The Energon Pub

Rated X wrote:I wouldnt go a far as calling a company sponsorship as being "successful". He is getting free toys to make videos, in other words dickering. When he starts his own online store and sponsors his own reviewer, than maybe you can call him successful. Right now he is just lucky.

Ummm... If you're getting compensated to do something you like to do, then, well, that's success in my book. Most of these guys were reviewing figures as a hobby, and yea sure, luck was probably involved in building a following and landing their sponsorships. But being lucky doesn't negate success. Just the opposite - often it's impossible to be successful without a little bit of luck.

My question to you is: why do you hate these guys so much? And I don't mean "I'm suspicious of them and don't trust them." That's a borderline understandable position. But everything you spout here indicates you hate them, and I mean hate them with a red hot passion. Why?

megatronus wrote:

Rated X wrote:I wouldnt go a far as calling a company sponsorship as being "successful". He is getting free toys to make videos, in other words dickering. When he starts his own online store and sponsors his own reviewer, than maybe you can call him successful. Right now he is just lucky.

Ummm... If you're getting compensated to do something you like to do, then, well, that's success in my book. Most of these guys were reviewing figures as a hobby, and yea sure, luck was probably involved in building a following and landing their sponsorships. But being lucky doesn't negate success. Just the opposite - often it's impossible to be successful without a little bit of luck.

This is exactly right. He's paid to do his hobby and he had a lot of fans. To me that's success. Starting out as just a guy doing his thing on YouTube to getting paid and fostering connections with people who are working behind the scenes in making these awesome toys is pretty successful.

Rated X wrote:

Gauntlet101010 wrote:

NOS wrote:

Rated X wrote:

Delta Magnus wrote:

we would still be in good hands with unsponsored reviewers

AH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA no.

Seriously. I don't fancy nothing but potato-quality video and depressingly fudged reviews (complete with barely-audible voices and atrociously overinflated runtimes mostly bloated by them fudging about with their dollar store camcorder). One of the reasons people like the sponsored guys (aside from the regular update rates) is that the production quality (which is important because if someone's doing a review with a 240P camera phone then I'm not getting a proper impression of the figure) is actually acceptable. Pretty much the only decent unsponsored reviewers are Thew (as he doesn't take it at all seriously and is hilarious to watch) and Baltmatrix (and even then only because he does some figures others don't do and doesn't have a totally dreadful camera- the amount of times I've heard him complaining about a slightly loose balljoint and just wanted to shout through the screen "JUST PUT SOME VARNISH/SUPERGLUE ON THE JOINT YOU IMBECILE" is beyond counting).

So yeah. If you want to stick with your 2003-quality reviews you do that. I'll take Peaugh and Vangelus and other people who know what they're doing.

You pretty much just admitted in this comment that what you want is a video that will help you make a buy or don't buy decision. I'm inclined to believe the unsponsored reviewers have nothing to lose by being both honest and blunt. Sure you don't get all the smoke and mirrors that make the video seem so "professional". But you get the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

And yes Peaugh and Vangelus know exactly what they're doing. They're selling you toys. When Im buying, I don't need the opinion of a salesman. I need the opinion fellow collector who vouches for the figure by means of their own income.

To be fair, I think X's view . . . -this- time . . . has a level of merit and I say this loosely. Each individual reviewer is not going to be the same. In fact, only those who want to produce high quality reviews will invest in decent equipment to do so. With that being said, I believe you're more likely to get an "honest" review out of someone who isn't being sponsored. They're offering a personal opinion strictly due to wanting to give a personal opinion. They actually bought the figure so they have nothing to lose or gain other than followers to their youtube channel which is likely only to increase/decrease due to video quality and performance.

Keep in mind . . . I'm not saying that's the rule, it's just more likely you'll get an honest opinion from someone who isn't being sponsored. Not 100% as anyone can be biased. The quality of a video does nothing to prove the honesty of ones motives. However, once you see that "sponsored by insert name here" tag you would be wise to believe that the person reviewing isn't being sponsored for their opinion, but rather to do a job to increase the sponsors sales. It's just business.

In fairness, questioning the honesty of someone's motives just because they've been successful is pretty disingenuous. I get casting a critical eye on what you hear, but if someone's successful it seems to be that they're honestly invested in what they're doing and the quality of what they do.

For all the hubbub in their thread about not being able to trust sponsored reviews because of any number of reasons, the only one that seems to be picked on is Peaugh. Proof's in the pudding. Even if there's a logical argument to be had against sponsored reviews if only one is being a problem (and that's very debatable, really) then we seem to be well served.

I wouldnt go a far as calling a company sponsorship as being "successful". He is getting free toys to make videos, in other words dickering. When he starts his own online store and sponsors his own reviewer, than maybe you can call him successful. Right now he is just lucky.

