Welcome to YouTube Ninja

YouTube-Top-20-Banner-1My Recent Tweets

How to Make Blue Torches in Minecraft - Soul Fire Torch Lantern plus Shr... youtu.be/UWlCfOLchBg via @YouTube

Yesterday from George Peirson's Twitter via Twitter Web Client

Articles and News

Some thoughts on getting YouTube Traffic

I was just responding to a post over at the Warrior Forum and I thought I would copy it here as well. The question was on how to get more traffic on YouTube:

Here are my basics.

You need to make sure you do the best YouTube SEO that you can. Including such forgotten items like the name of your video file, make sure the file name includes keywords.

Use a custom thumbnail and name that with your keywords as well.

Create a good SEO title based on other successful videos in your niche.

Do a long form description.

Don't put in a list of keywords in the description instead work the keywords into the text of the description, just like doing a successful blog post.

Put in the first comment a day or so after uploading your video. A thank you for watching comment always works.

Make sure you ask for subscribers atĀ  the end of the video, in the description, and in a comment.

Once you get above 1000 subscribers YouTube will begin to show your videos more frequently in the side bar.

Make sure you use your main keywords in the start of the video, Google transcribes the first minute or so of the video and will pull keywords from there if they find any.

Don't bother with purchased views, after all you want real views to respond to your call to action, purchased views never click on any links and never buy anything. Besides it is illegal on YouTube and they will shut down your channel if caught.

Lastly keep in mind that YouTube videos also show up well on Google. About 50% of my YouTube video views come from YouTube searches and the other 50% come from Google. So when you are doing your SEO keep Google in mind.

How Much can you make on YouTube?

This is a question I see asked over and over again on forums. To cut to the chase, for most people the quick answer is "not much". A successful channel can make several million dollars a year.

To really understand this we need to take a closer look at the question. First, where does the money come from on YouTube? Mostly from ads displayed around, before, and during videos. These videos can pay anywhere from 1 cent per 1000 ad views to $10 per 1000 add views and up. You will see ads to the right of videos in the side bar, at the start of videos, displayed along the bottom of videos, etc. These different ad positions pay different amounts. They also pay different amounts depending on how long the ad is displayed, if the whole ad is watched in the case of a video ad before the YouTube video, or if the ad is clicked on. So as you see there is a wide range of possibilities with display ad income from YouTube.

Most of the real money the different channels on YouTube is coming from web sites that the videos link to. Maybe they are linking into an affiliate or CPA offer. Maybe they are selling their own products like I do. So in this case YouTube is used as a traffic source instead of an income source, the YouTube ad income is just bonus money.

But back to how to figure out what kind of dollars you can make on YouTube I came across a very fun and informative video by ProfessorPuppet that has broken it down into a simple formula based upon some possibly wildly inaccurate assumptions. But there is no other way to do it, so at least it gives us something. I have embedded ProfessorPuppet's video at the end of this post if you care to watch.

Here is his formula:
views/1000 x .5 x $5 x 55% = estimated income

Breaking this down, you take the views from any video or channel, divide that by 1000 because YouTube pays based on $ paid per 1000 ad views. Then divide that in half (multiply by .5, this is an estimate to account for video ads not watched, viewing on mobile and the like). Then multiply by $5 which is just an average video payout, the multiply by 55% since YouTube takes 45% of the ad revenue.

When I tested this against my monthly video views and my YouTube ad revenue it came in at less than 1/2 of my actual numbers. So in my case if you dropped the .5 part it is closer. Again this is all based on assumptions and will vary widely.

In my case I make about 10+ times more from sales on my web site coming from links in my YouTube videos than the amount I am making from YouTube ads. Again YouTube is a great traffic source and the ad income is a nice bonus.

Here is the ProfessorPuppet video:


Google’s Restructuring – How It Affects YouTube


Alphabet logo

Google just announced that they will be restructuring their company under the new umbrella holding company Alphabet.

With this restructure Google will be splitting the one company up into many companies. The idea is that each new company will be able to better focus resources and energy on their main area and this should make for more efficiency overall.

The Google universe, under the Alphabet umbrella will be split up into these separate companies:

  • Google
  • Calico
  • Nest
  • Fiber
  • Google Ventures and Google Capital
  • Google X

Aside from the core Google company all of the other companies represent the different areas where Google has been working on expanding their influence and expertise. For instance Calico is going to pursue Google's research into anti-aging while Google X will handle such new technologies as the Google driverless car.

The largest of the companies will still be Google which will continue with search engines, marketing, ad services and the like. Also staying with Google will be other areas that depend on the Google search engine and Google marketing, namely YouTube and Android.

