• Zagorath@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Well, there is Nebula, which is kinda like that. But most of them also put their videos on YouTube, using Nebula as the premium ad-free option with a little bonus content.

    • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      51 minutes ago

      I’m worried about Nebula’s business model being profitable enough to be sustainable in the long term but given their business model includes making every creator on the platform a part-owner of the platform that does limit how bad things can get

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        33 minutes ago

        From everything I’ve heard, they’re already profitable, and are explicitly choosing only to grow in a sustainable way, without taking on outside investment which could force them into enshittifying down the line. With a relative lack of need to show extreme growth, and a lack of reliance on outside factors like advertising (being subscription-based), the only major risk that I can see for them long-term is user churn. Which is definitely a risk, but with the ever-creeping growth of the range of content they have and (at least for now) an attitude of being customer-friendly, churn seems a relatively low risk.

        As far as I can see, at worst, the platform dies if the YouTube channels of the people on the platform die because of the YouTube algorithm, and they get bad churn (with fewer new subscribers because of the aforementioned dead YouTube channels at the top of the funnel), and they don’t get new more successful channels on before that happens. A scenario that’s far from unlikely, but which I would describe as “catastrophic, whether or not Nebula exists today”, so its existence for now as a hedge against more likely bad scenarios is still worthwhile.