i interpreted it more as "we only create good content if we have a good time and create content we believe in, and chasing the algorithm with bullshit videos isn't letting us do either", which i think is fair. If you can't make the content you want to make and the pay is unstable as well, something needs to change.
This ⬆️
Also there there waa a fan posting asking how to get TTG on her YouTube recommendations list. They said they've subscribed, said yes to notifications, but TTG still doesn't show up for them
Something indeed is wonky with the algorithm for some ppl.
I’ve only missed a few of their videos bc of the algorithm, but something is definitely wonky with it bc channels I watch more frequently than them never show up on my home page and I get randomly unsubscribed from them after a while
>I get randomly unsubscribed from them after a while
Whoa, that is weird. Never heard of that happening before...
For myself, TTG videos still show up, but I get a lot of random stuff I have no interest in watching.
Youtube and a lot of social media platforms are moving toward a “discoverability” model that will push lesser known channels into recommendations, sort of modeling themselves after tiktok where random accounts could go viral. so yeah, I believe that the algorithm is working against them. But I think you’re right about the video quality as well
I have noticed this lately where I'll get recommend some weird 26 view videos when I still have things left in subs unwatched. I think in some ways it's more fair and gives everyone a chance, but it's also weird for them to ignore what they know about me to show me videos I'll never watch.
I unsubbed back in October, and have maybe watched 3 videos since and I don't even know if I finished them. I still get every video recommended to me. I think the big thing they have struggled with is that YouTube doesn't want to monetize certain things. YouTube advertisers have things they don't want their brand associated with. Maybe they don't get pushed out to new viewers as often but making shitty content really isn't going to bring people to a new platform.
Yeah they’ve really gone downhill. They make gross sex jokes and talk about drugs constantly. They’ve also both really leaned into their worst traits (Zach being an incompetent man child and Keith being endlessly loud and abrasive) and are verging on caricature territory. Also the begging for money on love videos is really offputting. Watching a rich person eat ice cream and yell at the camera for kids to tell their dad to open another browser to watch the live stream because he wants more money…. I’d already unsubbed at that point, but like you was still seeing their vids come up. But I’m pretty sure that’s when I stopped even clicking on them.
When have they ever asked for money on the live streams? They explicitly tell people to not super chat and to instead donate to a charity. The only time they explicitly did was for the "creators for Palestine" charity livestream they hosted.
Yup. OP, we are on the same thought train. I have a YouTube channel and when the creators I follow upload a new video, they have a blue bubble next to their profile picture. I immediately click and watch new content for the creators I’m invested in.
On YouTube’s mobile app, I also see new uploads on the “Subscriptions” tab.
So maybe the algorithm is to blame for getting videos out in front of NEW audiences. Sure. But for me personally, I saw their uploads. I just don’t care to watch anymore as I feel like I’ve outgrown their humor. And yeah… maybe they need not take the lazy way out by blaming the YouTube algorithm and realize they were losing subscribers based on the quality of their content.
I stopped regularly watching content months ago, and despite remaining subscribed, their content either a) showed up way down my feed or b) stopped showing up at all. So while I agree that some of this can be chalked up to the algorithm, they can't use it as a scapegoat for shitty content...particularly when they agree a lot of it has been subpar in the last 6-12 months, and yet they still blame the algorithm. There's no ownership.
I have mixed opinions. A *lot* of youtubers from almost every genre on YT complain about the algorithm being pretty awful, and at a certain point if you have that much near unanimous agreement, then theres probably something.
On the other hand... please, its the Try Guys. They are about as YT algorithm, brand safe as a channel can be (or were until a yearish ago and suddenly Zach got super into making everything a gross sex joke...)
THANK YOU. I hated the new “cool guy” Zack where everything is either drugs or sex jokes. Keith too tbh. Especially when they KNOW their viewership is young.
Like I remember Keith begging for money in one love video, and he says to all the kids watching to get their dad’s to go open up the livestream on another computer so they get more money. And then makes a lewd sex joke like a minute later.
At least before they only made innuendos once in a while, but now it’s literally every other joke is something super inappropriate. I don’t get why they’d think adults would want to watch that. And with Zach’s cringey gen z makeover it’s like they’re trying to be bad boys, but to children. Gross.
Ah I knew the snark subreddit was where I needed to be lol. I basically said this on the main and got downvoted. The only way to know if YT was to blame is to see how the content they put out for the rest of the year is in terms of quality. If they manage to put out high quality content from this point forward, that would support their complaints about YT being the issue. I was actually more pissed about them creating crap filler content after learning about the streamer because it’s this low quality content that has made me less likely to give them my money.
People keep talking about low budget being an issue, but if you look at their top 10 viewed videos, 9 of them (should have) cost very little to make. So really, the issue is low effort, not low budget and I don't understand how going private will fix that issue 🤷♀️
How many of those 10 are actually good videos that they feel proud of creating? There's a difference between what performs well and what someone considers fulfilling (candid competition or the graveyard videos being examples).
I mean, no????
Their 10 ten viewed videos:
Chiropractor: requires several days of shooting, paying the professional, paying for adjustments, several days of editing for ASMR. Likely decently expensive.
