/vt/ - Virtual Youtubers

[Anonymous No.]

thoughts on hololive setting up their own platform? is it suicide to leave youtube/ maintain own site?

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
yes

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
No

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
Maybe

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
maybe

[Anonymous No.]

The replies are unanimous.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
perhaps

[Anonymous No.]

you know you don't have to quote when you're the first posters..

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
Just do both. Keep all the YouTube stuff the same but have a site where you can post videos ect and maybe even stream stuff you don't want on YouTube such as some ASMR content and beach outfit stuff.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014257
yes

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014257
No

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
Yes it would be suicide to create their own site.
If they wanted to do something like that, they should all migrate to take over an extremely small site like openrec tv; and being the only people there actually popular, be able to essentially force the site owners to listen to them because they have no-one else.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
Honestly if they are really considering it they would do better just moving to twitch. The amount of money and infratstructure that goes into making a video streaming site would be far beyond their earnings, even for Cover.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014257
maybe

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014326
> JustinTV was literally built by a million dollar corporation
Ogey

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014232
>>16014222
>>16014200
I don't know.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014326
can you just fuck off twitchfag?
>>16014296
but why specifically is it suicide, do you think the base is unloyal to move platforms? the issue is that tourists vanish completely, but isnt the base large enough already?

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
It would make growing more difficult because it's "more hassle" to follow yet another website.
Not to mention the costs of creating a division in cover specifically for this site, the cost of the servers themselves and the need to keep them stable.
These costs would probably be higher than just giving Youtube their cut.
Cover will not be able to reach Youtube levels of stability and reliability without having as much resources as Youtube.
So it would do a lot more harm than good.
Not to mention Youtube works just fine and the Japanese aren't too fond of rocking a stable boat if they can help it.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
>no susan cut
>no cull
holochads.. i'm not sure we can handle winning this much..

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014389
Hey if you think they should move to mildom or something instead go ahead ans suggest and I'll tell you why it's equally retarded

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014398
i mean just from superchat alone, that youtube cut really feels juicy.
i think things like sponserships are being overlooked actually. it might be the key factor in why Cover stays with youtube

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014296
Microsoft tried that for DLive by buying Shroud and Ninja off from Twitch. It failed though as per Microsoft tradition as DLive shut down months later. If the platform that you recommend provides better services than Twitch and Youtube, then maybe more streamers will be open to the idea of considering either hosting streams there occasionally or migrate there completely.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014389
No, the suicide part is the costs of creating a streaming site, it working and not be an utter tech failure, and maintaining that site.
I think that a majority of the fanbase is loyal enough to move platforms, but they should all move over to an already existing, working, small streaming site and take it over that way by being the only popular streamers there, thus getting leverage power over the people who maintain the site as Hololive would draw the most clicks. Rather than create their own site from scratch and have to deal with the effects of it, if they just take over a site by all moving to openrec for example, when it potentially doesn't work out, they can back out super easily to youtube without having wasted money on creating a site. Creating a site themselves is very much self harm, if not suicide.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
For risque stuff that would get demonitized like the bikini outfits, sure.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014570
>DLive
I fucked up. I didn't check the name before typing this. It was Mixer. Not DLive. My bad.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014570
no one moved and no one cared because no one believed that the new site was anymore trustworthy than the old ones they knew.

[Anonymous No.]

whatever happened to NicoNico?

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
Moving wholesale would be a terrible but for multistreaming and or special streams it should be fine. They already do that with watch-a-longs on Twitch.

[Anonymous No.]

They going LTT floatplane route ?
Sign an agreement with niji and other, they might gonna make it

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014689
Garbage platform that requires having a niconico membership and essentially being Japanese to use properly along with the culture surrounding nico nico's streaming being rather infamous. I don't think anyone who streamed on nico nico wants to go back.

[Anonymous No.]

>a streaming site, entirely for vtubers, with a department specializing in getting permissions

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014563
It's really juicy, but it's less than the loss that would arise from setting up a site like this
You need
>a team to create and maintain the frontend website
>a team to create and maintain the backend
>a team to set up, monitor and maintain the servers 24/7
Remember that for streaming to be enjoyable servers need to operate without stuttering in real time, shit falls apart ALL THE TIME and only the really big tech companies have an uninterrupted up time so impressive that them being down for 5 minutes makes it to the news.
You'd end up with stutters, delays, overloads and an all around less enjoyable experience, which makes watching a stream far less enjoyable
>a team of community managers and moderators to look into abuse reports in comments which Youtube offers.
>a team to create and maintain the money exchange system
It needs to be effortless enough that it happens in maybe 2 clicks after the initial setup, the closer it is to an impulse decision the more SCs you get, which is difficult with something like paypal.
>professionals to work with stuff like regulations and laws that arise from maintaining a site like this

Oh, and you risk being DDOS'd which is virtually impossible with youtube.
Imagine if during Coco's Taiwan fiasco the chinks could also DDOS the server to the point it's unusable.

