I make nothing from Ads playing on my TECH channel videos. This channel still needs more watch hours and subscribers to reach the 2nd tier of the YouTube Partner Program. YouTube is changing their policy on that 2nd tier with revenue sharing. Starting in February 2027, it will basically be twice as difficult to reach what is needed. I currently need around 1000 additional watch hours, but after that point I'll need ~5000 hours based on my current statistics. It feels unlikely that I'll reach an additional 1/4th of my current viewership in time. This will be a real setback to the viability of the channel.
Check out the video where they state that the money "isn't significant" to creators:
They are changing the requirement to 8000 hours instead of 4000 in a rolling 365 day count. Keep in mind that vertical videos don't count toward this. The subscribers needed stays the same at 1000 or more, so I need around 250 more of you all to join me there as well.
YouTube's current claim is that the amount of money from Ad revenue sharing at 4000 watch hours "isn't significant" to creators. So that implies that I shouldn't get anything and they should be able to run Ads until reaching that higher viewership amount? I'd say that money is a lot more meaningful to me than them.
When they first implemented the YPP threshold requirement they claimed it was needed to counter "bad actors" and to help advertisers feel safe running Ads on the platform. It doesn't make sense.
I lost noticeable money when the 1000 subscriber 4000 watch hour threshold was originally implemented back in February 2018. I lost around $10 to $30 per month combined on my other channels besides the one channel that kept its status. This was the beginning of a bad policy shift that was counter to my online video work related to YouTube.
As Susan mentioned in December, we’re making changes to address the issues that affected our community in 2017 so we can prevent bad actors from harming the inspiring and original creators around the world who make their living on YouTube. A big part of that effort will be strengthening our requirements for monetization so spammers, impersonators, and other bad actors can’t hurt our ecosystem or take advantage of you, while continuing to reward those who make our platform great.
Starting today we’re changing the eligibility requirement for monetization to 4,000 hours of watchtime within the past 12 months and 1,000 subscribers. We’ve arrived at these new thresholds after thorough analysis and conversations with creators like you. They will allow us to significantly improve our ability to identify creators who contribute positively to the community and help drive more ad revenue to them (and away from bad actors). These higher standards will also help us prevent potentially inappropriate videos from monetizing which can hurt revenue for everyone.
In November 2020: "YouTube updated its Terms of Service to explicitly reserve the right to display ads on non-partnered channels without sharing any of that ad revenue with the creator." They do this and I see it happening on the technology channel.
 |
| A video with Ads on it I don't get revenue sharing from. |
 |
| A video with Ads on it I don't get revenue sharing from. |
 |
| A video with Ads on it I don't get revenue sharing from. |
The Ad revenue from here would help me make all of this online video work a little bit more viable even if the "VP of Creator Product" and whoever else at YouTube decides these policies thinks that the money isn't significant. Those few dollars a month or likely more could go to buying any number of tech accessories or products I could show or use for the channel.
Some commenters love saying that YouTube and online video platforms in general don't need to or shouldn't share revenue. It's such a pointless nihilistic mentality. Under that mentality, it could be applied to nearly any form of work or value that people create. It damages the idea and viability of one type of work because it's not something they do. I wonder how they'd feel if their choice of work no longer needs to share revenue with them for their services? In the photography world we get this a lot with the idea of being "paid in exposure". I think it's a pretty similar bad joke in this case. Anyone that's attempted to produce a video or has done photography for work understands this mentality that attempts to devalue their work.
There are more problematic changes to YPP in general with new minimums:
Updated channel activity requirements
To better recognize creators' consistent effort and reflect the realities of different formats, we are updating how we consider channels active in YPP.
Starting February 1, 2027, your channel is considered active if you meet any of the following requirements:
- 1,000 qualified watch hours in the past 365 days, or
- 1 million qualified Shorts views in the last 90 days, or
- 2 long-form videos or 5 Shorts uploaded every 90 days
Restore active status
Most creators in YPP already meet YPP activity thresholds, but those that drop below will now have an extended 90-day window to meet either of these requirements to stay in the program:
- 1,000 qualified watch hours in the past 365 days, or
- 1 million qualified Shorts views in the last 90 days
I haven't even touch on the problems with policy changes in vertical format short form video. They are basically removing the vast majority of creators from revenue sharing in that video format. That will include my larger channel that currently makes a few dollars a month on that format, so I'll be losing money with this change too.
Updating YPP ads & Premium entry thresholds
Starting Feb. 1, 2027, YPP entry thresholds for new creators are changing to 8,000 qualified watch hours in the last 365 days, or 20M qualified Shorts views in the last 90 days, in addition to still needing 1k subscribers. If you are already in YPP, your status is not impacted by this update.
There are no changes to the eligibility requirements for fan funding, YouTube Creator Partnerships, or YouTube Shopping. These products will continue to help creators to start their earning journeys even earlier when they reach 500 subscribers and either 3,000 qualified watch hours in the last year or 3M qualified Shorts views in the last 90 days.
20 million shorts views in 90 days seems insane to me. In the comments of the linked announcement videos there are creators saying that they are making hundreds of dollars a month or more but well under the 20 million per 90 days requirement. It's a figurative slap to the face of creators with how they are describing the reasons for this policy change.
Maybe it's for the sake of platform expenses? Maybe advertisement on YouTube globally had dropped? Who knows.
It feels like the corporate profit focused groups or individuals with control at Alphabet, Google, and YouTube have seen TikTok's and Meta's poor revenue sharing options that have been mostly accepted by users on those platform, so YouTube is testing the waters with walking back on the whole idea of the "creator economy" revenue sharing. It's been happening for quite a few years at this point. Every seemingly small change makes it more difficult to make all of this financially viable for anyone besides the lucky unicorns. Hard work was never the only thing needed, but small changes like this add up.
The other references: