[^_^] replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 58 minutes after the original post[^][v]#87,847
@previous (The Owl !KThEOwLwbU)
I don't/ I'm a newfag.
Syntax joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 26 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#87,852
Rumor mill only at other NOCs of SP's --- The hard nose change of rules on Race and Hate may have come to late. Advertisers run from that form of content super fast, even faster then a little bit of porn. Just before ED moved "away" I ran a through activity search on ED vs 4Chan - About one dozen factors and one thing stood out. Both were about equal in Net ranking - varied month by month widely but in general they at times were neck and neck.
Now I have no idea what Sherrod paid by the month but just about everyone remembers when Moot published his costs and that was some time back when the costs were lower. Everyone knows he was deep in debt and just made it each time on pleas for help.
4Chan reminds me of what happened at the infamous .com bust years ago when ad revenue for all web sites dropped off the map. Currently that fall off vs economy is no where near as bad, but if advertisers run from you? Very bad because you never get them back.
You all did notice how Moot had venture capitol for his new venture and how it should be 100% advertiser friendly. No clue if it will succeed, nor could I ever imagine Flicker ending up as VALUABLE! I sure was wrong on that one.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 26 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#87,870
@previous (Syntax)
Well no one could imagine youtube as valuable...and it's still not.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 15 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#87,884
@previous (H)
Do you have any idea how much money Google makes from ad revenue on Youtube?
Anonymous H replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#87,887
Syntax replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#87,889
@87,870 (H)
LOL and you may actually be correct re direct income derived from the Tube vs the HUGE cost it takes to keep it going. I know the co-founder on a personal basis re Bianca.com where he was sorta stealth - not really down the road. B4 Google came in to help they were at point of collapse real fast. Last I looked and you can too, pull up the 10K report for Google where they do break down operating costs of Tube. I bet its still on edge re money making or even less then.
What it now has is pissing off Bing cause of what Bing depends on lol with no possible revenue when tube is pulled up off of Bing nor can Bing figure a way to do the same thing NOW - 2Late to party
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 17 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#87,907