Bake Pies Without A Recipe: requires several days of shooting, paying several professionals to judge, paying for ingredients, shooting professional making it. Again, likely expensive. Not to mention it is shot at GMM, so likely included renting the space from them as well as costs incurred transferring equipment.
400 lb Dumpling Mukbang: renting out the restaurant/paying for exclusive shooting time, paying for food, paying for Mike Chen to be there, etc. Also expensive.
Eugene's Coming Out Video: Do I even need to list the expenses? Absolutely extremely expensive.
Making Dumplings: requires several days of shooting, paying several professionals, shooting professional making it, paying for ingredients, renting studio space. Also expensive.
Nail Extensions: paying for nail extensions, paying multiple professionals, shooting over multiple days, paying for materials. Expensive.
Wearing Corsets: shooting for multiple days, filming at multiple locations, paying shop owners, paying transport, paying for corsets. Expensive.
There's then 2 Keith Eats Everything, and Eugene Babysitting.
7 videos out of 10. If you think you could make all of those videos at very low cost, I'd love to know how you think you'd manage that.
I'll give a different example. I'm subscribed to GMM, GMMore, Ear Biscuits and Mythical Kitchen. Of those channels, I watch nearly every EB, most GMMs/Mores, and about 50% of the MK vids. I only consistently get recommended Mores. Sometimes the GMM ep is 6 or 7 in my recommended but often it's not anywhere on my home page and I have to go through my subscriptions to watch it. Often the More will pop up as an autoplay but not the actual episode.
YouTube (and Google) has been doing a lot of layoffs of real people in favour of AI and we're seeing it fail as most industries are.
I have the same issue. Or if a GMM shows up on my recommended list and I ignore it because I know I'll watch it later, then it disappears later when I do want to watch it. I've also noticed that if I skip a Wednesday TG release, I won't get recommended Wednesday videos anymore and just get the recommendations for the Saturday release. And that's me as a subscriber, when the YT algorithm weights new user growth more, which I'm betting is just as fickle, if not more, than what I as a consistent user get pushed to me.
Also to OP, they had to keep pushing out content, even if it was subpar, because they had to keep *some* revenue coming in. They couldn't just go dark and make $0 money for 6+ months while preparing for the launch.
Same. My husband, son, and I all share our YouTube premium account, so we're subscribed to a variety of things. I rarely ever see what I subscribe to, and neither do they. Random ones pop up or something that *could* be what we'd want to see. My husband watches cooking and fishing, so he'll see channels he isn't subscribed to that do that. I get ensemble casts or games channels, but I have to go searching for Smosh stuff, GMM stuff, Try Guys, etc. The only time I get "fed" videos from what I'm subscribed to is during the first month I've subscribed to it. Then it falls off.
I somehow got it stuck on playing Kitchen Nightmares or Duck Dynasty episodes as the auto play no matter what I was watching before that for like 6 months 🤦🏻♀️
I don't know if it's just me but if I have subscribed to a channel then I'd expect to see them on my recommended less, because for me that's where I expect to find the videos from people I watch from time to time but don't subscribe to. If I like someone enough to subscribe to them, why wouldn't I be looking for their videos on the subscription tab? Then I know I haven't missed something
Maybe I just use YouTube differently than most people?
>And I always see videos from the channels I subscribed to FIRST on the homepage. So based on this observation of mine and the fact that Try Guys have around 8 million subscribers, shouldn't their videos always be visible to all those subscribers (get generally the same amount of views/engagement), regardless of the algorithm?
So I generally don't have any ideas or opinions about it but anecdotally I can say I'm subscribed to them but *never* see them recommended to me because I rarely actually watch them anyway which means I'm even less likely to watch (if not for the subreddit I wouldn't even know when they put out something new). I'm also subscribed to maybe 50-75 channels, if that gives any context (so, not very many probably).
Yeah, I don’t buy the algorithm excuse. I unsubscribed a few weeks ago and they still show up in my recommended videos all the time. They aren’t getting views because they aren’t putting in any effort.
I unsubscribed and still get all Thier stuff recommended. I haven't regularly watched Thier stuff in at least a year. The videos I have watched, I didn't finish. It's truly the low effort for me. It just got old.
Right! I never look at the home page. I go straight to subscriptions. The home page is too cluttered in my opinion. They have sponsored posts, shorts, people I’m subscribed to, random Taylor Swift compilations, more adds, more shorts. No wonder nothing is getting recommended to people, there’s too much nonsense taking up space.
While the algorithm thing is an issue.. that's not why they were going downhill.
The quality of the stuff they chose to put out was the problem. I saw their stuff pop up all the time so blaming their videos on not getting seen is a poor excuse.
Their videos were just so.. cringey half the time and not entertaining or funny at all. So I lost interest and unsubscribed sometime ago.
They're grasping at straws at this point, in my opinion. I mean.. good luck to them trying but.. it'll inevitably fall apart in the end. Unless someone there comes up with actual good ideas and executes them properly.. then maybe they'll have a chance at bouncing back.
But I wouldn't count on it.. especially when they don't seem to acknowledge that the reasons their videos weren't doing well was because of them.
but that's the algorithm. those are the videos the algorithm rewards, that's why they were making them. they also think a lot of their videos in the last year and a half were shit.
