Google Video Runs Ads & Shares the Profits

god4twenty writes "Google announced yesterday that they are testing ads on videos on the Google Video service, matching capabilities that other video services have had for a while. Up to now, Google Video uploaders could make their video available either for a fee or for free. The new ad-laced videos are available on Google Video's "free today" section. The new ads appear as banners above the video.

When the test concludes, Google plans to run auctions where advertisers bid to have their ads displayed on each video. The ad revenue will be split with the video owner. " Time for me to start collecting phat bank from the videos I have up there.

Comments

so...

[joe 155]

will this be a step closer to us getting free episodes of CSI/Lost etc. If they are going to have adverts why not put on stuff like that?

Re:so...

[ChrisGilliard]

will this be a step closer to us getting free episodes of CSI/Lost etc. If they are going to have adverts why not put on stuff like that?

Yeah, I really think this might mean we get most of our content free. Why? Well, because the distrubution cost is very low. Much lower than the cable companies distrubution costs (i.e. maintaining their networks). Also, imagine if you instantly had your content available accross the world (as opposed to just one country at a time). Shows could instantly be a hit world wide. Also, you have a single partner to deliver this content (Google). In fact, Google makes it so easy to upload anyone can do it. You don't have to be a big shot tv producer. If American Idol had 40 million viewers in the US, how many people around the world would have tuned in if it was easily accessible? Also, I believe Google has the capability to make much more ad revenue off of these shows than traditional tv ads. This is because they allow the allow a more direct marketing approach by giving click-thrus. On tv, it's mostly just image advertising. So, why charge for content when you can make so much with ad revenue. Pay-per-view content will still be around, but it will be highly specialized content that doesn't get a lot of viewers.

Re:so...

[Antemeridian]

The only problem with that, is a lot of companies aren't looking for worldwide ads for everything . . . then you end up with stuff like ads in English only, campaigns not always being global, etc.

Now, for some stuff it could work, like massive advertising for the World Cup (sponsors' ads along with highlights?), or if the technology expands out, with the big multinationals, being able to purchase the rights to a video, and run regional campaigns throughout their various markets.

Ads only in windowed mode

[spyrochaete]

You can double-click the video to view it fullscreen which hides the ads entirely. If you hit F11 most browsers switch to minimal mode which is a great way to watch episodes.

Re:Phat Bank

[carl0ski]

Can you make revenue by posting other's copyrighted work? Most of the videos I see on youtube or google video are ripped. No I did not read the article. Yet.

Since it clearly states the split the revenue with the Video owner they will fetch permission

  from the video ownerwhether it be ABC NBC or your home video.

If you grant permission they will stick an ad in your video and you get a profit,

else it gets no ad and you get no revenue.

The person who uploaded a Copyright protected video and claims revenue will easily be prosecuted since the money trail leads to them

and Google would have a non liability disclosure on their policy.

Revver.com

[seaotter02]

Revver has been doing this for some time already - just with much less intrusive ads. That diet coke and mentos experiment linked on Slashdot was using Revver and made over $20,000 for the creators in two weeks (according to various news reports).

Revver splits the ad revenue 50-50 with creators - or if there is a syndicator involved 20%(syndicator) - 40% (creator) - 40% (Revver).