you had to sit through adverts mid-way through. This is exactly the same.

There's a balance here where there's an argument that if the viewers don't like it, don't watch, or accept the ads as without them the creators wouldn't be able to do what they do. What's missing is that without the viewers then none of it exists. Asking viewers to put up with a saturation of adverts or don't watch is perhaps missing the point.

The horse has to come before the cart, not the other way around.

I have no issue with a YTer like Harry, Jayemm having channel sponsors. I am somewhat less enamoured by a YTer acting out a sincere seen how they like playing the latest mobile game or ball trimmers as if theyre doing us a favour by telling us about them.

Theres a balance to be achieved here where the experience isn't dominated by adverts.

[wpa1975]

Pommy said:

ThomW said:

wpa1975 said:

I fully understand how these things work but it does not stop it being bloody annoying.

If it annoys you so much, don't watch. The free content you're getting for free.

If your user name gives a hint to your age, you're a couple fo years older than me, so you very much must remember when watching anything on ITV, Channel4 or Channel 5 when it launched (!!) meant you had to sit through adverts mid-way through. This is exactly the same.

There's a balance here where there's an argument that if the viewers don't like it, don't watch, or accept the ads as without them the creators wouldn't be able to do what they do. What's missing is that without the viewers then none of it exists. Asking viewers to put up with a saturation of adverts or don't watch is perhaps missing the point.

The horse has to come before the cart, not the other way around.

I have no issue with a YTer like Harry, Jayemm having channel sponsors. I am somewhat less enamoured by a YTer acting out a sincere seen how they like playing the latest mobile game or ball trimmers as if theyre doing us a favour by telling us about them.

Theres a balance to be achieved here where the experience isn't dominated by adverts.

Thank you, sums up what I was trying to put across really well.

[C70R]

Pommy said:

ThomW said:

wpa1975 said:

I fully understand how these things work but it does not stop it being bloody annoying.

If it annoys you so much, don't watch. The free content you're getting for free.

If your user name gives a hint to your age, you're a couple fo years older than me, so you very much must remember when watching anything on ITV, Channel4 or Channel 5 when it launched (!!) meant you had to sit through adverts mid-way through. This is exactly the same.

There's a balance here where there's an argument that if the viewers don't like it, don't watch, or accept the ads as without them the creators wouldn't be able to do what they do. What's missing is that without the viewers then none of it exists. Asking viewers to put up with a saturation of adverts or don't watch is perhaps missing the point.

The horse has to come before the cart, not the other way around.

I have no issue with a YTer like Harry, Jayemm having channel sponsors. I am somewhat less enamoured by a YTer acting out a sincere seen how they like playing the latest mobile game or ball trimmers as if theyre doing us a favour by telling us about them.

Theres a balance to be achieved here where the experience isn't dominated by adverts.

So you're saying "I'll only accept YouTube creators making money when it doesn't interrupt my experience"?

That sounds pretty selfish.

You're going to be blown away when you find out how Harry Melcalfe makes money from JLR.

[Mezzanine]

Does Harry still work for JLR?

Thought that role had finished?

[Pommy]

C70R said:

Pommy said:

ThomW said:

wpa1975 said:

I fully understand how these things work but it does not stop it being bloody annoying.

If it annoys you so much, don't watch. The free content you're getting for free.

If your user name gives a hint to your age, you're a couple fo years older than me, so you very much must remember when watching anything on ITV, Channel4 or Channel 5 when it launched (!!) meant you had to sit through adverts mid-way through. This is exactly the same.

There's a balance here where there's an argument that if the viewers don't like it, don't watch, or accept the ads as without them the creators wouldn't be able to do what they do. What's missing is that without the viewers then none of it exists. Asking viewers to put up with a saturation of adverts or don't watch is perhaps missing the point.

The horse has to come before the cart, not the other way around.

I have no issue with a YTer like Harry, Jayemm having channel sponsors. I am somewhat less enamoured by a YTer acting out a sincere seen how they like playing the latest mobile game or ball trimmers as if theyre doing us a favour by telling us about them.

Theres a balance to be achieved here where the experience isn't dominated by adverts.

So you're saying "I'll only accept YouTube creators making money when it doesn't interrupt my experience"?

That sounds pretty selfish.

You're going to be blown away when you find out how Harry Melcalfe makes money from JLR.

So you're saying "viewers, who have a range of channel choice should tolerate an excessive amount of ads in order for this to be commercial viable for me even though it's an unenjoyable use of their precious time"?

That sounds pretty selfish.

You'll be blown away when you wonder why I'm not impressed with 6 adverts in a 15 minute video so the creator can buy another car for their £5m fleet.

[Doofus]

Mezzanine said:

Does Harry still work for JLR?

Thought that role had finished?

I did too.

[InitialDave]

Sweet Fantastic said:

Spends fortunes of other people’s money on automotive exotica but his clothes don’t fit and has a ten bob haircut …

I'm managing 2 out of 3.

[C70R]

Mezzanine said:

Does Harry still work for JLR?

Thought that role had finished?

As far as I'm aware, he remains a Consultant (i.e. ambassador) to JLR SVO, which is why there's a lot of their product on his channel in general. Four of his last 17 videos have featured JLR products. It doesn't bother me in the slightest, for what it's worth.

[SteveStrange]

ThomW said:

If it annoys you so much, don't watch. The free content you're getting for free.

Some of us actually pay for YT Premium. Just because you freeload, don't tar us all with the same brush.

[C70R]

Pommy said:

C70R said:

Pommy said:

ThomW said:

wpa1975 said:

I fully understand how these things work but it does not stop it being bloody annoying.

If it annoys you so much, don't watch. The free content you're getting for free.

If your user name gives a hint to your age, you're a couple fo years older than me, so you very much must remember when watching anything on ITV, Channel4 or Channel 5 when it launched (!!) meant you had to sit through adverts mid-way through. This is exactly the same.

There's a balance here where there's an argument that if the viewers don't like it, don't watch, or accept the ads as without them the creators wouldn't be able to do what they do. What's missing is that without the viewers then none of it exists. Asking viewers to put up with a saturation of adverts or don't watch is perhaps missing the point.

The horse has to come before the cart, not the other way around.

I have no issue with a YTer like Harry, Jayemm having channel sponsors. I am somewhat less enamoured by a YTer acting out a sincere seen how they like playing the latest mobile game or ball trimmers as if theyre doing us a favour by telling us about them.

Theres a balance to be achieved here where the experience isn't dominated by adverts.

So you're saying "I'll only accept YouTube creators making money when it doesn't interrupt my experience"?

That sounds pretty selfish.

You're going to be blown away when you find out how Harry Melcalfe makes money from JLR.

So you're saying "viewers, who have a range of channel choice should tolerate an excessive amount of ads in order for this to be commercial viable for me even though it's an unenjoyable use of their precious time"?

That sounds pretty selfish.

You'll be blown away when you wonder why I'm not impressed with 6 adverts in a 15 minute video so the creator can buy another car for their £5m fleet.

So you're presumably moaning about something you don't even watch, if you have such a "range of channel choice" and you struggle to "tolerate" a few ads?

And on this "range of channel choice", have you ever benchmarked YT against something like ITV or the Sky channels (although I suspect you're probably too "not impressed" by Sky's subscription cost to stomach it)?

Commercial TV is allowed up to 8min of ads in an hour. That's over 10% of the airtime dedicated to ads. I wonder how that stacks up against a few quick ads interrupting the 15min YouTube videos that you don't even watch?

[Pommy]

C70R said:

Pommy said:

C70R said:

Pommy said:

ThomW said:

wpa1975 said:

I fully understand how these things work but it does not stop it being bloody annoying.

If it annoys you so much, don't watch. The free content you're getting for free.

If your user name gives a hint to your age, you're a couple fo years older than me, so you very much must remember when watching anything on ITV, Channel4 or Channel 5 when it launched (!!) meant you had to sit through adverts mid-way through. This is exactly the same.

There's a balance here where there's an argument that if the viewers don't like it, don't watch, or accept the ads as without them the creators wouldn't be able to do what they do. What's missing is that without the viewers then none of it exists. Asking viewers to put up with a saturation of adverts or don't watch is perhaps missing the point.

The horse has to come before the cart, not the other way around.

I have no issue with a YTer like Harry, Jayemm having channel sponsors. I am somewhat less enamoured by a YTer acting out a sincere seen how they like playing the latest mobile game or ball trimmers as if theyre doing us a favour by telling us about them.

Theres a balance to be achieved here where the experience isn't dominated by adverts.

So you're saying "I'll only accept YouTube creators making money when it doesn't interrupt my experience"?

That sounds pretty selfish.

You're going to be blown away when you find out how Harry Melcalfe makes money from JLR.

So you're saying "viewers, who have a range of channel choice should tolerate an excessive amount of ads in order for this to be commercial viable for me even though it's an unenjoyable use of their precious time"?

That sounds pretty selfish.

You'll be blown away when you wonder why I'm not impressed with 6 adverts in a 15 minute video so the creator can buy another car for their £5m fleet.

So you're presumably moaning about something you don't even watch, if you have such a "range of channel choice" and you struggle to "tolerate" a few ads?

And on this "range of channel choice", have you ever benchmarked YT against something like ITV or the Sky channels (although I suspect you're probably too "not impressed" by Sky's subscription cost to stomach it)?

Commercial TV is allowed up to 8min of ads in an hour. That's over 10% of the airtime dedicated to ads. I wonder how that stacks up against a few quick ads interrupting the 15min YouTube videos that you don't even watch?

How does not tolerating excessive adverts suddenly transpose to you saying I struggle tolerate a few ads?

I said excessive adverts, I didn't say a few adverts.

I don't watch ITV or have Sky. I don't watch commercial tv. As you say, if you don't like it don't watch it.