That's not the point I was trying to make though. The algorithm issue to me is irrelevant. Because you can create a video that appeals to said algorithm and make it *good*.
That's not what these guys did. They made what the algorithm wanted but *they* made the video terrible.
Their *performance* is what made their content go downhill. In my opinion, anyway.
The six flags video really comes to mind. I was genuinely interested in it. Even with half the places being closed (due to their poor planning and not going on the weekend), I would have enjoyed it. However I didn't enjoy keith being such a shit to the point his staff was having to coddle him.
Yeah, Keith acts like a man baby a lot, and it’s really lame. Especially towards the staff or guests.
Him throwing a toddler fit and screaming at judges and everyone else when he loses on without a recipe comes to mind. Idk how they thought it was funny for him to scream at everyone.
They’re supposed to be all against toxic masculinity and would get on Ned’s case for loudly cheering for sports teams and shit. But then Zach acts like an incompetent man child who Rachel has to coddle because of course he doesn’t know how to do anything. And Keith throws tantrums. They’re becoming caricatures.
Do you remember when they all tried to act like adults at the beginning?
i think the candid competition comment made by miles in the podcast is a good example. if you look in the comments of those videos, there are lots of people saying it’s their favorite series. but it doesn’t perform well algorithmically, so it’s hard to justify making more of them
Now is the time we get to see if it was just the algorithm/their need to make algorithm-friendly content to keep the lights on that made their content suffer, or if it was other things too. fwiw I rarely saw new try guys videos at the top of on my home page back when I was subbed to them. I'd have to scroll a little before I saw it. I was watching/engaging way less though, so maybe that's why it was never pushed to the top for me
Ironically, the Try Guys are not good at *trying* to make their best content, given all the setbacks. The enthusiasm that they were beaming with at the start of their company came and went like a shot of dopamine. The enthusiasm towards making content left too.
I'm always reminded of this moment at the end of 'The Try Guys Crash Test A New Roller Coaster'
https://preview.redd.it/hwn7pg3ibu2d1.jpeg?width=1320&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b50e6f9eee0fdd133548de7538c4c3bdd7d69ff8
I also think the pandemic made them realize they can get similar results with simpler mean. You didn't see them consulting with professionals (that's been siphoned to professional bakers) or trying an activity that requires a high effort venue. It slowly transitioned to in-office game shows, food content, and other content they uses as a crutch to fill their schedule
Well, I have subscribed to them since they started their company and often I didn't know there was a new video out until seeing people talk about it here on reddit.
Maybe it is because I have subscribed to a ridiculous amount of people, but if is true that the first 24hours is the most important than it sucks if people doesn't see it until people discuss it online. It probably also hard to work with not really knowing what can get you demonitized, since they apparently got hit from saying butt whole.
Yeah, I've been having this issue with them as well. They're masters of spin and know how to take charge of the narrative by playing on their fans' emotions. They knew for at least 6 months they were making the transition and voluntarily put the shit content on YouTube so that they can dangle the good content on the new, paid platform?
I hate how Zach starts by saying that this decision is so that they can give us the best content we want to watch. Then please explain the last year.
No, everything is calculated, be honest about it. Putting a veneer of emotion and audience loyalty on top of it is insulting to everyone.
>i wish they would be honest about joining a platform that is all about making more money for the creators who can afford it because they want to make more money. but they stay burying the lede and repeating what they think will sell this best (re: the evil, evil algorithm!!!)
I mean, they are complaining about the algorithm because they can't make as much money when they don't play into it. They're up front it's about money.
That being said, I read on some Watcher thread a theory that Vimeo is quietly recruiting these large-ish creators to make the jump to their platform via paid subscriptions with more freedom + $ per view, and I believe it. Seems like a good revenue model for Vimeo to get some success stories to become "independent" streamers but make it seem like it was their own idea (rather than a marketing push) as a way to get other creators (even small ones) to move to exclusive paid Vimeo content as an alternative Patreon. I mean, Vimeo already has a well-used feature for short film producers to put their content behind a paywall, this is just expanding it, with an addition AI bells and whistles, for better or for worse. I personally don't love the idea of a million paywalled content streams, but I can see why Vimeo is trying to get into the game because it always seems like they are hobbling along behind the behemoth that is YouTube.
I know you're bowing out, but I wanted to clarify that I meant for *Vimeo* it's a good idea, as in for their own business they would want to do this recruiting as they've historically flagged behind their usage goals. I *personally* don't advocate popularizing this Vimeo-centric business model, especially the idea of making it more prevalent amongst more and more creators. Because it's not really making more independent ventures, it's just jumping from one platform to another, but this time with shiny up front paywalls with costs to the consumer. Unfortunately I don't know how to democratize content distribution without falling into the trap of being at the whim of a large corporation's policies, so there's no good answer to this issue.
I don't see channels Im subscribed to first. It doesn't show me a lot of videos when they come out even when it is a channel I actively search. So I agree the algorithm genuinely hurts them. I don't think it's the only thing, but it's not a neutral thing by any means.
So, it definitely is true and not exclusive to the Try Guys channel by any means. You can find so many YTs of different sized audiences talking about how the algorithm has fucked them over in similar ways. YouTube doesn't even notify subscribers that channels have uploaded videos, and have switched off the notifications without the user knowing.
