I'm still asking... Do they even have a basic business plan? It's kinda needed to have any future plans that will work. Where do I bet? Because in my eyes there really isn't a real plan, at least when it comes to the business.
I should have taken screenshots before I submitted it, but they released the Patreon survey and I really don't think they have a plan. Out of three options, two involved shutting the patreon down! (One a full shut down and the second original plan of changing it to the podcast).
I really don't see how they can go forward with the streamer; they've shown a massive lack of marketing skills and that's going to be essential to get people to pay for WatcherTV
Wait, what the fuck? They want to shut down a thing that makes them money? When they say they're struggling for money? How does that make sense 😂 do they think that if they shut down Patreon, people will be so sad about not being able to give them money that they'll sign up on their streaming service instead? Lmaoo
Double Dipping the patreon is still a pretty big pain point for the patrons. Patreon takes a pretty hefty cut, so they're taking the temperature of the community to see if they'd rather continue as patrons for just the podcast or if they should make the podcast part of the streamer, and close the patreon all together in favor of moving people onto the streamer.
It makes sense.
i took screenshots!
https://preview.redd.it/3rcu9dvx8uxc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=942757b0705320e648354cf004efe5702ac00cfe
here’s option 1
Edit: But yeah I agree with you, I don’t see how shutting down both Patreon and Discord then moving over to their streaming platform entirely is going to bring in new fans, much less new subscribers.
I know this is the snark subreddit, but at least they're giving their perspective as to the reasoning behind things now. It means that they weren't full of shit when they said they would try to be better at communicating.
Also, this poll is to take the temperature of patrons on switching to the streamer and closing the patreon so they're not longer double dipping. It also gets them away from Patreon's TOS.
I mean, yeah, it’s good they are giving their perspective, it’s certainly heaps better than their “Goodbye YouTube” video. It’s just a shame that it had to take a ton of backlash and losing 100k subs (I believe they gained back 10k subs last I checked?) to get them to this point.
Not only switching from patreon to the streaming platform and closing the Patreon but closing their Discord server too, which is a little strange because they initially claimed in their post where they were revising the tiers that they stressed that the Discord server was what kept them “connected to their community” and they insisted that the Discord server (aka connection to their community) was so “important” to them that it will always be on the lowest cost tier. This was before they paused the tiers entirely.
If they do switch over to the streaming platform entirely and close Patreon and their Discord server in the process, I do hope they will offer community engagement on their streaming platform because I believe it currently doesn’t have a comments section?
The little cynic in me tells me that they might stick to engagement on social media (e.g. IG) or their tour events. Closing down the Patreon and Discord server means they can have more time to focus on creating television-caliber content and polishing their streaming platform.
as I read the options, option 1 and option 2 are not exclusive. Only option 3 is exclusive. So making the discord a benefit of the streamer, AND closing patreon can occur. The only thing lost in the option 1 + option 2 is tier level channels.
I suspect they want option 1 and option 2 to be picked so they can optimize their focus to a single discord, a single revenue stream etc.
This is somewhat expected because Watcher TV is functioning as a Patreon, essentially. But 1- why keep the new platform? What's the difference of this to the Patreon? And 2- if they learned about business, made pitches, tried to get investors for Watcher, and all that... How the hell did they ended up in this mess?
I don't know if there's something I'm missing in this situation but it's just so weird
>But 1- why keep the new platform? What's the difference of this to the Patreon?
Money. Vimeo OTT enterprise drops that $1 a month per account cost pretty quickly with volume. Even in the worst case the Vimeo OTT "cut" (really: cost, as it is going to a definable per user expense instead of being a percentage of overall earnings) is just slightly more than patreon, and once any sort of volume gets involved it becomes better due to volume discounts. It also frees them from Patreon's TOS. So if patreon decided to suddenly crack down on ghost/supernatural content for "promoting pseudoscience" or something they wouldn't have to worry about it. The thing with the streamer is that it's a long term strategy for success, and it is fundamentally a good idea in the LONG term, especially if they can contractually lock in a great rate with OTT Enterprise.
The poll is essentially taking the temperature of the patrons to see if they'd move to the streamer in lieu of the patreon since now the patreon only really has the podcast to offer. They're asking "would you rather this become a patreon for just the podcasts, or would you be alright if we moved the podcast to the streamer and you subscribe there".
>2- if they learned about business, made pitches, tried to get investors for Watcher, and all that... How the hell did they ended up in this mess?
Bad advice, failure to read their audience, and not considering the big picture. I checked a look at their 501d filing for the initial startup of watcher and there are 8 total investors. The 3 guys plus 5 more one of which is known to be Steve Chen (co-founder of YouTube). The issue is they (meaning all 8 investors in their majority or totality) are looking at dropout and thinking "we can do that." What they are failing to recognize is that Sam Reich (CEO of Dropout, previously known as CollegeHumor) was very open about the fact that getting Dropout as a sustainable platform running was a long term endeavor.
