Hey man.
Yeah I figured that out after asking. I looked at the entire payout, all the names.
So basically, this model, if someone on the outside wanted to start today in order to take advantage of this "100% share of ad revenue," they'd quickly find out all their efforts were for nothing, because there are hundreds if not thousands of middlemen in between the platform and the content creator taking their share first.
Or the content creator starting today can first buy in and stake some tokens. They then get a share, but they're also in debt. So they technically wouldn't be earning a dime of that ad revenue until they break even. That could take a very long time.
Unfortunately I'm not impressed with how this all looks. Certainly doesn't encourage me to use the platform. The stakeholders basically hoard the value of all the attention generated, stripping it from both the content creators and consumers at the same time, while standing on the sidelines.
Maybe I'm missing something but for an actual content creator, this model could potentially be the worst deal on the entire internet.
The day comes a content creator finally wants to pay themselves. What happens? Possibly unstake a few tokens, effectively giving themselves a lasting pay cut for the future.
@yieldgrower is saying he got a $75 payout and he's only got 20k LEO powered up.
I have over 250k Leo power.
Clearly I should have learned more before writing this.
But then again I take people on their word when they market things a certain way.
I assumed I got $50 because I have hundreds of posts on LEO that are getting some amount of traffic. Not so sure how it works now. I'll ask in Discord.
Traffic generators also earn from the ad revenue without having any stake through evergreen rewards.
There are two ways to earn from here: have stake or generate traffic.
cc @nonameslefttouse
Does that payout from roughly ten days ago include evergreen rewards?
It does, but there are hardly any evergreen rewards, we need to up our SEO and outreach game, the main purpose of evergreen rewards is to encourage authors to promote their high level posts outside of hive and maybe that way we'll bring more eyes into hive = incentivizing the outreach.
I've been a huge proponent of moving a part of the reward pool towards outreach and promotion, and rewards authors based on clicks and views and not just based on arbitrary criteria set by each community member, but that hasn't gotten any traction, but hopefully this one will.
The goal is that at one point the evergreen rewards dwarf the hive rewards, but who knows if we'll ever get there.
It's going to take a lot of work to reach that goal, but I respect the goal. Good luck.
IMO it's one the few goals that will help $hive (token) build positive momentum and maybe not miss the bulls, if people are making money from ads maybe they won't need to sell $hive to pay bills.
Yieldgrower got 75... tokens. Not dollars.
lol right I see the $LEO and think USD.
next post will explain all the fuckups I made in this one.
I learned a little bit more. 200 view minimum for evergreen rewards to kick in. I've been able to achieve that on PeakD a few times organically from the local consumer base. Now all I need to do is tell them stop viewing there and go somewhere else so I can get paid...
Do I really want to be that guy?
Or the other option is to wait and hope the consumer base grows on inleo because others did that, then show up and leech off their efforts.
Do I really wan to be that guy?
LOL. Still early in the game. Hopefully things become a little more clear as time progresses. As soon as we're seeing content creators at the top of that payout list earning from evergreen, I think that's when it becomes attractive. "80%" doesn't mean much until then.
I'll tag @khaleelkazi here if he can clearfy further, as yes I find your points valid.
Just something to add is, imagin if this add thing didnt existied, as it was till now. Users get just the incetive from people curating their content and earning tokens from that... this revenue can be an aditional incetive for them to keep those tokens and bring in more revenue....
For sure the dude deserves to hear and might have something to add or adjust. I'm not knocking anyone down. Just the model seems a bit out of whack.
People need to know stacking tokens isn't something your typical content creator wants to be doing. I realize on Hive that's like saying all the swear words in one sentence but, it's true. They want to monetize their work and pay their bills, just like anyone else in the workforce.
Stacking tokens and acquiring perks is more suited to consumers. They want more bang for their buck. So in this scenario, they buy the tokens to support the work. They get a share of the ad revenue with this model. They turn around and use that to support content creators they came to see and support. Support levels grow naturally due to all these systems in place. Content creator can cash out, and some of that money goes back into creating better content for the consumer, incentivizing them to buy and hold more.
Still, the content creator would want a share of the ad revenue as well. They get the ball rolling in this attention economy. Screw them over, and they go someplace else.
Just want to add, this scenario where the consumer is receiving ad revenue in this fashion, then paying it forward by supporting content with votes; in a sense the content creator is receiving that ad revenue indirectly from the consumer, over time. Not a bad thing at all... just different.
it looks like Ninja stake at Steemit 😎
I'd say give this 6-12 months before making a comparison like that. On the surface it does appear to be a bit top-heavy but it's only the first payout. At this point I don't even know if anything qualified to receive "evergreen rewards." Oddly enough the pinned posts from the team stand a good chance...
Of course, it's not comparable, it's more like a metaphor, I've already replied to someone, but as far as I'm concerned it's ok, because the prize is a second-layer token, and they're supposedly going to make sure that the tokenomics comes out. But, at the end of the day, it just looks a bit more sophisticated to me than a voting bot to which you delegate something and get a reward in its token
I want to see it succeed but I'm confused. If 1000 content creators all get 199 views, that's 199000 views to the site, but not one content creator qualified for "evergreen rewards" so all that money goes to stakeholders instead.
Or maybe once again I'm missing something. I dunno...
I don't know what to say. I bought a Leo premium account on purpose, let's say I post something daily through their interface, but I get zero or very few views. Obviously, nobody is interested in my posts there. Therefore, I do not expect anything. I have delegated the staked Leo tokens on to somewhere else, at least there I get something in return. I will not use their front-end because it is not good for me. We'll see what happens, as you said, some time has to pass.
Content creator on Hive (Inleo is a part of Hive) is better off saving money by not paying for premium options available elsewhere for free, and lining up their own sponsorships. Eliminates all those middlemen. Could also sell the perks that come standard like curation reward (simply call it consumer reward instead) to your own audience and grow yourself a solid decentralized revenue stream as well, where you're not relying on large stakeholders or curation groups for support (plus you have an actual audience). Those options are sitting on the table, smiling at everyone here, yet going completely unnoticed.
That 80% share certainly looks good in writing. 20% pays better? Stakeholders are rewarded more if content creators get fewer views? Is that good for business or bad? I have more questions than anything. Maybe some answers will come along...
Probably best to stop thinking about it.