You know these guys make money from youtube ads right? With the amount of money these guys are pulling from youtube ads (those commercials in the beginning of the videos) some reviewers do this full time. They don't even have another job (Optibotimus) cause they can live off that ad money.. LOL X for talking so much you really know so little.... If all of these reviewers no longer get sponsorship it wouldn't really matter them much... it's just icing on the cake for them. Peaugh is not lucky he has a huge following he built over time because he did something others weren't doing back in 07 and hes raking it in.


EDIT:

https://www.youtube.com/user/MichellePhan/about

FYI this girl is a Millionaire from making youtube videos! 7 million subscribers and over a billion views. I know cause my girlfriend watches her videos. Transformers reivews on youtube is small time compared to more mainstream products out there but make no mistake about it the bulk of the money they are making is not from sponsors it's from the youtube ads, and the free toys? like I said that's icing..

mooncake623 wrote:

Rated X wrote:

Gauntlet101010 wrote:

NOS wrote:

Rated X wrote:

Delta Magnus wrote:

we would still be in good hands with unsponsored reviewers

AH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA no.

Seriously. I don't fancy nothing but potato-quality video and depressingly fudged reviews (complete with barely-audible voices and atrociously overinflated runtimes mostly bloated by them fudging about with their dollar store camcorder). One of the reasons people like the sponsored guys (aside from the regular update rates) is that the production quality (which is important because if someone's doing a review with a 240P camera phone then I'm not getting a proper impression of the figure) is actually acceptable. Pretty much the only decent unsponsored reviewers are Thew (as he doesn't take it at all seriously and is hilarious to watch) and Baltmatrix (and even then only because he does some figures others don't do and doesn't have a totally dreadful camera- the amount of times I've heard him complaining about a slightly loose balljoint and just wanted to shout through the screen "JUST PUT SOME VARNISH/SUPERGLUE ON THE JOINT YOU IMBECILE" is beyond counting).

So yeah. If you want to stick with your 2003-quality reviews you do that. I'll take Peaugh and Vangelus and other people who know what they're doing.

You pretty much just admitted in this comment that what you want is a video that will help you make a buy or don't buy decision. I'm inclined to believe the unsponsored reviewers have nothing to lose by being both honest and blunt. Sure you don't get all the smoke and mirrors that make the video seem so "professional". But you get the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

And yes Peaugh and Vangelus know exactly what they're doing. They're selling you toys. When Im buying, I don't need the opinion of a salesman. I need the opinion fellow collector who vouches for the figure by means of their own income.

To be fair, I think X's view . . . -this- time . . . has a level of merit and I say this loosely. Each individual reviewer is not going to be the same. In fact, only those who want to produce high quality reviews will invest in decent equipment to do so. With that being said, I believe you're more likely to get an "honest" review out of someone who isn't being sponsored. They're offering a personal opinion strictly due to wanting to give a personal opinion. They actually bought the figure so they have nothing to lose or gain other than followers to their youtube channel which is likely only to increase/decrease due to video quality and performance.

Keep in mind . . . I'm not saying that's the rule, it's just more likely you'll get an honest opinion from someone who isn't being sponsored. Not 100% as anyone can be biased. The quality of a video does nothing to prove the honesty of ones motives. However, once you see that "sponsored by insert name here" tag you would be wise to believe that the person reviewing isn't being sponsored for their opinion, but rather to do a job to increase the sponsors sales. It's just business.

In fairness, questioning the honesty of someone's motives just because they've been successful is pretty disingenuous. I get casting a critical eye on what you hear, but if someone's successful it seems to be that they're honestly invested in what they're doing and the quality of what they do.

For all the hubbub in their thread about not being able to trust sponsored reviews because of any number of reasons, the only one that seems to be picked on is Peaugh. Proof's in the pudding. Even if there's a logical argument to be had against sponsored reviews if only one is being a problem (and that's very debatable, really) then we seem to be well served.

I wouldnt go a far as calling a company sponsorship as being "successful". He is getting free toys to make videos, in other words dickering. When he starts his own online store and sponsors his own reviewer, than maybe you can call him successful. Right now he is just lucky.

You know these guys make money from youtube ads right? With the amount of money these guys are pulling from youtube ads (those commercials in the beginning of the videos) some reviewers do this full time. They don't even have another job (Optibotimus) cause they can live off that ad money.. LOL X for talking so much you really know so little.... If all of these reviewers no longer get sponsorship it wouldn't really matter them much... it's just icing on the cake for them. Peaugh is not lucky he has a huge following he built over time because he did something others weren't doing back in 07 and hes raking it in.