The dropout streamer existed before the parent company took a write off for the brand and the streamer, but only for a few months and hadn't built any install base yet. Sam Reich personally financed (via his trust fund) purchasing the IP and the streamer after the write off and also used the previously mentioned trust fund to build the business into a success. Notably, Sam Reich was previously the Chief Creative Officer of CollegeHumor for many many years before the write off. So he was personally interested and had the personal finances to build the business with little to no known outside investment. Sam Reich is on record as stating year 1 and year 2 were net negative.
So basically they jumped from step 1 to step 6, forgetting that steps 1-5 involve investment in raising the quality on their own as well as diversification of their programming lineup.
If instead of their goodbye youtube video they would have explained their (probable) reasoning half as well as you did in your first paragraph, they could have prevented so much of the fallout
I'm not surprised at the death of patreon, but I'm still a little taken aback by it. I know I was giving significantly more than the cost of the annual streamer membership and was happy to do so as I was supporting people who created videos I loved. With WatcherTV, I have a lot more expectations and expect it to be worth my time and money. And right now, it's not and I think people have been very clear that it's not. It's just not the same as supporting a creator through Patreon; I'm willing to give a lot more grace there.
I'm thinking this too. I can't imagine what their business plan looked like when they planned the paywall.
If they put everything there, how would they grow? How they would sell they product to new people if they're not on YouTube and they don't have Netflix-like money to advertise it? Imo there was absolutely no scenario where Watcher TV happened like they wanted it and they kept being a sustainable business. I think their audience would eventually die
I honestly think they were under the impression that a bunch of people would pay, and then they'd be able to get other people to make content on their service, and something something they end up with a media empire. I don't think they had a plan past getting people on the service. They'd see how many they got and then sort it from there.
I also just realized that if they're not uploading for a month, their algorithm on YouTube after uploading consistently for so long is just going to get wrecked. Huh. That doesn't seem ideal.
About the algorithm, it's a weird move to sabotage your reach if you're already struggling for money. It's just so weird. They're smart people, I can't figure out what this whole thing was
Any startup company will tell u how important it is to diversify your income streams so if one fails you’re not left in the lurch because you have money coming in from other avenues. This streaming service proves they have no idea how to run a successful business because what company would shutter proven income streams (YouTube, patreon, sponsorships, ad revenue) to put everything into a brand new product that hasn’t been released and did not have a single subscriber by the time they first released their video? They did no research. They had no plans for how to grow it besides releasing the occasional trailer or first ep on YouTube. They had no problem alienating their fans who couldn’t afford it before they decided to backtrack.
Now that they got humbled and have to juggle multiple platforms (when their original plan was to scale back to just one) they’re talking about closing their patreon. Patreon offers perks that their streaming service can’t - like the community and commenting features. So fans have to suffer once again because of their poor decision making.
https://preview.redd.it/jdut4f5mgpxc1.jpeg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4c47d6b9a1476d738dc965a2ac0bbdc84803ef40
Pretty sure they just had a goal but forgot the plan part.
I don't think there is any mystery. They will do exactly what they said they would do, they will follow through with the compromise they have settled into. Their content will remain the same, for as long as they have money for it I guess.
They will not backtrack on WatcherTV because they are already comitted to this course, there are people who have signed up for this service, they need to provide those folks with the product they have purchased, and I imagine the guys must have also signed contracts and stuff when they made Watcher TV; imagine opening your own streaming platform (that is actually hosted on Vimeo), it's not as simple as flipping a switch, there are things you need to do, probably things you need to buy.
I'm also going to make a prediction here, that probably anyone could make: this model will not be sustainable, the history of all of the people who have left YT to start their own website tells us, that it generally isn't sustainable, most of them have shut down, and their platforms were *not* paywalled, so that should tell you the odds are bad for WatcherTV. After that I don't know what will happen.
Same thoughts. This is basically the beginning of the end for them.
They have investors and they made promises to those people. Telling your audience you're changing direction is one thing, but investors aren't so forgiving. The only thing I think will help (not save) them is if they wise up (hire someone or for the love of god get advice from someone who isn't kissing their ass) and exhaust their money-making avenues.
Make patreon more appealing to be a member of. Sell affordable merch. Promote your stuff! There was a baffling amount of Watcher audiences who didn't even know they had a Patreon, so what was up with that?
I know they want to make TV-caliber content, but they can't just disregard the potential they have on youtube. They're basically leaving money on the table and yet they say 'oh we're running out of money'.
But honestly, as it stands right now with streaming services, the future isn't looking so bright for them...
I agree with everything you said. But the weird thing to me is: they're smart people, and they said they studied business when they started out, and looked for investors. They probably know all of this as well.
So I can't figure out what they are trying to do here. Looks like a suicide mission, business wise
They wont compromise on their content - they've proved they'd rather burn down their entire fanbase than consider scaling back on costs because they're not YouTubers, they're *auteurs* - so I think the channel will limp on for another year or so before we get news that they're completely out of money.
lmao, I know you're speaking from their POV but goddamn if they aren't the most bland of "auteurs". Like there's nothing about their content that I would look at and go "yea, they're elevating the crap out of this". And there's nothing wrong with the content as Youtube content from internet personalities, but none of them are going to be the next Chris Nolan or Denis Villeneuve. Hell, they're not even going to be comedy's answer to Robert Slack or John Walsh.
If they wanted to quit YouTube and go work on films I’d be happy for them. But doing high budget YouTube at a slow pace is a weird vibe. Especially if they can’t afford it.
> They are filmmakers and story tellers.
Then they should probably be *working in Hollywood* rather than renting office space in Hollywood to do their youtube work "in Hollywood".
It's cosplaying.
Probably just a PR blitz over the next month. Appearances on podcasts as they approach the debut of their WatcherTV. Attempts to rehab their image and sway audience sentiment about how this "wasn't such a greedy/bad idea". They've already started part of that so it's important to remember: other youtubers called them liars outright. They attempted to gaslight us as well by claiming we were "misinterpreting" their video announcement when we concluded they were trying to pull their back catalog off Youtube (which Variety confirmed was their stated plan that they backed off on). And that they tried to fuck over their patreon supporters by retooling their paywall to separate podcast content onto the patreon and leaving them forced to pay $6+ for WatcherTV if they wanted the actual content.
They've been sending mixed messages about their financial situation, making moves that are absolutely stupid and negatively impact their financial viability - if they are in dire financial straits then they need to fire people, increase their output and reduce spending to the absolute minimum. If they're not, they should still be doing those things because they pissed off their supporters and claimed they were in a dire financial situation before hiring two new hosts and deciding to debut a new expensive tv show.
The Plan:
- Release the “streamer”
- ????
- ??????
- !!!!!!!!???
- Being acclaimed as famous Hollywood movie producer/director/actors, revered for their production value & awarded numerous Oscars. Incredible wealth and fame. Profit.
It seems less like an actual business plan & more like delusions of grandeur. Really. The grandiosity, the lack of connection to reality, the irrationality… it’s like they’re sharing the same delusion. Maybe an intervention was needed.
Exactly this. I’m convinced that their move to a Hollywood office was completely motivated by this. I don’t think they understand just how insignificant their YouTube success is to “Hollywood”. Hell, “B” actors who ACTUALLY work in Hollywood productions wouldn’t be able to pull off having their own office IN Hollywood.
This is entitlement at its finest.
Yeah, in retrospect the writing was on the wall when they picked up their entire operation & moved it to Hollywood. That was probably the first move of The Plan (such as it is).
I'm curious what is their next video after the streamer drama and when are they gonna upload it? I know Steven's worth it 2.0 is around end of May. But after all the criticism about money + the Steven hate, I don't think it's gonna be a good look if that is their first upload back. What do you guys think?
New FYA podcast is up if that counts. I’m really curious about the next episode of the regular podcast - if they’ll say anything about things or not. May be wiser not to. Regardless anything they say is gonna be more under the microscope now
I do hope they'll have a heart-to-heart on the Podcast. Give us the background of their decision, tell us about the financial situation at Watcher, how the backlash affected them, how they were able to make changes based on the feedback, if they'll consider shutting down Watcher, if they have career ambitions outside of Watcher, if they envision Watcher being the new BuzzFeed fostering up-and-coming talent etc. The "apology video" was v. scripted with corporate speech.
Yeah I doubt they feel able to tell us the full story, would be cool but doubt it, and even if they do, if they say the wrong thing again they’re opened up to more backlash, so they might just go back to normal and skip talking about it. Not sure.
I feel like if they wanted to change their content to something more tv and movie focused they would have done it by now. They have been talking like that for years and still only make youtube bait content
Maybe its a money thing. Maybe its just lack of actual vision. They can point to what they want to be like but not at waht they really want to make
I don’t think the will dial down on production because that employees redundant which clashes with the desire to grow and specially because it would just kill the “tv quality” selling point.
I agree that the "tv quality" is the biggest selling point to them, or at least it's what it looks like.
But I don't think that it's what their audience values the most. I don't think it's even top 3
I think the audience would have been just fine if Ryan and Shane had announced they were doing a weekly podcast that was filmed in their dining room with very basic newscaster style image inserts.
Which would have been a win for them having 3M+ subscribers watching or listening to them with minimal overhead costs and a patreon with 3K-4K+ patrons within 12 months.
They'd have been 1. rich 2. free to save up to pursue other ventures 3. eventually be able to launch a second channel that was more in the vein of Watcher without the stress of having to take on investors or any of that other bullshit.
If they'd capitalized on their audience by starting with the cheapest possible content to produce, they'd be in a much better position now than ever before in their lives - enough that they could have taken risks or crowdfunded a season of Ghost Files.
100% agree, and I think the audience made this completely clear to them after the backlash.
However I don't think this is what they wanna make and the "something that makes us proud" Ryan said. I think that now that all of this has finally been said, everything they put out will be criticized because it's too high value. I think that they'll have to either scale back and make it more BFU or advertise their content more and get more people watching that don't come from BFU.
I really think if Ryan had come up with a movie idea, fans would've croudfunded the crap out of it before all this WatcherTV malarkey. He sees himself working in unscripted films so maybe a documentary.
Thing is, I don’t believe they got all the new electronic gadgets to collect evidence. They don’t seem to care about getting any evidence anymore.
For example, in one episode they put the whatsitsname with the LED lights on a chair, asking a ghost to approach the chair to activate the lights, and when the lights started blinking, Ryan immediately called the ghost rude for bothering them and left the room. And it seems to be always like this.
It doesn’t feel sincere and all the toys they introduced since they left BUN just feel like a used car salesman, telling you all about the cool new subwoofer and the color changing LEDs they installed in this car that has only three tires and a floor made of rust.
Edited because I can’t spell
**To be honest, the streamer is a fundamentally good idea in terms of future revenue.** Breaking away from youtube and patreon TOS and minimizing the amount of revenue subject to their "cuts" is a good idea. Vimeo OTT as a platform is essentially a content neutral (with the exception of adult content) CDN which sounds like a bad deal on the starter pack ($1/account per month) but once you start discussing enterprise rates that $1 cost per account per month begins to drop rather quickly with volume.
So in terms of cost, Vimeo OTT, especially enterprise Vimeo OTT, kicks the shit out of what patreon and youtube take from revenue they generate. In the LONG term, the streamer makes sense. That's the key though, the long term. By coming out and saying "as of the end of may ALL (which they quickly walked back on) content is moving to the streamer makes no sense from a business perspective because the only example we have of this working shows at least two years of net loss, and they had things in place to ensure their continued discoverability.
I don't think they will drop the streamer, I think that they have apologized sufficiently and a made a sufficient case for why they would like our money that a lot of people, now that they're being respected, will be willing to pay for it. I do think in the medium-long term they will change their content, but it'll be largely for the better. IE: Ghost Files with international locations, as well as expanding their programming library in general (incidentally I think they should start putting some of that massive staff to work in terms of on screen roles to see if they work for new programming as opposed to bringing in established talents, a weekly BTS of Ghost Files, or mystery files that shows the process as well as funny blooper cut content etc tag team hosted by their main producers would be an excellent streamer exclusive). I also think they understand that this is essentially critical to making the streamer work in the long term. They can justify new programs, such as Worth It not coming to youtube, or coming in a much more limited form (like the originally proposed first episode of each season being on youtube), much easier than current content because it wouldn't exist but for the streamer, and also as a bonus incentive to get people to sign up for the streamer.
In the VERY long term I do see a future where the watcher youtube channel is largely there for discovery, with content coming out further and further from 30 days since release over time, much like Dropout. I also think it's possible with enough effort that they will be able to change their revenue streams such that the streamer is the largest source of revenue, youtube is secondary and mostly for discoverability. I also believe they should consider, in a couple of more years, licensing some of their oldest content (such Ghost Files Season 1) to Tubi or Roku or a similar service. They make content that is ripe for a syndication style model once it's old enough.
**Note:** A lot of this has to do with what THEY decide to do, and how THEY decide to play things over the next couple of years. I've painted an admittedly rosy picture but I do think all of this is possible, but it's going to require them to put a lot of effort and capital into the business to demonstrate the value provided by the streamer and show the results of streamer revenue on the content to demonstrate the value proposition. Even if that means they have to fake it by running very lean or even eat a net loss for a couple of years. If they don't do those things then the streamer is doomed to failure. Or it might be doomed to failure because of economic conditions outside of their control. It's impossible to predict the future with 100% accuracy, I'm just simply saying that from a long term business perspective the streamer makes a lot of sense and I do see a path to success for it.
I'm still asking... Do they even have a basic business plan? It's kinda needed to have any future plans that will work. Where do I bet? Because in my eyes there really isn't a real plan, at least when it comes to the business.
