#watcher patreon is worth it

[mangomybeloved]

i hate to say it, like i love watcher, but my thoughts on them leaving youtube is this is too much too soon, like the bulk of their fans are probs younger/unable to afford another subscription fee, plus youtube has always been where they've been?? it's just so stark to go from this being the site you put your content on for years and then to go full cold turkey, no more posting on youtube ever

and i'll be honest, they don't have enough content to warrant a separate site/subscription all together. dropout is able to pull it off because they have the full rotation of shows and cast as well (dnd, game changer, etc), whereas for watcher, they only have a few couple really successful shows and those are primarily only focused on ryan and shane.

and tbh, i don't think they have a big enough audience to launch it either, like their marketing team could do better on advertising their shows! like, i haven't been keeping up with their recent shows cause either i don't see it on my youtube algorithm at all or i have to go out of my way to go see it.

and i don't know this just feels like a kick to the face to their fans, like even dropout has shorts on youtube and keeps up all their content on youtube like some episodes and the entirety of season one of fantasy high, and now i'm seeing in the comments, that their international fans outside of the usa won't even able to subscribe cause of how payment works which is :///, so yeah, watcher, it's been nice knowing ya, but i don't know how this move will turn out for you, i'm sorry to say

[littlekingbergara]

steven lim pays ryan bergara $5 one time and gets a front row seat to his belly button performance but i pay ryan bergara $5 every month for 3 and a half years and all i get is early access to watcher videos and access to patreon-exclusive content.

[carryonlikewedidbefore]

Ok, so the thing about the Watcher move.

I’ve happily been a Patreon since day 1 and that’s fine because it was voluntary it felt like something I was doing for them in addition to what they were producing. So I didn’t mind if there were shows that I wasn’t a fan of - I just wouldn’t watch for that month.

But this? This is compulsory and more than that, it’s paying for a service. And that service is still only 1 episode a week and if I’m not into a show well too bad I guess my money is wasted for the month

[floraapretty]

A streaming service? In this economy?

[samuraisharkie]

I can’t wait to see how badly this new business venture of Watcher’s fails. I hope Steven, Ryan, and Shane’s America centric self obsessed asses lose everything and I hope Steve has to sell his Tesla and bullshit matcha machine and the others have to downsize whatever else bougie shit they have and LEARN how valuable $6 is, not just in the US but everywhere else. This is going to crash and burn and I can’t wait to see the decline.

[thestamp3d3]

bro im so mad about the watcher announcement bc yeah 5 bucks a month isn’t a lot but THEY ONLY MAKE LIKE 1 VIDEO A WEEK!!!

[lavendertownsghost]

Big sads that I can't afford both Watcher and Dropout subscriptions, I watch a lot more Dropout content than I do from Watcher, so I guess no more Ghost/Mystery Files for me :(

[southernsolarpunk]

I watched Charlie MoistCritikal’s video on the Watcher drama and he definitely has some good insight considering he runs a company that helps creators get sponsorships, and finding out that with their subscriber & view counts they probably get $15,000-$30,000 per ad read was like the final nail in the coffin for me. So they make $100k a month on patreon + an ad read a week + ad revenue + merch sales? Maybe slow down on making new shows. Cultivate what you have. Maybe remaking worth it… isn’t worth it.

(Charlie’s video is good if you want some deeper insight into the creator economy)

[grimrester]

i am really so sorry to continue harping on about the watcher entertainment streaming service. but this kind of stuff (internet content as a business & marketing it as such) is truly my obsession, and i think i will implode if i don't talk about some of the takes i'm seeing.

i'd like to emphasize again i don't have strong feelings about watcher either way. i like ghost files, i watch mystery files sometimes, i watched worth it back in the buzzfeed days. i don't watch any of their shows religiously.

anyway, here's the main things i keep seeing crop up and my thoughts on each:

"watcher has 25 employees they have to pay, and employing people in this economy is good, so we should be banding together to pay them."

employing people is good if you currently have the capacity to pay them. i checked watcher's linkedin page, and many of their employees were hired within the last year or two. if they hired people they cannot pay with the business model they had before, something is seriously wrong with their internal bookkeeping/decision making. it means they either didn't know they couldn't pay these people long term, or they did know and were content with risking newly hired employees' livelihoods on a huge content pivot in the next year.

of note is that none of their employees' titles have anything to do with managing the finances of the company. they are the size of a small business but have no one aside from the figureheads of the company in charge of their finances.

this is the kind of company decision making that leads to downsizing and layoffs, which can be devastating. but you know what's worse than laying off a portion of your staff? laying off everyone because your business is going under.

"not everyone can afford the subscription, but those who can should pay it to support the watcher team."

no. $6/month for a couple hours of content (depending on what shows you actively watch and the natural fluctuation of their release schedule) is a fundamentally bad value. i can pay that much for a few movies on amazon. i can pay that much for dropout, if i want to support a smaller business instead.

and to be totally frank, even if people do sign up, i don't think they'd get enough to compete with the amount they get through patreon/sponsorships. and the fact that they didn't know how many of their subscribers would realistically sign up is a bad sign.

a pretty good conversion rate of free to paid subscribers of a service or content is 3% (usually accomplished through a free trial). given the very poor reception of the announcement, let's say about 1% of their 3 mil youtube subs pay for their service. that's 30k people paying for their new platform. that's $180k a month in their pocket.

(they currently only have 12k subs on patreon so we are being generous here.)

a sponsorship deal (based on my googling, i have less direct experience with this) is anywhere from $10-50 per 1000 views. they've gotten about 1 mil views on their last few videos. 3 mil subs is nothing to shake a stick at, but let's say they're on the lower end of the payscale at $25 per 1000 views. that's $25k a video, $100k a month if they release 1 video a week. their lowest patreon tier is 5 bucks, so even if all their subs are at that tier, that's another $60k, so $160k total. it's entirely likely they're bringing in much more than that when you factor in merch, adsence, etc.

did anyone on their team crunch numbers on how many people would need to sub to make the switch worth it? did anyone do market research on how many people they could convert to paid users? because if not, if they really didn't have a game plan for this, the subscription service was always doomed to fail.

"this was their only option to continue making the content they want to make, with the production value they want."

i watched their announcement video. a key point in that video is that they have done sponsored videos and that's what used to pay for their content, but they did not like the amount of creative control the sponsor had over the content.

look, i get that's no fun. we'd all love creatives to be able to make whatever they want. but when you are a small business with a team of employees relying on you, you have to think about making money, sometimes at the cost of creative liberties.

and they had so many other options to make money for the projects they want to make without jumping to a subscription platform.

they could have started actually promoting their patreon, and maybe done some restructuring of the tiers. why not a highly produced, special series just for patreon members? or a special high-budget episode of each series, while the main series is lower budget?

bite the bullet and continue taking sponsorship deals on some less-produced shows, while axing sponsorships from the ones the crew feels more passionate about.

schedule larger, blowout-production shows only when they can be afforded. this is what Notorious Amongus Guy streamer jerma does. he saves up for big productions like his baseball or dollhouse streams, so he can really get creative with them.

they had other options and they've tried very little, especially when you compare them to other content house business at similar scales. try guys and good mythical morning both put out significant content with significant staff, and have had to diversify their income streams with auxiliary products, shows with widely varied levels of production, etc. but it seems to be working for them. watcher has merch and that's about it, and seems to only want to increase the production quality of ALL their shows.

really, all this just boils down to a terrible business decision. it's hard to say if the watcher team is working with a consultant or anyone outside of their team, but they certainly don't have anyone internally who is experienced with running a business like this. to me, it seems very much like they got in a room together and did some extremely optimistic income ballparking with no research behind it.

and that might have been fine for three dudes running a channel alone, but if they're a business, they have to start making decisions like one.

[certified-bi]

Okay all my thoughts because some people have been saying that not supporting this change is not supporting artist and creators and as an artist fuck that.

1. Audiences owe you nothing. You have to convince them to engage with your creation not the other way around. This is something both the nonprofit theatre I work with recognizes and huge companies realize. It's just part of life. There are so many talented people in the world making amazing art, videos, music, writings, and on and on, and there's only so much time in the day. I'm not saying you shouldn't know your worth, just that being flippant about how little you care about those who can't pay isn't a good move. On that note...

2. PR is everything. If you haven't made a visible effort to push patreon, channel memberships or other avenues of making money, don't be suprised that your creation that was previously accessible to those without extra cash and to those who can't support foreign subscriptions due either to conversions or because it simply doesn't work, being made private isn't popular. There's a big leap from "We want to have more artistic control" to "We can't afford to make our content accessible to most of our audience," and people are smart enough to see this. You either have to make budget cuts or give into sponsors. This isn't unique to Watcher, it's part of literally every production from broadway, to Hollywood, to YouTube. Unless you can fund it yourself or get viewers to pay(which given how many are already strapped for cash...) that's life.

Not to mention they simply do not have enough followers to make the switch to a paid only site(dropping the first epsiode only on YouTube isn't going to draw people in, they're just going to say "oh why start if I'm not going to see the rest" and not watch) especially not one that is buggy and a security risk. Even if the switch had been supported its not going to end well. The only reason services like nebula and dropout work is because of the large amount of series and creators and the fact those creators still are partly on YouTube so new people are drawn in.

3. As for the price, 6 dollars a month is a not a good starting price for only their content and that's as someone who pays for nebula. I'd be paying the same amount for a fraction of the access to others work. Actually it'd be twice as much. And before someone says "it's only a coffee-" that's for you. Not everyone has your lifestyle. And with every other patreon and subscription service that says the same thing, it all adds up and I simply don't think 60 dollars for 48 videos a year on a subscription basis where you don't get to keep the videos if your situation changes, some of which don't appeal to every viewer is a good move. If you were able to buy physical copies of your favorite series they've made that'd be different, but that's not what this is.

4. I do believe that the employees deserve a livable wage. I also did not hire them. It is not on the viewers that they hired more people than they could afford to. They can charge that much if they want to to try and balance this out. They also shouldn't be suprised if not many can or will sign up. They also don't have to be based in L.A. L.A has ridiculous costs associated with it, and quite honestly it doesn't really add much to the content. I'm not saying they need to move to the middle of nowhere Kansas. Simply that living and basing your studio in a super expensive city and then being suprised money is tight is just weird.

5. Something that occurs to me is that they might get more views if their playlists were better set up. Only some series are given playlists. It'd be easier to find all of the series and binge them if they didn't just show off their more popular shows. Honestly the only draw the streaming site has to me is that the series are actually labeled well.

Do I think the weird ass energy towards Steven is necessary? No. He's not the only one at the company and they're all adults. I actually liked grocery run and homemade, and like to see them back. The parascoial attachment to Ryan and Shane is annoying in people's criticisms, but that doesn't make them completely wrong. If you're going to brand yourself as the anti capalist underdogs you can't get away with being dismissive of your poorer fans. The dissonance is what is causing this backlash and makes you look like hypocrites. I definitely think Steven is turning into the fall guy which is fucked up, his statement and the fact dish granted is one of those shows that make people uncomfortable about wealth flexs doesn't help matters.

[ashleyisartsy]

Problems (objective and personal) I'm not seeing discussed a lot w this new WatcherTV thing, in no particular order:

-Alienates people internationally who literally CANNOT GET the streaming service!

-Alienates casual fans who don't watch or want to watch all of their shows. Putting down 60 bucks a year to watch just one or two shows is kind of insane, at least for me.

-The volume of content Watcher has produced historically hasn't been enough to justify a separate streamer. I understand there's no way a small team could compete with something like Netflix, obviously, but that's what you're trying to do by putting yourself in the streamer market.

-Will this streamer be secure? What steps are in place to protect your viewers info? ESPECIALLY payment info.

-Will it be easily watchable on multiple devices? I watch YouTube videos on my phone at work 90% of the time, or at home on my TV thru my switch. Is this a browser only deal?

-What are the internet requirements for this? Believe it or not most streaming services won't run on my internet personally. I don't have any for that reason. I can watch YouTube on 360p, or on my 2-bar-reception phone data. Not everywhere has stable reliable internet.

-The suddenness and totality of the move was going to be jarring no matter what, if the idea had been introduced gradually or started as a hybrid model to test audience interest there wouldn't be nearly this amount of pushback.

-I understand the people saying "pay artists!!" Bc I am one, and I get that their quality is expensive and they have a whole company's worth of people to support. I do actually think their work is worth paying for! Everyone's is! But convincing anyone to pay for something they previously got for free is going to be a hard sell. They were still getting paid before, they're now just asking us to pay instead of the advertisers. Idk about you, but that's a way bigger hit to my pocketbook than a multimillion dollar company's bank account.

-I get that YouTube can be a really shitty place to be a creator sometimes, and that being beholden to advertisers is something they don't want to be. It's why they left Buzzfeed! They already have a patreon and merch and it's clearly not been enough for their ambitions. But shooting yourself in the foot because your running shoes are wearing out isn't going to make you a better marathon runner. They had to know that there was going to be a not small portion of their audience unwilling to make this move with them (and again, lots literally aren't able to!)

-If they had a free w/ ads option, or even did a hybrid model with whole shows behind the pay wall, or even just ran a fucking crowd funding campaign to help cover costs of new seasons of shows, any of those things could have worked. They don't even have YouTube memberships turned on, which I've personally seen many many channels do even when they already have a patreon. It really doesn't seem like they've exhausted other options, at least from an outside perspective, which is all we have as viewers!

-I get that this has been in the works for a long time, and that there probably isn't a way for them to back out now. But I hope they can find a way to make this more accessible if they want it to work at all. I truly am not wishing for their downfall, but the whole situation is an awful mess.

Idk, rant over. As a lot of you are I'm feeling very disappointed and upset with this one, and I'm not paying for it either. Hope the boys can salvage this one for their and their crew's sake. Would really hate for this to be the end.

[countdracublahh]

Here are my thoughts about the watcher situation:

1) my PERSONAL issue is not the fact that the content is being paywalled. I understand and believe that an artist should be able to charge what they think their work is worth. I have paid for patreons and memberships before when I had a bit of extra money so I fully support creators getting adequate compensation. HOWEVER, the way this was rolled out was almost comically bad. The video felt tone deaf at times and it felt like this decision was only halfway thought through. There were many steps they could have taken to try to mitigate production costs before jumping ship.

2) Why did people suddenly decide that everything had to have been Steven’s fault? I’m not even a Steven fan, but this is ridiculous. Even if it was Steven’s idea, Ryan and Shane still sat and filmed the video. They are still the co-founders and have repeatedly supported Steven’s choices as CEO. Where did this narrative that Steven is an evil, corrupt, greedy, leader and poor Ryan and Shane are forced against their will to do these things come from? I’ve followed Ryan and Shane since Buzzfeed Unsolved like many of us here, but we can’t let them escape criticism because the idea of them doing something bad hurts.

3) As someone currently going to school for stuff like this, I would LOVE to see the research they used to come to this decision. That’s not even me trying to be shady. I genuinely want to know. The community response has been so overwhelmingly negative that I have to assume that they either 1) did not have enough data, or 2) did not collect any data themselves and relied on outside sources that didn’t fully understand the landscape of watcher’s viewership. Either way I want to know.