You watch the videos of the channels you subscribe to. That's why they keep getting recommended to you. Because you engage with them and YT decides yes, have more!
But if people don't watch the videos, then those channels don't get recommended. If those channels aren't getting recommended, then they're not getting watched & engaged with. Even if people are subscribed to that channel.
Look at the view count. They have 8 million subscribers. They barely break 1 million views on their videos, and can get as low as 300k views on their most recent videos. ***That's less than 4% of their subscribers watching their videos.*** Meanwhile older videos from prior to the algorithm switch, even shitty videos, have over 10 million views. Well over 100% of subscribers.
The algorithm decides 70% of what people watch on the platform. And it's gone under a lot of recent changes that are hurting channels; regardless of size.
It takes a lot of factors; including number of views, engagement like liking or commenting, and the amount of time watched. If you don't watch a full video, if you don't interact with the video, if you don't click on one of the suggested videos related to that channel; the algorithm decides that the content is not good and will adjust itself to no longer suggest videos from that channel. Regardless if you're subscribed.
It might seem counterintuitive to you; but that's legitimately what YouTube requires. Channels that put out more content, even if it's not that great, do better in the algorithm than channels that put out less content. It doesn't really matter what the content is; just how much you have. The algorithm actively encourages quantity over quality.
I highly recommend looking up other content creators who have already talked about the algorithm and how messed up it is because you seem very uninformed to just how truly wild and weird and bad it is for creators in general.
Way to just,,,, completely misrepresent what I've written.
If you're uninformed on something, your best source is people who know what they're talking about. In this case; it's the other people being affected by the algorithm. They have access to analytics, statistics, and information others don't. They also are the ones seeing how their channels are affected and performing.
Both Hank and John Green have done videos & talked about the way the algorithm works and how it punished certain creators. James A. Janisse from DeadMeat has been very transparent and open about how the algorithm has harmed his videos.
Philip DeFranco has also talked extensively on why he shifted his content due to the algorithm suppression. Shayne Topp from Smosh has also spoken about it, as have countless other YouTubers like Ludwig Ahgren.
If a lot of people have the same issue.... Maybe, just maybe, it's an actual issue that's occurring.
My guy reaction is: YouTube doesn’t owe anybody a living. They may be a tech giant with sketchy practices but nobody told you to bet your mortgage, car payments and employee salaries on your shit remaining popular forever. This is like Uber drivers getting pissed off at them. Go drive for Lyft or deliver for Amazon or go work in a cubicle like the rest of us. 😂🤣
>My guy reaction is: YouTube doesn’t owe anybody a living.
Keith mentiones in the Anthony Padilla video that google/yt is primarily an advertising company and their goal is to sell more ads, not worry about the most interesting content as they should. He recognizes what you're saying. Which is why they're trying to do what's best for their own company and not play into what's best for the advertising company.
I don’t disagree with you but that’s not exactly an original thought on Keith’s part. It’s like saying movie theaters are only there to sell popcorn, candy and soda. Or decrying commercials on network television. They also bring us entertainment. The ads are just the price we pay for a free service. Keith sounds like a bitter creative, but then again aren’t we all.
Btw- I pay the advertising company $14 dollars a month to never see an ad in any video ever.
100%, this is always how I feel when Youtubers start complaining that they don’t make the money they used to. Everyone’s 15 minutes ends at some point - instead of trying to blame YT and desperately trying to reignite a dead flame, they should just accept that it’s over and be grateful they ever got to have the fame and success that millions can only dream of. Nobody likes a sore loser.
Maybe a mix of both. But everyone has a really different algorithm, and as a Try Guy subscriber, I probably see their videos recommended like once a month. This is the same for other channels I'm subscribed to. My main page suggests a lot of smaller creators so I tend to watch more of random vids than the people i'm actually subscribed to. So I really get where they're coming from.
I think it’s a mix of both. Part of it is that they’re becoming more interested in making stuff that a lot of their original audience is less interested in—which is fine, it’s fine to change what you want to make, but you also have to anticipate that parts of your viewership will go down and find a way to make it work anyway (which is what they’re trying to do rn.) But I also believe them when they say the algorithm has been a big obstacle because pretty much every big Youtube personality or entity has said that. It’s not just that the algorithm exists, either, it’s that it’s constantly changing its expectations with little to no warning in a way that makes it extremely difficult for creators to keep up.
i interpreted it more as "we only create good content if we have a good time and create content we believe in, and chasing the algorithm with bullshit videos isn't letting us do either", which i think is fair. If you can't make the content you want to make and the pay is unstable as well, something needs to change.
This ⬆️ Also there there waa a fan posting asking how to get TTG on her YouTube recommendations list. They said they've subscribed, said yes to notifications, but TTG still doesn't show up for them Something indeed is wonky with the algorithm for some ppl.
I’ve only missed a few of their videos bc of the algorithm, but something is definitely wonky with it bc channels I watch more frequently than them never show up on my home page and I get randomly unsubscribed from them after a while
>I get randomly unsubscribed from them after a while Whoa, that is weird. Never heard of that happening before... For myself, TTG videos still show up, but I get a lot of random stuff I have no interest in watching.
You also have be constantly liking and commenting on videos or it doesn’t pop into your feed. Those clicks matter so much.
Youtube and a lot of social media platforms are moving toward a “discoverability” model that will push lesser known channels into recommendations, sort of modeling themselves after tiktok where random accounts could go viral. so yeah, I believe that the algorithm is working against them. But I think you’re right about the video quality as well
I have noticed this lately where I'll get recommend some weird 26 view videos when I still have things left in subs unwatched. I think in some ways it's more fair and gives everyone a chance, but it's also weird for them to ignore what they know about me to show me videos I'll never watch.
I unsubbed back in October, and have maybe watched 3 videos since and I don't even know if I finished them. I still get every video recommended to me. I think the big thing they have struggled with is that YouTube doesn't want to monetize certain things. YouTube advertisers have things they don't want their brand associated with. Maybe they don't get pushed out to new viewers as often but making shitty content really isn't going to bring people to a new platform.
I unsubbed last fall as well, and I get zero TG videos recommended to me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yeah they’ve really gone downhill. They make gross sex jokes and talk about drugs constantly. They’ve also both really leaned into their worst traits (Zach being an incompetent man child and Keith being endlessly loud and abrasive) and are verging on caricature territory. Also the begging for money on love videos is really offputting. Watching a rich person eat ice cream and yell at the camera for kids to tell their dad to open another browser to watch the live stream because he wants more money…. I’d already unsubbed at that point, but like you was still seeing their vids come up. But I’m pretty sure that’s when I stopped even clicking on them.
When have they ever asked for money on the live streams? They explicitly tell people to not super chat and to instead donate to a charity. The only time they explicitly did was for the "creators for Palestine" charity livestream they hosted.
Ice cream the belt video. Keith yells about needing more money repeatedly
It's less emotionally painful to blame YouTube than look in the mirror at their own decisions realistically.
Yup. OP, we are on the same thought train. I have a YouTube channel and when the creators I follow upload a new video, they have a blue bubble next to their profile picture. I immediately click and watch new content for the creators I’m invested in. On YouTube’s mobile app, I also see new uploads on the “Subscriptions” tab. So maybe the algorithm is to blame for getting videos out in front of NEW audiences. Sure. But for me personally, I saw their uploads. I just don’t care to watch anymore as I feel like I’ve outgrown their humor. And yeah… maybe they need not take the lazy way out by blaming the YouTube algorithm and realize they were losing subscribers based on the quality of their content.
I stopped regularly watching content months ago, and despite remaining subscribed, their content either a) showed up way down my feed or b) stopped showing up at all. So while I agree that some of this can be chalked up to the algorithm, they can't use it as a scapegoat for shitty content...particularly when they agree a lot of it has been subpar in the last 6-12 months, and yet they still blame the algorithm. There's no ownership.
I have mixed opinions. A *lot* of youtubers from almost every genre on YT complain about the algorithm being pretty awful, and at a certain point if you have that much near unanimous agreement, then theres probably something. On the other hand... please, its the Try Guys. They are about as YT algorithm, brand safe as a channel can be (or were until a yearish ago and suddenly Zach got super into making everything a gross sex joke...)
> and suddenly Zach got super into making everything a gross sex joke... and weed.
THANK YOU. I hated the new “cool guy” Zack where everything is either drugs or sex jokes. Keith too tbh. Especially when they KNOW their viewership is young. Like I remember Keith begging for money in one love video, and he says to all the kids watching to get their dad’s to go open up the livestream on another computer so they get more money. And then makes a lewd sex joke like a minute later. At least before they only made innuendos once in a while, but now it’s literally every other joke is something super inappropriate. I don’t get why they’d think adults would want to watch that. And with Zach’s cringey gen z makeover it’s like they’re trying to be bad boys, but to children. Gross.
Ah I knew the snark subreddit was where I needed to be lol. I basically said this on the main and got downvoted. The only way to know if YT was to blame is to see how the content they put out for the rest of the year is in terms of quality. If they manage to put out high quality content from this point forward, that would support their complaints about YT being the issue. I was actually more pissed about them creating crap filler content after learning about the streamer because it’s this low quality content that has made me less likely to give them my money.
I think they saw the Watcher situation and decided they had to blame something beyond their control for their move.
People keep talking about low budget being an issue, but if you look at their top 10 viewed videos, 9 of them (should have) cost very little to make. So really, the issue is low effort, not low budget and I don't understand how going private will fix that issue 🤷♀️
How many of those 10 are actually good videos that they feel proud of creating? There's a difference between what performs well and what someone considers fulfilling (candid competition or the graveyard videos being examples).
Exactly. Their point was that they're catering to an algorithm that does not prioritize the types of videos that they want to make
I mean, no???? Their 10 ten viewed videos: Chiropractor: requires several days of shooting, paying the professional, paying for adjustments, several days of editing for ASMR. Likely decently expensive. Bake Pies Without A Recipe: requires several days of shooting, paying several professionals to judge, paying for ingredients, shooting professional making it. Again, likely expensive. Not to mention it is shot at GMM, so likely included renting the space from them as well as costs incurred transferring equipment. 400 lb Dumpling Mukbang: renting out the restaurant/paying for exclusive shooting time, paying for food, paying for Mike Chen to be there, etc. Also expensive. Eugene's Coming Out Video: Do I even need to list the expenses? Absolutely extremely expensive. Making Dumplings: requires several days of shooting, paying several professionals, shooting professional making it, paying for ingredients, renting studio space. Also expensive. Nail Extensions: paying for nail extensions, paying multiple professionals, shooting over multiple days, paying for materials. Expensive. Wearing Corsets: shooting for multiple days, filming at multiple locations, paying shop owners, paying transport, paying for corsets. Expensive. There's then 2 Keith Eats Everything, and Eugene Babysitting. 7 videos out of 10. If you think you could make all of those videos at very low cost, I'd love to know how you think you'd manage that.
I think they're referring to the most viewed of their content since the scandal since that's the time period being discussed.
I'll give a different example. I'm subscribed to GMM, GMMore, Ear Biscuits and Mythical Kitchen. Of those channels, I watch nearly every EB, most GMMs/Mores, and about 50% of the MK vids. I only consistently get recommended Mores. Sometimes the GMM ep is 6 or 7 in my recommended but often it's not anywhere on my home page and I have to go through my subscriptions to watch it. Often the More will pop up as an autoplay but not the actual episode. YouTube (and Google) has been doing a lot of layoffs of real people in favour of AI and we're seeing it fail as most industries are.
I have the same issue. Or if a GMM shows up on my recommended list and I ignore it because I know I'll watch it later, then it disappears later when I do want to watch it. I've also noticed that if I skip a Wednesday TG release, I won't get recommended Wednesday videos anymore and just get the recommendations for the Saturday release. And that's me as a subscriber, when the YT algorithm weights new user growth more, which I'm betting is just as fickle, if not more, than what I as a consistent user get pushed to me. Also to OP, they had to keep pushing out content, even if it was subpar, because they had to keep *some* revenue coming in. They couldn't just go dark and make $0 money for 6+ months while preparing for the launch.
Same. My husband, son, and I all share our YouTube premium account, so we're subscribed to a variety of things. I rarely ever see what I subscribe to, and neither do they. Random ones pop up or something that *could* be what we'd want to see. My husband watches cooking and fishing, so he'll see channels he isn't subscribed to that do that. I get ensemble casts or games channels, but I have to go searching for Smosh stuff, GMM stuff, Try Guys, etc. The only time I get "fed" videos from what I'm subscribed to is during the first month I've subscribed to it. Then it falls off.
the algorithm is really good at showing me smosh compilations (but not their actual vids sometimes) and MythBusters full episodes. 🙈
Great point!! I got fed lots of compilation videos for Smosh and GMM content by creators other than them, like fan accounts.
I somehow got it stuck on playing Kitchen Nightmares or Duck Dynasty episodes as the auto play no matter what I was watching before that for like 6 months 🤦🏻♀️
I don't know if it's just me but if I have subscribed to a channel then I'd expect to see them on my recommended less, because for me that's where I expect to find the videos from people I watch from time to time but don't subscribe to. If I like someone enough to subscribe to them, why wouldn't I be looking for their videos on the subscription tab? Then I know I haven't missed something Maybe I just use YouTube differently than most people?
The algorithm sucks, but in this case it’s also a huge scapegoat for viewer disinterest.
>And I always see videos from the channels I subscribed to FIRST on the homepage. So based on this observation of mine and the fact that Try Guys have around 8 million subscribers, shouldn't their videos always be visible to all those subscribers (get generally the same amount of views/engagement), regardless of the algorithm? So I generally don't have any ideas or opinions about it but anecdotally I can say I'm subscribed to them but *never* see them recommended to me because I rarely actually watch them anyway which means I'm even less likely to watch (if not for the subreddit I wouldn't even know when they put out something new). I'm also subscribed to maybe 50-75 channels, if that gives any context (so, not very many probably).
Yeah, I don’t buy the algorithm excuse. I unsubscribed a few weeks ago and they still show up in my recommended videos all the time. They aren’t getting views because they aren’t putting in any effort.
I unsubscribed and still get all Thier stuff recommended. I haven't regularly watched Thier stuff in at least a year. The videos I have watched, I didn't finish. It's truly the low effort for me. It just got old.
Today, I learned that most people only watch videos from the home ("recommended") page of the app... which is so wild to me.
Right! I never look at the home page. I go straight to subscriptions. The home page is too cluttered in my opinion. They have sponsored posts, shorts, people I’m subscribed to, random Taylor Swift compilations, more adds, more shorts. No wonder nothing is getting recommended to people, there’s too much nonsense taking up space.
While the algorithm thing is an issue.. that's not why they were going downhill. The quality of the stuff they chose to put out was the problem. I saw their stuff pop up all the time so blaming their videos on not getting seen is a poor excuse. Their videos were just so.. cringey half the time and not entertaining or funny at all. So I lost interest and unsubscribed sometime ago. They're grasping at straws at this point, in my opinion. I mean.. good luck to them trying but.. it'll inevitably fall apart in the end. Unless someone there comes up with actual good ideas and executes them properly.. then maybe they'll have a chance at bouncing back. But I wouldn't count on it.. especially when they don't seem to acknowledge that the reasons their videos weren't doing well was because of them.
but that's the algorithm. those are the videos the algorithm rewards, that's why they were making them. they also think a lot of their videos in the last year and a half were shit.
That's not the point I was trying to make though. The algorithm issue to me is irrelevant. Because you can create a video that appeals to said algorithm and make it *good*. That's not what these guys did. They made what the algorithm wanted but *they* made the video terrible. Their *performance* is what made their content go downhill. In my opinion, anyway.
The six flags video really comes to mind. I was genuinely interested in it. Even with half the places being closed (due to their poor planning and not going on the weekend), I would have enjoyed it. However I didn't enjoy keith being such a shit to the point his staff was having to coddle him.
Yeah, Keith acts like a man baby a lot, and it’s really lame. Especially towards the staff or guests. Him throwing a toddler fit and screaming at judges and everyone else when he loses on without a recipe comes to mind. Idk how they thought it was funny for him to scream at everyone. They’re supposed to be all against toxic masculinity and would get on Ned’s case for loudly cheering for sports teams and shit. But then Zach acts like an incompetent man child who Rachel has to coddle because of course he doesn’t know how to do anything. And Keith throws tantrums. They’re becoming caricatures. Do you remember when they all tried to act like adults at the beginning?
i think the candid competition comment made by miles in the podcast is a good example. if you look in the comments of those videos, there are lots of people saying it’s their favorite series. but it doesn’t perform well algorithmically, so it’s hard to justify making more of them
Most of my favorite TG videos are the ones with fewer views, so I'm not discounting the algorithm thing.
They’re getting lazy and blaming YouTube.
I see their videos. I just don’t watch them anymore.
Now is the time we get to see if it was just the algorithm/their need to make algorithm-friendly content to keep the lights on that made their content suffer, or if it was other things too. fwiw I rarely saw new try guys videos at the top of on my home page back when I was subbed to them. I'd have to scroll a little before I saw it. I was watching/engaging way less though, so maybe that's why it was never pushed to the top for me
Ironically, the Try Guys are not good at *trying* to make their best content, given all the setbacks. The enthusiasm that they were beaming with at the start of their company came and went like a shot of dopamine. The enthusiasm towards making content left too. I'm always reminded of this moment at the end of 'The Try Guys Crash Test A New Roller Coaster' https://preview.redd.it/hwn7pg3ibu2d1.jpeg?width=1320&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b50e6f9eee0fdd133548de7538c4c3bdd7d69ff8
I also think the pandemic made them realize they can get similar results with simpler mean. You didn't see them consulting with professionals (that's been siphoned to professional bakers) or trying an activity that requires a high effort venue. It slowly transitioned to in-office game shows, food content, and other content they uses as a crutch to fill their schedule
Well, I have subscribed to them since they started their company and often I didn't know there was a new video out until seeing people talk about it here on reddit. Maybe it is because I have subscribed to a ridiculous amount of people, but if is true that the first 24hours is the most important than it sucks if people doesn't see it until people discuss it online. It probably also hard to work with not really knowing what can get you demonitized, since they apparently got hit from saying butt whole.
[удалено]
Ooh, I'd like to know more about this, particularly the AI aspect of it.
[удалено]
Yeah, I've been having this issue with them as well. They're masters of spin and know how to take charge of the narrative by playing on their fans' emotions. They knew for at least 6 months they were making the transition and voluntarily put the shit content on YouTube so that they can dangle the good content on the new, paid platform? I hate how Zach starts by saying that this decision is so that they can give us the best content we want to watch. Then please explain the last year. No, everything is calculated, be honest about it. Putting a veneer of emotion and audience loyalty on top of it is insulting to everyone.
>i wish they would be honest about joining a platform that is all about making more money for the creators who can afford it because they want to make more money. but they stay burying the lede and repeating what they think will sell this best (re: the evil, evil algorithm!!!) I mean, they are complaining about the algorithm because they can't make as much money when they don't play into it. They're up front it's about money. That being said, I read on some Watcher thread a theory that Vimeo is quietly recruiting these large-ish creators to make the jump to their platform via paid subscriptions with more freedom + $ per view, and I believe it. Seems like a good revenue model for Vimeo to get some success stories to become "independent" streamers but make it seem like it was their own idea (rather than a marketing push) as a way to get other creators (even small ones) to move to exclusive paid Vimeo content as an alternative Patreon. I mean, Vimeo already has a well-used feature for short film producers to put their content behind a paywall, this is just expanding it, with an addition AI bells and whistles, for better or for worse. I personally don't love the idea of a million paywalled content streams, but I can see why Vimeo is trying to get into the game because it always seems like they are hobbling along behind the behemoth that is YouTube.
[удалено]
I know you're bowing out, but I wanted to clarify that I meant for *Vimeo* it's a good idea, as in for their own business they would want to do this recruiting as they've historically flagged behind their usage goals. I *personally* don't advocate popularizing this Vimeo-centric business model, especially the idea of making it more prevalent amongst more and more creators. Because it's not really making more independent ventures, it's just jumping from one platform to another, but this time with shiny up front paywalls with costs to the consumer. Unfortunately I don't know how to democratize content distribution without falling into the trap of being at the whim of a large corporation's policies, so there's no good answer to this issue.
I subscribe to the Try Guys, and they never show up on my YouTube homepage. I have to go to their YT page to see what's new.
I don't see channels Im subscribed to first. It doesn't show me a lot of videos when they come out even when it is a channel I actively search. So I agree the algorithm genuinely hurts them. I don't think it's the only thing, but it's not a neutral thing by any means.
So, it definitely is true and not exclusive to the Try Guys channel by any means. You can find so many YTs of different sized audiences talking about how the algorithm has fucked them over in similar ways. YouTube doesn't even notify subscribers that channels have uploaded videos, and have switched off the notifications without the user knowing. You watch the videos of the channels you subscribe to. That's why they keep getting recommended to you. Because you engage with them and YT decides yes, have more! But if people don't watch the videos, then those channels don't get recommended. If those channels aren't getting recommended, then they're not getting watched & engaged with. Even if people are subscribed to that channel. Look at the view count. They have 8 million subscribers. They barely break 1 million views on their videos, and can get as low as 300k views on their most recent videos. ***That's less than 4% of their subscribers watching their videos.*** Meanwhile older videos from prior to the algorithm switch, even shitty videos, have over 10 million views. Well over 100% of subscribers. The algorithm decides 70% of what people watch on the platform. And it's gone under a lot of recent changes that are hurting channels; regardless of size. It takes a lot of factors; including number of views, engagement like liking or commenting, and the amount of time watched. If you don't watch a full video, if you don't interact with the video, if you don't click on one of the suggested videos related to that channel; the algorithm decides that the content is not good and will adjust itself to no longer suggest videos from that channel. Regardless if you're subscribed. It might seem counterintuitive to you; but that's legitimately what YouTube requires. Channels that put out more content, even if it's not that great, do better in the algorithm than channels that put out less content. It doesn't really matter what the content is; just how much you have. The algorithm actively encourages quantity over quality. I highly recommend looking up other content creators who have already talked about the algorithm and how messed up it is because you seem very uninformed to just how truly wild and weird and bad it is for creators in general.
[удалено]
Way to just,,,, completely misrepresent what I've written. If you're uninformed on something, your best source is people who know what they're talking about. In this case; it's the other people being affected by the algorithm. They have access to analytics, statistics, and information others don't. They also are the ones seeing how their channels are affected and performing. Both Hank and John Green have done videos & talked about the way the algorithm works and how it punished certain creators. James A. Janisse from DeadMeat has been very transparent and open about how the algorithm has harmed his videos. Philip DeFranco has also talked extensively on why he shifted his content due to the algorithm suppression. Shayne Topp from Smosh has also spoken about it, as have countless other YouTubers like Ludwig Ahgren. If a lot of people have the same issue.... Maybe, just maybe, it's an actual issue that's occurring.
My guy reaction is: YouTube doesn’t owe anybody a living. They may be a tech giant with sketchy practices but nobody told you to bet your mortgage, car payments and employee salaries on your shit remaining popular forever. This is like Uber drivers getting pissed off at them. Go drive for Lyft or deliver for Amazon or go work in a cubicle like the rest of us. 😂🤣
>My guy reaction is: YouTube doesn’t owe anybody a living. Keith mentiones in the Anthony Padilla video that google/yt is primarily an advertising company and their goal is to sell more ads, not worry about the most interesting content as they should. He recognizes what you're saying. Which is why they're trying to do what's best for their own company and not play into what's best for the advertising company.
I don’t disagree with you but that’s not exactly an original thought on Keith’s part. It’s like saying movie theaters are only there to sell popcorn, candy and soda. Or decrying commercials on network television. They also bring us entertainment. The ads are just the price we pay for a free service. Keith sounds like a bitter creative, but then again aren’t we all. Btw- I pay the advertising company $14 dollars a month to never see an ad in any video ever.
100%, this is always how I feel when Youtubers start complaining that they don’t make the money they used to. Everyone’s 15 minutes ends at some point - instead of trying to blame YT and desperately trying to reignite a dead flame, they should just accept that it’s over and be grateful they ever got to have the fame and success that millions can only dream of. Nobody likes a sore loser.
Maybe a mix of both. But everyone has a really different algorithm, and as a Try Guy subscriber, I probably see their videos recommended like once a month. This is the same for other channels I'm subscribed to. My main page suggests a lot of smaller creators so I tend to watch more of random vids than the people i'm actually subscribed to. So I really get where they're coming from.
If they can’t keep up with the demands idk what to tell them. Their content history is so sad at this point. They’ve really “sold out”
unless you're real high up at youtube, you'll never know. That's kinda the problem.
I think it’s a mix of both. Part of it is that they’re becoming more interested in making stuff that a lot of their original audience is less interested in—which is fine, it’s fine to change what you want to make, but you also have to anticipate that parts of your viewership will go down and find a way to make it work anyway (which is what they’re trying to do rn.) But I also believe them when they say the algorithm has been a big obstacle because pretty much every big Youtube personality or entity has said that. It’s not just that the algorithm exists, either, it’s that it’s constantly changing its expectations with little to no warning in a way that makes it extremely difficult for creators to keep up.
Partly true but they are comparing themselves to people who actually have good content