RE: Pay per view: PH Blog
Discussion
If someone is a car nut, then this would make a great gift - £25 on a year subsciption (providing vidoes are frequent!) is good value IMO, particularly for Drive since the production quality is so high
I think Chris sold his argument pretty well; blankly put, we've all got to get our wages from somewhere, and the traditional youtube method was not really raking in the money (how quickly are the veiws ammased?)
I think Chris sold his argument pretty well; blankly put, we've all got to get our wages from somewhere, and the traditional youtube method was not really raking in the money (how quickly are the veiws ammased?)
From the comments it seems I'm not the only one who would rather they release a DRIVE+CHRISHARRISONLY channel? I'd happily pay £25 for just Chris' videos but not the other stuff they release. In fact, I'd happily pay £100+ a year if there was a consistent stream of CH only videos - say 4 a month as a minimum.
Joe911 said:
That's the key thing for me - I always waited on a Weds for Chris's skidz, which is great - but I'd want more out of it than just that.
Some of the other stuff was cool, love Spinelli, and Michelle's OK.
A couple of 7 min vids per week is pretty marginal.
Be great to have 60 mins per week. I have no problem with paying - but I want to pay for something relatively substantial.
It doesn't all have to be on location - some studio Q&A's, interviews, etc. - presumably much cheaper to produce.
Agree - don't mind paying for a resonable amount of good quality content Some of the other stuff was cool, love Spinelli, and Michelle's OK.
A couple of 7 min vids per week is pretty marginal.
Be great to have 60 mins per week. I have no problem with paying - but I want to pay for something relatively substantial.
It doesn't all have to be on location - some studio Q&A's, interviews, etc. - presumably much cheaper to produce.
TVRinBFG said:
Chris - I really love your videos but there is too much free content out there to watch, so I wouldn't sign up.
I understand that the F40/F50 video at Angelsey cost £9,000 to shoot, and so far has had two million views, grossing just £4,800. But presumably the number of views will continue to grow and eventually like the McLaren P1 video will racked up over 3.6 million; and so eventually be in profit? And then, as you say, cheap to make videos like the McLaren one, make a profit for the expensive to make ones like the F40/F50?
Good luck with the new venture though.
Edited to add: You make brilliant films Chris, I am sure the BBC/ITV/C4/C5 etc will be calling on you soon.
They won't be calling anytime soon, see fifth gears fate for that, ex top gear staff and a proper budget and it still tanked. People saying its the same as buying a magazine, no it's not, we already pay for a pad/laptop/phone, and then for internet access, you are then asking for us to subsidise your business model effectively. It's you tube which is the problem, they should nurture businesses that are getting high views, and then drag off the corresponding adverts that will follow. Maybe if its free force the viewer to sit through 3 minutes of adverts like itv player does. A fair trade off. I understand that the F40/F50 video at Angelsey cost £9,000 to shoot, and so far has had two million views, grossing just £4,800. But presumably the number of views will continue to grow and eventually like the McLaren P1 video will racked up over 3.6 million; and so eventually be in profit? And then, as you say, cheap to make videos like the McLaren one, make a profit for the expensive to make ones like the F40/F50?
Good luck with the new venture though.
Edited to add: You make brilliant films Chris, I am sure the BBC/ITV/C4/C5 etc will be calling on you soon.
Edited by TVRinBFG on Wednesday 30th July 13:36
Let's face it, most peiple are tight, car magazines were the only outlet we got years ago, but in a recession, (compared to the boom), you may just have to admit it won't work and most will carry on expecting free content.
Muzzer79 said:
mike-r said:
VladD said:
b14 said:
Chris, I love your videos, and will probably subscribe (depending on price), but it's difficult for me to reconcile this with all the stories about your many expensive cars - leases on FFs, shiny Range Rovers, M3 rally cars, 2CVs, M5s, 512TRs, etc etc.
I know, you aren't going to personally fund the Drive videos and I get that, but you many need to manage this perception in order to avoid a negative view on this story.
I have to disagree here. Chris's personal situation is irrelevant. Being a motoring journalist is his job and his living. He's not going to do all of this at a loss just to keep the viewers happy. We don't expect to get Evo magzine free because some of the employees own supercars. Same thing in my opinion.I know, you aren't going to personally fund the Drive videos and I get that, but you many need to manage this perception in order to avoid a negative view on this story.
Good luck Chris, I hope it goes well.
I find this attitude stunning. A video costs what it costs to make. Those costs need to be recovered and if charging for it is the only way, those who want to watch will need to fork out.
To suggest that it should be cheaper/free because the host has a few quid is nuts.
Good luck Chris, it'll be tough as the terms by youtube seem hard but they did fund you for two years so swings & roundabouts.
VFM doesn't seem so good all considered.
There is too much good content for free elsewhere.
If you do charge then the quality is going to have to step up another notch imo for it to be even considered. People are gonna expect TG quality video editing/creativity while also getting much better audio.
For me I'd prefer actual in-depth technical reviews, not just pub banter type technical reviews.
Imo it's premature to take it to paid only before it's already "paid for" quality already.
Ie, while you're at it flying to XYZ location with cameras, people and flashy cars, then there is scope for making a lot more content out of the trip.
Just driving a car is great, but what about something more along the lines of the paid for videos from Best Motoring where they have the fun driving part, a verbal review, some empirical considerations, a look around the car from a technical and also visual perspective.
While you're investing £££ in travel/gear/salaries, shoot more content while you're there and make more videos to cater to a wider market.
Dave
There is too much good content for free elsewhere.
If you do charge then the quality is going to have to step up another notch imo for it to be even considered. People are gonna expect TG quality video editing/creativity while also getting much better audio.
For me I'd prefer actual in-depth technical reviews, not just pub banter type technical reviews.
Imo it's premature to take it to paid only before it's already "paid for" quality already.
Ie, while you're at it flying to XYZ location with cameras, people and flashy cars, then there is scope for making a lot more content out of the trip.
Just driving a car is great, but what about something more along the lines of the paid for videos from Best Motoring where they have the fun driving part, a verbal review, some empirical considerations, a look around the car from a technical and also visual perspective.
While you're investing £££ in travel/gear/salaries, shoot more content while you're there and make more videos to cater to a wider market.
Dave
I think a tier system would work well with Drive. Even if it was donation like radiolab.org - X amount (on top of the subscription) gets you exclusives/newsletter/merch/high resolution photos. However I think the website needs more content for that to work.
Need any help with anything at all - adamharbin.ca
And If you ever come near Cape Breton, Canada - I grew up not far from these roads and am still pretty close:
Need any help with anything at all - adamharbin.ca
And If you ever come near Cape Breton, Canada - I grew up not far from these roads and am still pretty close:
I really don't care about how the latest supercars drift, which £100000 saloon is fastest what being a rich semi-pro race driver is like. I'm sure Harris is quite good at it but I find most of his videos on new cars extremely dull as they are invariably about cars I (and realistically 99% of people) could never attain being driven in a way which would get you arrested on the road and disqualified from a track day. The enthusiasm and knowledge comes through but for me the content is just too irrelevant to be interesting. If there are enough people who are interested enough in watching this stuff to pay then good luck to him, seems a pretty good way to earn a living. I am much more interested in affordable cars, classics, real life driving and comedy challenges using cars in ways they were really not intended for so I shall have to get my automotive video fix elsewhere.
I think mostly the same thing about Top Gear, I don't care about the latest Ferrari or Bentley test etc etc, I skip through those parts. I love the cheap car challenges, the crazy journeys in unsuitable cars and the various comedic stunts and ideas that create amusement and enjoyment from everyday attainable cars.
I think mostly the same thing about Top Gear, I don't care about the latest Ferrari or Bentley test etc etc, I skip through those parts. I love the cheap car challenges, the crazy journeys in unsuitable cars and the various comedic stunts and ideas that create amusement and enjoyment from everyday attainable cars.
mike-r said:
VladD said:
b14 said:
Chris, I love your videos, and will probably subscribe (depending on price), but it's difficult for me to reconcile this with all the stories about your many expensive cars - leases on FFs, shiny Range Rovers, M3 rally cars, 2CVs, M5s, 512TRs, etc etc.
I know, you aren't going to personally fund the Drive videos and I get that, but you many need to manage this perception in order to avoid a negative view on this story.
I have to disagree here. Chris's personal situation is irrelevant. Being a motoring journalist is his job and his living. He's not going to do all of this at a loss just to keep the viewers happy. We don't expect to get Evo magzine free because some of the employees own supercars. Same thing in my opinion.I know, you aren't going to personally fund the Drive videos and I get that, but you many need to manage this perception in order to avoid a negative view on this story.
Good luck Chris, I hope it goes well.
Also, people talking about it being ad-free... Will it? No more pop ups, forced ads at the beginning of each feature etc? Having to pay so someone can advertise at you sucks.
Out of interest (and not because I think I could even get close) what sort of cameras are they using for the likes of Magnus Walker's and Drive's videos? I occasionally daydream about shooting some footage driving around London at night, but I assume getting anything close to their quality is beyond the amateur?
Second, does anyone here subscribes to some of the Porsche magazines on Apple's newsstand app?
Second, does anyone here subscribes to some of the Porsche magazines on Apple's newsstand app?
OK, I went to /DRIVE+ at the youtube but it says "This paid channel is unavailable in your country". Now it is true I am currently in Bulgaria, but most of the year I live in the Netherlands and couple pages ago I saw somebody say that subscription out of Holland is also impossible. Is that true? Is it available only in the UK and only with a credit card? Because if it is then even though I want to pay I can't.
Chris, to make this work you need to make it easy for people to give you their money (e.g. the Dutch have this iDeal system that uses debit cards instead of credit cards), and on top of that make it clear what they are getting. Maybe make a video (a free one) explaining the whole thing in greater detail.
Chris, to make this work you need to make it easy for people to give you their money (e.g. the Dutch have this iDeal system that uses debit cards instead of credit cards), and on top of that make it clear what they are getting. Maybe make a video (a free one) explaining the whole thing in greater detail.
Ask The Times how their paywall is going...
Netflix gives me hundreds of films, thousands of TV programmes including highly-acclaimed original content for £6/mo
Google Play Music (or Spotify) etc. gives me millions of songs, a large percentage of everything that's ever been recorded, for £10/mo
DRIVE will be £2.49/mo?
Hmmm.
Yes, it's cheaper than a pint, a magazine (not that I've bought any of them for years) and not much to ask considering the quality is usually very good, but at $1/€1/69p a month it would be a 'sign-up and forget' whereas at £2.49 it makes me think about it.
1.3m subscribers - what will the conversion rate be? Not much, I'd bet.
1% pay £2.49 = £32k/mo
3% pay £1 = £39k/mo
Except I bet it would be easier to retain/add to subscriber numbers at the lower price. Plus the fact that you need sufficient subscribers to create enough 'buzz' to ensure links are shared and enough interest generated to pull in new subscribers, otherwise you watch the subs and revenue dwindle.
Don't mean to suggest the DRIVE team haven't thought this through properly, I'm sure they've run many different scenarios, but it doesn't feel like this is the long term solution.
Can't help but feel YouTube are missing a trick here. They've bankrolled what has turned out to be a well-respected brand and are happy now to see it wither or reduce in scope? They should perhaps insist on a paid, but shared, subscription account to view channel like DRIVE?
I lodge funds with YouTube - say, £10 minimum - and then videos that require paid subs come off at a pay-per-play rate that is set by the channel. Allows free videos, discounts via promotion/clickthrough etc. and provides wallet-backed feedback on their videos' popularity.