So even though this is a major shakeup in how Google is structured there should be no impact on day to day operations at either Google or YouTube. This should come as good news for the millions of YouTube video producers. Plus as a side benefit by spinning off the different areas from Google that really had very little to do with Google's core responsibilities it should allow Google to be more focused on doing what they do best.

In the end this restructuring should be seen as a positive action that will help Google to maintain their leadership position while still allowing the new Alphabet holding company and the owners of Google the freedom to expand into other markets.


YouTube competitor Vimeo removes several videos from site for using “Pixels” in title

Opinion Editorial

According to a DMCA complaint documented on ChillingEffects.org (https://www.chillingeffects.org/notices/11039982#) and reported on at CNET (http://www.cnet.com/news/videos-taken-down-from-vimeo-for-using-the-word-pixels/), the video hosting site Vimeo has removed several videos from their service just because the videos used the word "Pixels" in the title. This is based on a complaint from the production company for the film "Pixels", a poorly rated Adam Sandler movie. (17% splat on RottenTomatoes.com, http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/pixels/)

The videos removed included the short video that the film Pixels was based on along with several other videos that were posted on Vimeo years before the Pixels movie. It appears to me that the owners of these videos have a legitimate prior claim to the video title use of the word Pixels and could take legal action if they chose to. At the very least the removal of their videos from Vimeo is without merit and the videos should be returned to the site.

This action shows one of the problems with online video sites and unfortunately YouTube is not blameless in this regard. Video sites will usually honor DMCA copyright complaints without looking into the matter and will remove videos and even delete accounts without any attempt at verifying the legitimacy of the complaint. In the Pixels complaint it is patently obvious that videos uploaded years before the film Pixels was made clearly don't infringe on the film's rights. If anything the film Pixels is infringing on the other videos use of the word Pixels.

When the Batman film franchise was first rebooted with Michael Keaton playing Batman it is understandable that Warner Brothers would try to stop people from usingĀ  Batman imagery and references to the 1960's TV show. First they owned the Batman name, image, etc. and secondly they were trying to change the look and direction of the product. This included forcing a bar near here to change its name from Gotham City and banning Adam West and Burt Ward from wearing any part of their costumes from the 60's TV show at fan conventions. (I got this last part first hand as I was working for Burt Ward at the time on a TV pilot project he was doing).

But in the Pixels case the word is simply the plural form of a public domain common usage word and has been in use since the mid 1960's. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pixel). The only infringement here would be for uses of the word pixels that were trying to create a false impression of a link to or association with the movie Pixels. As far as I can see none of the videos removed by Vimeo fit this case.

All I can say is I hope that the owners of the videos that have been removed fight this action by Vimeo. As for the rest of us, I guess copyright infringement really means the company with the most money, the biggest name, and the best lawyers own the copyright. Doesn't matter whether or not it will hold up in court. YouTube is better about allowing Fair Use of content on their site, but if a company files a DCMA complaint with YouTube their first action is also to simply remove the video without researching the claim fully.

Here are some prior films with the use of the word Pixels in the title:

Pixels and Static (2009) - available on Amazon Prime
Legion: From Pixels to Picture (2010) - available on Amazon Prime

Looks to me like the makers of both of these films can go after the makers of Pixels for copyright infringement.

All of the above of course are only my opinions on the matter and I have written extensively in the past on video related forums about why you should never use copyrighted material in your videos unless you own the copyright or have received written permission. But actions like the above I consider attempts to steal copyrights from legitimate holders or users, or in this case an attempt to create a copyright or trademark half a century after the word entered common usage.

Unfortunately as shown above, even using common use words in our titles can sometimes get our videos removed from video sites.


Cracks in the cable business send media stocks tumbling – YouTube Viewers should go up

"Cracks in the cable business send media stocks tumbling"

This is the headline from the Washington Post on Aug 7, 2015. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/cracks-in-the-cable-business-send-media-stocks-tumbling/2015/08/07/bc0ceacc-3d38-11e5-8e98-115a3cf7d7ae_story.html)

Basically media stocks took a large hit this week with companies like Disney losing 9 percent of their value and Viacom dropping 20 percent. Why the huge drop? Because people are "cutting the cable" and moving to online solutions for watching video. High up on the list are cable cutting services like Hulu, Netflix, and Amazon Prime, but also in the mix are video sharing sites like YouTube an Dailymotion.

The upshot is that people are looking more than ever to internet sources for watching movies, TV shows, and other video. In other words there should be more viewers than ever on YouTube. And this means more opportunities than ever to use YouTube as a revenue source. So, bad news for the major cable outlets, good news for YouTube producers.

Check the Washington Post article out. It points to several important factors to keep in mind as you build your YouTube channel.