It's simply way too much for too little gain.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014563
Superchat isn't their biggest revenue stream and you have to ask whether that 30% will actually pay for an international streaming platform that's even technically comparable, before even talking about discoverability. The answer is probably not.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014803
This, if something like this were to be successful you would need all the major companies, and be open to receive all the indies n stuff.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
If they want to isolate themselves on their own platform and then bleed out of audience, then sure they can.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014632
>>16014857
Oh shit, an informative post on /vt/. Cheers anon.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
Yes, never underestimate how lazy people are to just click in another tab

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
An alternate site for swimsuits streams could be a good idea doe

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014924
Aren't they? Investors probably put more money on the table, but it's a one-time thing and not revenue in the first place. They get a respectable amount of sponsorship deals from various sources, but how much money does it represent? I don't think we have any way to even speculate reliably.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
Why not fully move twitcast? Most of them already do lewd stuff there

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014384
Can you repeat the question?

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
For general livestreaming? No, not a good idea and not worth losing the visibility.

For special events and other things? Yes, definitely. If they're smart, they would already be developing their own site for archival purposes and automatically push VODs to it, so if the banhammer ever comes that data won't be lost. As the platform develops they could do special event streams that wouldn't fly on YT.

Basically anything that would get those hags back into bikinis would be a good thing in the long run.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16015469
that sounds retarded and the other way around.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16015508

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014857
Don't forget things like a CDN. They'd need to set up infrastructure all over the world just to meet the basic requirement of things being watchable. A streaming platform that isn't servicing like 100 users has insane requirements on the infrastructure.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014857
Getting permissions would also be harder, I'd guess. "We stream on YouTube and sometimes Twitch" is different than "we stream on our personal platform".

[Anonymous No.]

>>16016009
Good one.
We take streaming for granted so much that it's easy to forget it's arguably the most demanding task the average users does on their computer or phone.
>>16016069
Also a good point.
If a label sees someone is using their song without credit on youtube they just send a request to youtube who will either demonetize it, monetize it in the label's favor instead of just outright block it.
That can only happen because Google has massive departments for such cases specifically and because labels and other entities trust Google to make good on these demands.
A (relatively) small company like Hololive would have to deal with lawyers or other such entities for every small infraction like that, real or otherwise.

Youtube works so well that the cut they take from superchat is honestly a bargain.

[Anonymous No.]

You forget that YT became big only by outliving all other streaming platforms. It's a money sink unless you got a megacorpo backing it forever.

[Anonymous No.]

big brain

[Anonymous No.]

Youtube can't even make money on its own fucking site, despite everything it has done over the years.
It was close to it, but the adpocalypse raped them hard.
This is a company that had the backing of Google, a fuckhuge company that had already been laying their own network outside of the internet and offload the bulk of Youtube to it and cache stuff locally. They save considerable bandwidth costs in doing this.
Yet still run it at a loss.
What the flying monkeys fuck to you think Cover are going to do? Summon a magic pixie to cough up several billion dollary doos?
There's a reason most other video sites are failures - they fucking suck.
If niconico douga never had seagulls for developers, maybe it wouldn't be ass and they could use that for general content instead of paid specials.
Youtube in general made the massive mistake of thinking "all free all the time" meant they could profit with ads. (Google in general)
Reality quickly caught up to them. Nobody by default should be able to watch anything over 720p for free. Boom, premium sales through the roof.
But they fucked it, and reversing it would be chaos, chaos the likes of Amazon would take advantage of and instantly spin-up a competitor using their already existing video platform but a public facing version of the site.

[Anonymous No.]

ITT armchair backend devs

no, it's not gonna happen
why? because growth would stop dead in a month when youtube runs out of recent shit to recommend to new people
why? because bandwidth isn't free, neither is hardware

>but muh cloud servers are cheap
and how would that be different?

[Anonymous No.]

>>16015383
You're not the boss of me now
You're not the boss of me now
You're not the boss of me now
And you're not so big

[Anonymous No.]