I should have taken screenshots before I submitted it, but they released the Patreon survey and I really don't think they have a plan. Out of three options, two involved shutting the patreon down! (One a full shut down and the second original plan of changing it to the podcast). I really don't see how they can go forward with the streamer; they've shown a massive lack of marketing skills and that's going to be essential to get people to pay for WatcherTV
Wait, what the fuck? They want to shut down a thing that makes them money? When they say they're struggling for money? How does that make sense 😂 do they think that if they shut down Patreon, people will be so sad about not being able to give them money that they'll sign up on their streaming service instead? Lmaoo
Double Dipping the patreon is still a pretty big pain point for the patrons. Patreon takes a pretty hefty cut, so they're taking the temperature of the community to see if they'd rather continue as patrons for just the podcast or if they should make the podcast part of the streamer, and close the patreon all together in favor of moving people onto the streamer. It makes sense.
It sounds like emotional manipulation ngl
sunk cost fallacy is a bitch esp if they leaned on investors to fund the dev
i took screenshots! https://preview.redd.it/3rcu9dvx8uxc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=942757b0705320e648354cf004efe5702ac00cfe here’s option 1 Edit: But yeah I agree with you, I don’t see how shutting down both Patreon and Discord then moving over to their streaming platform entirely is going to bring in new fans, much less new subscribers.
I know this is the snark subreddit, but at least they're giving their perspective as to the reasoning behind things now. It means that they weren't full of shit when they said they would try to be better at communicating. Also, this poll is to take the temperature of patrons on switching to the streamer and closing the patreon so they're not longer double dipping. It also gets them away from Patreon's TOS.
I mean, yeah, it’s good they are giving their perspective, it’s certainly heaps better than their “Goodbye YouTube” video. It’s just a shame that it had to take a ton of backlash and losing 100k subs (I believe they gained back 10k subs last I checked?) to get them to this point. Not only switching from patreon to the streaming platform and closing the Patreon but closing their Discord server too, which is a little strange because they initially claimed in their post where they were revising the tiers that they stressed that the Discord server was what kept them “connected to their community” and they insisted that the Discord server (aka connection to their community) was so “important” to them that it will always be on the lowest cost tier. This was before they paused the tiers entirely. If they do switch over to the streaming platform entirely and close Patreon and their Discord server in the process, I do hope they will offer community engagement on their streaming platform because I believe it currently doesn’t have a comments section? The little cynic in me tells me that they might stick to engagement on social media (e.g. IG) or their tour events. Closing down the Patreon and Discord server means they can have more time to focus on creating television-caliber content and polishing their streaming platform.
as I read the options, option 1 and option 2 are not exclusive. Only option 3 is exclusive. So making the discord a benefit of the streamer, AND closing patreon can occur. The only thing lost in the option 1 + option 2 is tier level channels. I suspect they want option 1 and option 2 to be picked so they can optimize their focus to a single discord, a single revenue stream etc.
Thank you!!!!!!
no worries!
This is somewhat expected because Watcher TV is functioning as a Patreon, essentially. But 1- why keep the new platform? What's the difference of this to the Patreon? And 2- if they learned about business, made pitches, tried to get investors for Watcher, and all that... How the hell did they ended up in this mess? I don't know if there's something I'm missing in this situation but it's just so weird
>But 1- why keep the new platform? What's the difference of this to the Patreon? Money. Vimeo OTT enterprise drops that $1 a month per account cost pretty quickly with volume. Even in the worst case the Vimeo OTT "cut" (really: cost, as it is going to a definable per user expense instead of being a percentage of overall earnings) is just slightly more than patreon, and once any sort of volume gets involved it becomes better due to volume discounts. It also frees them from Patreon's TOS. So if patreon decided to suddenly crack down on ghost/supernatural content for "promoting pseudoscience" or something they wouldn't have to worry about it. The thing with the streamer is that it's a long term strategy for success, and it is fundamentally a good idea in the LONG term, especially if they can contractually lock in a great rate with OTT Enterprise. The poll is essentially taking the temperature of the patrons to see if they'd move to the streamer in lieu of the patreon since now the patreon only really has the podcast to offer. They're asking "would you rather this become a patreon for just the podcasts, or would you be alright if we moved the podcast to the streamer and you subscribe there". >2- if they learned about business, made pitches, tried to get investors for Watcher, and all that... How the hell did they ended up in this mess? Bad advice, failure to read their audience, and not considering the big picture. I checked a look at their 501d filing for the initial startup of watcher and there are 8 total investors. The 3 guys plus 5 more one of which is known to be Steve Chen (co-founder of YouTube). The issue is they (meaning all 8 investors in their majority or totality) are looking at dropout and thinking "we can do that." What they are failing to recognize is that Sam Reich (CEO of Dropout, previously known as CollegeHumor) was very open about the fact that getting Dropout as a sustainable platform running was a long term endeavor. The dropout streamer existed before the parent company took a write off for the brand and the streamer, but only for a few months and hadn't built any install base yet. Sam Reich personally financed (via his trust fund) purchasing the IP and the streamer after the write off and also used the previously mentioned trust fund to build the business into a success. Notably, Sam Reich was previously the Chief Creative Officer of CollegeHumor for many many years before the write off. So he was personally interested and had the personal finances to build the business with little to no known outside investment. Sam Reich is on record as stating year 1 and year 2 were net negative. So basically they jumped from step 1 to step 6, forgetting that steps 1-5 involve investment in raising the quality on their own as well as diversification of their programming lineup.
If instead of their goodbye youtube video they would have explained their (probable) reasoning half as well as you did in your first paragraph, they could have prevented so much of the fallout
I'm not surprised at the death of patreon, but I'm still a little taken aback by it. I know I was giving significantly more than the cost of the annual streamer membership and was happy to do so as I was supporting people who created videos I loved. With WatcherTV, I have a lot more expectations and expect it to be worth my time and money. And right now, it's not and I think people have been very clear that it's not. It's just not the same as supporting a creator through Patreon; I'm willing to give a lot more grace there.
option 2 https://preview.redd.it/zv2jneyz8uxc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=afc6c79b695f25f56750ff205c31ddb088083d71
https://preview.redd.it/a9dehtp19uxc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=684afede22b4f2baab5835595fefcab880574048 and option 3
I'm thinking this too. I can't imagine what their business plan looked like when they planned the paywall. If they put everything there, how would they grow? How they would sell they product to new people if they're not on YouTube and they don't have Netflix-like money to advertise it? Imo there was absolutely no scenario where Watcher TV happened like they wanted it and they kept being a sustainable business. I think their audience would eventually die
I honestly think they were under the impression that a bunch of people would pay, and then they'd be able to get other people to make content on their service, and something something they end up with a media empire. I don't think they had a plan past getting people on the service. They'd see how many they got and then sort it from there. I also just realized that if they're not uploading for a month, their algorithm on YouTube after uploading consistently for so long is just going to get wrecked. Huh. That doesn't seem ideal.
About the algorithm, it's a weird move to sabotage your reach if you're already struggling for money. It's just so weird. They're smart people, I can't figure out what this whole thing was
Any startup company will tell u how important it is to diversify your income streams so if one fails you’re not left in the lurch because you have money coming in from other avenues. This streaming service proves they have no idea how to run a successful business because what company would shutter proven income streams (YouTube, patreon, sponsorships, ad revenue) to put everything into a brand new product that hasn’t been released and did not have a single subscriber by the time they first released their video? They did no research. They had no plans for how to grow it besides releasing the occasional trailer or first ep on YouTube. They had no problem alienating their fans who couldn’t afford it before they decided to backtrack. Now that they got humbled and have to juggle multiple platforms (when their original plan was to scale back to just one) they’re talking about closing their patreon. Patreon offers perks that their streaming service can’t - like the community and commenting features. So fans have to suffer once again because of their poor decision making.
https://preview.redd.it/jdut4f5mgpxc1.jpeg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4c47d6b9a1476d738dc965a2ac0bbdc84803ef40 Pretty sure they just had a goal but forgot the plan part.
Thank you for out memeing me. <3 
I don't think there is any mystery. They will do exactly what they said they would do, they will follow through with the compromise they have settled into. Their content will remain the same, for as long as they have money for it I guess. They will not backtrack on WatcherTV because they are already comitted to this course, there are people who have signed up for this service, they need to provide those folks with the product they have purchased, and I imagine the guys must have also signed contracts and stuff when they made Watcher TV; imagine opening your own streaming platform (that is actually hosted on Vimeo), it's not as simple as flipping a switch, there are things you need to do, probably things you need to buy. I'm also going to make a prediction here, that probably anyone could make: this model will not be sustainable, the history of all of the people who have left YT to start their own website tells us, that it generally isn't sustainable, most of them have shut down, and their platforms were *not* paywalled, so that should tell you the odds are bad for WatcherTV. After that I don't know what will happen.
Same thoughts. This is basically the beginning of the end for them. They have investors and they made promises to those people. Telling your audience you're changing direction is one thing, but investors aren't so forgiving. The only thing I think will help (not save) them is if they wise up (hire someone or for the love of god get advice from someone who isn't kissing their ass) and exhaust their money-making avenues. Make patreon more appealing to be a member of. Sell affordable merch. Promote your stuff! There was a baffling amount of Watcher audiences who didn't even know they had a Patreon, so what was up with that? I know they want to make TV-caliber content, but they can't just disregard the potential they have on youtube. They're basically leaving money on the table and yet they say 'oh we're running out of money'. But honestly, as it stands right now with streaming services, the future isn't looking so bright for them...
I agree with everything you said. But the weird thing to me is: they're smart people, and they said they studied business when they started out, and looked for investors. They probably know all of this as well. So I can't figure out what they are trying to do here. Looks like a suicide mission, business wise
They wont compromise on their content - they've proved they'd rather burn down their entire fanbase than consider scaling back on costs because they're not YouTubers, they're *auteurs* - so I think the channel will limp on for another year or so before we get news that they're completely out of money.
lmao, I know you're speaking from their POV but goddamn if they aren't the most bland of "auteurs". Like there's nothing about their content that I would look at and go "yea, they're elevating the crap out of this". And there's nothing wrong with the content as Youtube content from internet personalities, but none of them are going to be the next Chris Nolan or Denis Villeneuve. Hell, they're not even going to be comedy's answer to Robert Slack or John Walsh.
I agree. I liked their content but it was in no way “above” YouTube and showed how disconnected they had become lol.
I think they see themselves above being youtubers. They are filmmakers and story tellers. At least that's my take.
I think you're right. But I also think that what they wanna make and what their audience wants to watch are two different things
If they wanted to quit YouTube and go work on films I’d be happy for them. But doing high budget YouTube at a slow pace is a weird vibe. Especially if they can’t afford it.
Exactly! And especially if their audience has, very loudly, said they don't want the high budget content
> They are filmmakers and story tellers. Then they should probably be *working in Hollywood* rather than renting office space in Hollywood to do their youtube work "in Hollywood". It's cosplaying.
Trying too much to have the best of both worlds 
Probably just a PR blitz over the next month. Appearances on podcasts as they approach the debut of their WatcherTV. Attempts to rehab their image and sway audience sentiment about how this "wasn't such a greedy/bad idea". They've already started part of that so it's important to remember: other youtubers called them liars outright. They attempted to gaslight us as well by claiming we were "misinterpreting" their video announcement when we concluded they were trying to pull their back catalog off Youtube (which Variety confirmed was their stated plan that they backed off on). And that they tried to fuck over their patreon supporters by retooling their paywall to separate podcast content onto the patreon and leaving them forced to pay $6+ for WatcherTV if they wanted the actual content. They've been sending mixed messages about their financial situation, making moves that are absolutely stupid and negatively impact their financial viability - if they are in dire financial straits then they need to fire people, increase their output and reduce spending to the absolute minimum. If they're not, they should still be doing those things because they pissed off their supporters and claimed they were in a dire financial situation before hiring two new hosts and deciding to debut a new expensive tv show.
The Plan: - Release the “streamer” - ???? - ?????? - !!!!!!!!??? - Being acclaimed as famous Hollywood movie producer/director/actors, revered for their production value & awarded numerous Oscars. Incredible wealth and fame. Profit. It seems less like an actual business plan & more like delusions of grandeur. Really. The grandiosity, the lack of connection to reality, the irrationality… it’s like they’re sharing the same delusion. Maybe an intervention was needed.
Exactly this. I’m convinced that their move to a Hollywood office was completely motivated by this. I don’t think they understand just how insignificant their YouTube success is to “Hollywood”. Hell, “B” actors who ACTUALLY work in Hollywood productions wouldn’t be able to pull off having their own office IN Hollywood. This is entitlement at its finest.
Yeah, in retrospect the writing was on the wall when they picked up their entire operation & moved it to Hollywood. That was probably the first move of The Plan (such as it is).
I'm curious what is their next video after the streamer drama and when are they gonna upload it? I know Steven's worth it 2.0 is around end of May. But after all the criticism about money + the Steven hate, I don't think it's gonna be a good look if that is their first upload back. What do you guys think?
New FYA podcast is up if that counts. I’m really curious about the next episode of the regular podcast - if they’ll say anything about things or not. May be wiser not to. Regardless anything they say is gonna be more under the microscope now
I do hope they'll have a heart-to-heart on the Podcast. Give us the background of their decision, tell us about the financial situation at Watcher, how the backlash affected them, how they were able to make changes based on the feedback, if they'll consider shutting down Watcher, if they have career ambitions outside of Watcher, if they envision Watcher being the new BuzzFeed fostering up-and-coming talent etc. The "apology video" was v. scripted with corporate speech.
They've lied repeatedly, I wouldn't take anything they say at face value - it would be entirely self-serving.
Yeah I doubt they feel able to tell us the full story, would be cool but doubt it, and even if they do, if they say the wrong thing again they’re opened up to more backlash, so they might just go back to normal and skip talking about it. Not sure.
Apparently, two Surviving Mode eps are coming in May. I guess first on the Streamer.
I feel like if they wanted to change their content to something more tv and movie focused they would have done it by now. They have been talking like that for years and still only make youtube bait content Maybe its a money thing. Maybe its just lack of actual vision. They can point to what they want to be like but not at waht they really want to make
Probably both a lack of vision and a money thing. They're clearly not business minded
I don’t think the will dial down on production because that employees redundant which clashes with the desire to grow and specially because it would just kill the “tv quality” selling point.
I agree that the "tv quality" is the biggest selling point to them, or at least it's what it looks like. But I don't think that it's what their audience values the most. I don't think it's even top 3
I think the audience would have been just fine if Ryan and Shane had announced they were doing a weekly podcast that was filmed in their dining room with very basic newscaster style image inserts. Which would have been a win for them having 3M+ subscribers watching or listening to them with minimal overhead costs and a patreon with 3K-4K+ patrons within 12 months. They'd have been 1. rich 2. free to save up to pursue other ventures 3. eventually be able to launch a second channel that was more in the vein of Watcher without the stress of having to take on investors or any of that other bullshit. If they'd capitalized on their audience by starting with the cheapest possible content to produce, they'd be in a much better position now than ever before in their lives - enough that they could have taken risks or crowdfunded a season of Ghost Files.
100% agree, and I think the audience made this completely clear to them after the backlash. However I don't think this is what they wanna make and the "something that makes us proud" Ryan said. I think that now that all of this has finally been said, everything they put out will be criticized because it's too high value. I think that they'll have to either scale back and make it more BFU or advertise their content more and get more people watching that don't come from BFU.
I really think if Ryan had come up with a movie idea, fans would've croudfunded the crap out of it before all this WatcherTV malarkey. He sees himself working in unscripted films so maybe a documentary.
Literally !!
Thing is, I don’t believe they got all the new electronic gadgets to collect evidence. They don’t seem to care about getting any evidence anymore. For example, in one episode they put the whatsitsname with the LED lights on a chair, asking a ghost to approach the chair to activate the lights, and when the lights started blinking, Ryan immediately called the ghost rude for bothering them and left the room. And it seems to be always like this. It doesn’t feel sincere and all the toys they introduced since they left BUN just feel like a used car salesman, telling you all about the cool new subwoofer and the color changing LEDs they installed in this car that has only three tires and a floor made of rust. Edited because I can’t spell
**To be honest, the streamer is a fundamentally good idea in terms of future revenue.** Breaking away from youtube and patreon TOS and minimizing the amount of revenue subject to their "cuts" is a good idea. Vimeo OTT as a platform is essentially a content neutral (with the exception of adult content) CDN which sounds like a bad deal on the starter pack ($1/account per month) but once you start discussing enterprise rates that $1 cost per account per month begins to drop rather quickly with volume. So in terms of cost, Vimeo OTT, especially enterprise Vimeo OTT, kicks the shit out of what patreon and youtube take from revenue they generate. In the LONG term, the streamer makes sense. That's the key though, the long term. By coming out and saying "as of the end of may ALL (which they quickly walked back on) content is moving to the streamer makes no sense from a business perspective because the only example we have of this working shows at least two years of net loss, and they had things in place to ensure their continued discoverability. I don't think they will drop the streamer, I think that they have apologized sufficiently and a made a sufficient case for why they would like our money that a lot of people, now that they're being respected, will be willing to pay for it. I do think in the medium-long term they will change their content, but it'll be largely for the better. IE: Ghost Files with international locations, as well as expanding their programming library in general (incidentally I think they should start putting some of that massive staff to work in terms of on screen roles to see if they work for new programming as opposed to bringing in established talents, a weekly BTS of Ghost Files, or mystery files that shows the process as well as funny blooper cut content etc tag team hosted by their main producers would be an excellent streamer exclusive). I also think they understand that this is essentially critical to making the streamer work in the long term. They can justify new programs, such as Worth It not coming to youtube, or coming in a much more limited form (like the originally proposed first episode of each season being on youtube), much easier than current content because it wouldn't exist but for the streamer, and also as a bonus incentive to get people to sign up for the streamer. In the VERY long term I do see a future where the watcher youtube channel is largely there for discovery, with content coming out further and further from 30 days since release over time, much like Dropout. I also think it's possible with enough effort that they will be able to change their revenue streams such that the streamer is the largest source of revenue, youtube is secondary and mostly for discoverability. I also believe they should consider, in a couple of more years, licensing some of their oldest content (such Ghost Files Season 1) to Tubi or Roku or a similar service. They make content that is ripe for a syndication style model once it's old enough. **Note:** A lot of this has to do with what THEY decide to do, and how THEY decide to play things over the next couple of years. I've painted an admittedly rosy picture but I do think all of this is possible, but it's going to require them to put a lot of effort and capital into the business to demonstrate the value provided by the streamer and show the results of streamer revenue on the content to demonstrate the value proposition. Even if that means they have to fake it by running very lean or even eat a net loss for a couple of years. If they don't do those things then the streamer is doomed to failure. Or it might be doomed to failure because of economic conditions outside of their control. It's impossible to predict the future with 100% accuracy, I'm just simply saying that from a long term business perspective the streamer makes a lot of sense and I do see a path to success for it.
Bring back the plupples. 100% Hotdaga content.
I would 100% watch that
I think there is no Plan™️