That way whensome furry channel another channel with interesting content pops up I'm not being asked to pony up £2.49/mo again just to see if it is any good.
While I'm sure YouTube would like me to have 10+ subscriptions, at these rates that would be getting on for a Sky subscription!
And what about Haymarket? There's a lot of trust in the DRIVE brand, they already have CH on board, why don't they stick some (more?) cash behind it and co-opt the branding/promotion?
Netflix gives me hundreds of films, thousands of TV programmes including highly-acclaimed original content for £6/mo
Google Play Music (or Spotify) etc. gives me millions of songs, a large percentage of everything that's ever been recorded, for £10/mo
DRIVE will be £2.49/mo?
Hmmm.
Yes, it's cheaper than a pint, a magazine (not that I've bought any of them for years) and not much to ask considering the quality is usually very good, but at $1/€1/69p a month it would be a 'sign-up and forget' whereas at £2.49 it makes me think about it.
1.3m subscribers - what will the conversion rate be? Not much, I'd bet.
1% pay £2.49 = £32k/mo
3% pay £1 = £39k/mo
Except I bet it would be easier to retain/add to subscriber numbers at the lower price. Plus the fact that you need sufficient subscribers to create enough 'buzz' to ensure links are shared and enough interest generated to pull in new subscribers, otherwise you watch the subs and revenue dwindle.
Don't mean to suggest the DRIVE team haven't thought this through properly, I'm sure they've run many different scenarios, but it doesn't feel like this is the long term solution.
Can't help but feel YouTube are missing a trick here. They've bankrolled what has turned out to be a well-respected brand and are happy now to see it wither or reduce in scope? They should perhaps insist on a paid, but shared, subscription account to view channel like DRIVE?
I lodge funds with YouTube - say, £10 minimum - and then videos that require paid subs come off at a pay-per-play rate that is set by the channel. Allows free videos, discounts via promotion/clickthrough etc. and provides wallet-backed feedback on their videos' popularity.
That way when
While I'm sure YouTube would like me to have 10+ subscriptions, at these rates that would be getting on for a Sky subscription!
And what about Haymarket? There's a lot of trust in the DRIVE brand, they already have CH on board, why don't they stick some (more?) cash behind it and co-opt the branding/promotion?
Price shouldn't be the issue and as many have said it is affordable for most people.
The only thing that will entice subscribers is content both in quality and quantity. For every great 10 minute video of CH on Cars or Big Muscle there is an hour of Leo Perente reading an auto queue like he wants to chew it and the chair he's sitting in. That stuff I can do without and if that's taking up 50% of the subscription it'll be a waste of money. Tuned, Big Muscle, Inside Bentley, Drive Clean, CH on cars were all very well put together but those shows - which is what they need to be now, not just 10 or 15 minute features - have to be either longer or just more of them to justify the cost. That's the only way they can live up to the price in my eyes.
I wish them well but it'll all rest on what the first two week trial brings up and also a list of what is to come once people have to start paying. Subscribers need to see they are paying to watch things that are coming up, not funding stuff they want to make, if that makes sense.
The only thing that will entice subscribers is content both in quality and quantity. For every great 10 minute video of CH on Cars or Big Muscle there is an hour of Leo Perente reading an auto queue like he wants to chew it and the chair he's sitting in. That stuff I can do without and if that's taking up 50% of the subscription it'll be a waste of money. Tuned, Big Muscle, Inside Bentley, Drive Clean, CH on cars were all very well put together but those shows - which is what they need to be now, not just 10 or 15 minute features - have to be either longer or just more of them to justify the cost. That's the only way they can live up to the price in my eyes.
I wish them well but it'll all rest on what the first two week trial brings up and also a list of what is to come once people have to start paying. Subscribers need to see they are paying to watch things that are coming up, not funding stuff they want to make, if that makes sense.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff