<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:go='http://ns.gigaom.com/'
xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: YouTube Infrastructure Costs Vastly Overestimated: Report</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/video/youtube-infrastructure-costs-vastly-overestimated-report-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/video/youtube-infrastructure-costs-vastly-overestimated-report-2/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 10:27:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bloggasm &#187; The perils of predicting the profitability of internet companies</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/video/youtube-infrastructure-costs-vastly-overestimated-report-2/#comment-473053</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bloggasm &#187; The perils of predicting the profitability of internet companies]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Apr 2010 03:11:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.com/?p=26748#comment-473053</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] some of which claim that YouTube is losing massive amounts of money while others estimate that it&#8217;s actually pulling in a profit. YouTube is much closer to breaking even than widely thought, says a firm with intimate knowledge of [...]&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] some of which claim that YouTube is losing massive amounts of money while others estimate that it&#8217;s actually pulling in a profit. YouTube is much closer to breaking even than widely thought, says a firm with intimate knowledge of [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Analyst: YouTube Could Turn a Profit in 2010</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/video/youtube-infrastructure-costs-vastly-overestimated-report-2/#comment-473052</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Analyst: YouTube Could Turn a Profit in 2010]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:31:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.com/?p=26748#comment-473052</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] with one analyst estimating that the unit could lose as much as $470 million in 2009 (though others refuted that number) &#8212; Google has been relatively pleased with the trajectory that YouTube has been on, at least [...]&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] with one analyst estimating that the unit could lose as much as $470 million in 2009 (though others refuted that number) &#8212; Google has been relatively pleased with the trajectory that YouTube has been on, at least [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/video/youtube-infrastructure-costs-vastly-overestimated-report-2/#comment-473051</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lee]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 19:49:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.com/?p=26748#comment-473051</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;Do you know where I can buy you tube video&#039;s on dvd for dvd playing machines ?Those from 2007-2009 .?.&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do you know where I can buy you tube video&#8217;s on dvd for dvd playing machines ?Those from 2007-2009 .?.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: john glenn</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/video/youtube-infrastructure-costs-vastly-overestimated-report-2/#comment-473050</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[john glenn]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2009 01:15:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.com/?p=26748#comment-473050</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;Great article.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I wonder what&#039;s going to happen when energy costs go through the roof.  You may not believe it but its coming.  Soon!  Real Soon!&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article.</p>
<p>I wonder what&#8217;s going to happen when energy costs go through the roof.  You may not believe it but its coming.  Soon!  Real Soon!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Citi Now Agrees YouTube Can Reach Profitability Soon</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/video/youtube-infrastructure-costs-vastly-overestimated-report-2/#comment-473049</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Citi Now Agrees YouTube Can Reach Profitability Soon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:50:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.com/?p=26748#comment-473049</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] holding a call with RampRate, the IT services analysts who&#8217;d recently declared that YouTube&#8217;s costs were vastly overestimated, Citi issued a note saying it agreed. Google [...]&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] holding a call with RampRate, the IT services analysts who&#8217;d recently declared that YouTube&#8217;s costs were vastly overestimated, Citi issued a note saying it agreed. Google [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Pirate Bay: Distributing the World&#8217;s Entertainment for $3,000 a Month</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/video/youtube-infrastructure-costs-vastly-overestimated-report-2/#comment-473048</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[The Pirate Bay: Distributing the World&#8217;s Entertainment for $3,000 a Month]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Jul 2009 07:01:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.com/?p=26748#comment-473048</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] around $3,000. Compare that with recent reports that put YouTube&#8217;s bandwidth costs anywhere between $130,000 and a million dollar per day, and you&#8217;ll understand why I haven&#8217;t been able to get that [...]&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] around $3,000. Compare that with recent reports that put YouTube&#8217;s bandwidth costs anywhere between $130,000 and a million dollar per day, and you&#8217;ll understand why I haven&#8217;t been able to get that [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google: YouTube Will Soon Be “Very Profitable” &#171; Klickabletv: digital media news</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/video/youtube-infrastructure-costs-vastly-overestimated-report-2/#comment-473047</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Google: YouTube Will Soon Be “Very Profitable” &#171; Klickabletv: digital media news]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 2009 14:59:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.com/?p=26748#comment-473047</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] estimating that YouTube could lose $470 million this year, however an infrastructure research firm disputed that report, saying the bank had underestimated Google’s ability to minimize [...]&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] estimating that YouTube could lose $470 million this year, however an infrastructure research firm disputed that report, saying the bank had underestimated Google’s ability to minimize [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google: YouTube Will Soon Be &#8220;Very Profitable&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/video/youtube-infrastructure-costs-vastly-overestimated-report-2/#comment-473046</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Google: YouTube Will Soon Be &#8220;Very Profitable&#8221;]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:47:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.com/?p=26748#comment-473046</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] estimating that YouTube could lose $470 million this year, however an infrastructure research firm disputed that report, saying the bank had underestimated Google&#8217;s ability to minimize [...]&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] estimating that YouTube could lose $470 million this year, however an infrastructure research firm disputed that report, saying the bank had underestimated Google&#8217;s ability to minimize [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: YouTube dobler til 2GB for opplastede filer &#124; Timepoint.no</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/video/youtube-infrastructure-costs-vastly-overestimated-report-2/#comment-473045</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[YouTube dobler til 2GB for opplastede filer &#124; Timepoint.no]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 14:53:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.com/?p=26748#comment-473045</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] I dag tjener Google penger på partnerprogrammer og innholdsannonseringen fra Adwords som går på YouTube. Økonomer har lenge ment at YouTube er et tapsprosjekt pga høye båndbredde utgifter, men nå nesten halverer en ny rapport disse kostnadene. Les mer på NeewTeeWee [...]&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I dag tjener Google penger på partnerprogrammer og innholdsannonseringen fra Adwords som går på YouTube. Økonomer har lenge ment at YouTube er et tapsprosjekt pga høye båndbredde utgifter, men nå nesten halverer en ny rapport disse kostnadene. Les mer på NeewTeeWee [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fred Destin</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/video/youtube-infrastructure-costs-vastly-overestimated-report-2/#comment-473044</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Fred Destin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 20:04:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newteevee.com/?p=26748#comment-473044</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;It is clear to me that YouTube can indeed negotiate free peering agreements.  They are certainly building large POPs and buying some dedicated links for peak usage, where off peak can be used for standard free peering agreements with the carriers.  I think this is a safe assumption.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I am on the board of a large video sharing company and I can assume the following with confidence: I would be VERY suprised if  YouTube were spending more than 50 cents per thousand videos streamed on their run-of-the-mill short videos, and the cost is more probably 25-30 cents.  On a global CDN their commit rates probably allow them to cover Asian traffic &quot;for free&quot; etc leading to averaging down the overall cost.  Assuming they are streaming indeed $1bn videos per day their bandwidth costs should be somewhere between $90M and $180M -- which fits the above estimate.  Very back of the envelope.  The Ramprate estimate looks flattering to me but the CSFB analysts were clearly looking to grab headlines.  Hardware opex also looks insanely cheap: I think CSFB&#039;s guess is much better here and indeed there has to be some DB and so on.  Transcoding falls under hardware kit and is dirt cheap.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;By contrast I would also be amazed if the company really cost $300M to run including content deals.  If they have 300 folks, salary costs cannot be more than $45M which leaves a LOT of juice for content deals.  On balance, $400M feels like a worst case estimate to run this business.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;If they did make $200M last year, you can hardly see them doubling this in 2009 (these kinds of volumes NEED direct selling if you want a decent rate card, even for YT / G).  So $300M topline ?&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Probably still losing money but closing the gap fast.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Once they are breakeven, the world can then quietly assess the full extent of what just happened to broadcasting !&lt;/p&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is clear to me that YouTube can indeed negotiate free peering agreements.  They are certainly building large POPs and buying some dedicated links for peak usage, where off peak can be used for standard free peering agreements with the carriers.  I think this is a safe assumption.</p>
<p>I am on the board of a large video sharing company and I can assume the following with confidence: I would be VERY suprised if  YouTube were spending more than 50 cents per thousand videos streamed on their run-of-the-mill short videos, and the cost is more probably 25-30 cents.  On a global CDN their commit rates probably allow them to cover Asian traffic &#8220;for free&#8221; etc leading to averaging down the overall cost.  Assuming they are streaming indeed $1bn videos per day their bandwidth costs should be somewhere between $90M and $180M &#8212; which fits the above estimate.  Very back of the envelope.  The Ramprate estimate looks flattering to me but the CSFB analysts were clearly looking to grab headlines.  Hardware opex also looks insanely cheap: I think CSFB&#8217;s guess is much better here and indeed there has to be some DB and so on.  Transcoding falls under hardware kit and is dirt cheap.</p>
<p>By contrast I would also be amazed if the company really cost $300M to run including content deals.  If they have 300 folks, salary costs cannot be more than $45M which leaves a LOT of juice for content deals.  On balance, $400M feels like a worst case estimate to run this business.</p>
<p>If they did make $200M last year, you can hardly see them doubling this in 2009 (these kinds of volumes NEED direct selling if you want a decent rate card, even for YT / G).  So $300M topline ?</p>
<p>Probably still losing money but closing the gap fast.</p>
<p>Once they are breakeven, the world can then quietly assess the full extent of what just happened to broadcasting !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