Why don't they just put their more risque content on there and charge a membership fee? Too make it better, how about they put all their member content there as well that isn't an unarchived karaoke so people can support all the chuubas without having to pick and choose but paying a somewhat premium monthly fee for it? Anything else stays on youtube.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014326
>Twitch
those assholes are more volatile than all of Pekora's traps
>you don't know WHEN you'll get banned and when you do, they'll tease the FUCK out of you in and out of suspension

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014275
yeah

[Anonymous No.]

Yes, this is a horrible idea.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014385
>Comparing then and now

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014326
Fuck off twitch faggot no one likes your aids site but zoomers and retards

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
Cover can barely afford new models for their talent, you think they can maintain an entire site?

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014846
they could easily take talents from there too

[Anonymous No.]

I always thought they should have their own platform or place to do streams that shitty jewtube won't allow. Like swimsuits...

[Anonymous No.]

depends how good their app will be, how good the servers will be and security. worst case they fail and go back to YouTube.

[Anonymous No.]

They could just put a foot into Twitch and leave it like that unless Youtube's AI goes full Ultron. Better to have alternatives and a place to run instead of relying on Susan's pajeets all the time.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
no, you dont know how big holodex traffic is

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014326
>Sorry Dr.Disrespect, we're banning you because you're simply earning too much, TEEHEE.

Nigga....

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
Definitely suicide
Most people use aggregate sites nowadays

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
It's suicide without a sufficient marketing, promotional and production budget. YouTube has a built in audience and automatically markets content to them. Even mainstream media is on YouTube for that reason. This also applies to any platform with a sufficient number of viewers and a mechanism for recommending popular/trending content.

With that said, having a website to mirror the content, have extra related content, and broadcast things that can't be shown on YouTube is a matter of course for those who can afford it. Tim Pool is an example of a content creator using this strategy, as he has a membership function on his website that unlocks additional premium content aired without concern for YouTube censors.

Personally, I don't even check YouTube recommendations anymore. At first I was getting right wing collectivist. Then I was getting left wing collectivists. Now it's back to right wing collectivists as well as dramaniggers like YEAH BOY and pajeet. The issue is that the content I watch is usually lolbertarian "fuck the government and get it off my lawn" fare or mgtow philosophy.

When they say YouTube is a rabbit hole that radicalized people, they're actually right. I'm so sick of all this tribalism and sports tier "owning the X" bullshit when it comes to matters of real world geopolitics that I just check bookmarks in my browser and don't even bother looking at YouTube's suggestions anymore. Mostly because (as a data point) watching Pokémon Unite and Vtubers but not the clips causes it to recommend me political dramaniggers shit from my other watched videos instead of just recommending me more entertaining entertainment like cartoons, comics, shorts, and other anime related videos.

The current YouTube algorithm seems to have gone from Hololive clips and animation related content filling every spot in my recommendeds to pushing politics during an election year. This seems to be the new algo meta, which makes sense given that YouTube moderation is highly politicized they're an American company, and it's an election year. I'd imagine the content they want to push now is outrage bait that'll make people angry, keep people watching and foment even more tribalist divisions to make it that much easier to divide and conquer.

tldr I'm probably an outlier, but my own subjective opinion is that 2022 is actually good year to have a personal platform that features and recommends only Hololive content in order to keep people engaged with vtubers rather than run the risk of staying on YouTube where people may get sidetracked by other types of content YouTube decides to push harder. Allowing non vtubing content to filter into someone's recs is suboptimal, and the ideal would be a closed ecosystem under Hololive's control that only ever mainlines Hololive content to viewers without any other unrelated distractions. YouTube doesn't care about Hololive. It doesn't care about vtubers. And it will holocaust videos as well as clothe your whores on a whim exactly because it's a political entity. Leaving the fate of hololive vtubers entirely in the hands of YouTube, Twitch or any other silicon valley entity was retarded from the start. It really was. And it's indicative of a fundamental lack of understanding of western content hosting paradigms.

Honestly, I shouldn't even need to say this. You'd think Hololive would've already hired someone less retarded than a shitposter to contribute this kind of perspective.

[Anonymous No.]

>>16033073
Do your reps, how much drama do you think rests on the doctor's shoulders when he was on Twitch? He admitted to committing adultery in a stream ffs. The man was a walking PR disaster in a time where Twitch had to cement themselves online.

[Anonymous No.]

Is not possible to just multistream?
just let the stream go to YT and Twitch

[Anonymous No.]

>>16014191
It's expensive and they have to make sure they get the right staff to run it. It's a risk for sure and I'm not sure how risk averse Cover is.

[Anonymous No.]

There's a reason why only Google and Amazon, which can afford to pour in massive amounts of money from their other businesses, have major live-streaming distribution sites.