EDIT:

https://www.youtube.com/user/MichellePhan/about

FYI this girl is a Millionaire from making youtube videos! 7 million subscribers and over a billion views. I know cause my girlfriend watches her videos. Transformers reivews on youtube is small time compared to more mainstream products out there but make no mistake about it the bulk of the money they are making is not from sponsors it's from the youtube ads, and the free toys? like I said that's icing..

Im not doubting your intellect, but how do you know this ?

We all know Seibertron makes money off advertising. But the difference is Ryan owns Seibertron.com. The reviewers don't own YouTube. Those advertisments that say "you can skip in 5 sec" don't always come up when you click on the same video. And often different ads come before the same video if you hit refresh, or sometimes no ad at all. To my knowledge it's Youtube who is getting paid for running those ads, not the channels owner. Now if the channels owner gets a percentage on a "hit based" system, I wouldn't know for sure. I know that's how file sharing and torrent sites generate money. They might get a percentage of a cent for every hit, so it's in their best interest to keep the free uploads coming.

To say these guys are making a lot of money through Youtube is just as much speculation as my suspicions that they are dishonest. Unless you can get an official acknowledgement from any one of them saying that they make big money from reviews, it's all speculation. The only compensation we know for a fact that they receive is free toys.

Rated X wrote:

mooncake623 wrote:

Rated X wrote:

Gauntlet101010 wrote:

NOS wrote:

Rated X wrote:

Delta Magnus wrote:

we would still be in good hands with unsponsored reviewers

AH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA no.

Seriously. I don't fancy nothing but potato-quality video and depressingly fudged reviews (complete with barely-audible voices and atrociously overinflated runtimes mostly bloated by them fudging about with their dollar store camcorder). One of the reasons people like the sponsored guys (aside from the regular update rates) is that the production quality (which is important because if someone's doing a review with a 240P camera phone then I'm not getting a proper impression of the figure) is actually acceptable. Pretty much the only decent unsponsored reviewers are Thew (as he doesn't take it at all seriously and is hilarious to watch) and Baltmatrix (and even then only because he does some figures others don't do and doesn't have a totally dreadful camera- the amount of times I've heard him complaining about a slightly loose balljoint and just wanted to shout through the screen "JUST PUT SOME VARNISH/SUPERGLUE ON THE JOINT YOU IMBECILE" is beyond counting).

So yeah. If you want to stick with your 2003-quality reviews you do that. I'll take Peaugh and Vangelus and other people who know what they're doing.

You pretty much just admitted in this comment that what you want is a video that will help you make a buy or don't buy decision. I'm inclined to believe the unsponsored reviewers have nothing to lose by being both honest and blunt. Sure you don't get all the smoke and mirrors that make the video seem so "professional". But you get the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

And yes Peaugh and Vangelus know exactly what they're doing. They're selling you toys. When Im buying, I don't need the opinion of a salesman. I need the opinion fellow collector who vouches for the figure by means of their own income.

To be fair, I think X's view . . . -this- time . . . has a level of merit and I say this loosely. Each individual reviewer is not going to be the same. In fact, only those who want to produce high quality reviews will invest in decent equipment to do so. With that being said, I believe you're more likely to get an "honest" review out of someone who isn't being sponsored. They're offering a personal opinion strictly due to wanting to give a personal opinion. They actually bought the figure so they have nothing to lose or gain other than followers to their youtube channel which is likely only to increase/decrease due to video quality and performance.

Keep in mind . . . I'm not saying that's the rule, it's just more likely you'll get an honest opinion from someone who isn't being sponsored. Not 100% as anyone can be biased. The quality of a video does nothing to prove the honesty of ones motives. However, once you see that "sponsored by insert name here" tag you would be wise to believe that the person reviewing isn't being sponsored for their opinion, but rather to do a job to increase the sponsors sales. It's just business.

In fairness, questioning the honesty of someone's motives just because they've been successful is pretty disingenuous. I get casting a critical eye on what you hear, but if someone's successful it seems to be that they're honestly invested in what they're doing and the quality of what they do.

For all the hubbub in their thread about not being able to trust sponsored reviews because of any number of reasons, the only one that seems to be picked on is Peaugh. Proof's in the pudding. Even if there's a logical argument to be had against sponsored reviews if only one is being a problem (and that's very debatable, really) then we seem to be well served.

I wouldnt go a far as calling a company sponsorship as being "successful". He is getting free toys to make videos, in other words dickering. When he starts his own online store and sponsors his own reviewer, than maybe you can call him successful. Right now he is just lucky.

You know these guys make money from youtube ads right? With the amount of money these guys are pulling from youtube ads (those commercials in the beginning of the videos) some reviewers do this full time. They don't even have another job (Optibotimus) cause they can live off that ad money.. LOL X for talking so much you really know so little.... If all of these reviewers no longer get sponsorship it wouldn't really matter them much... it's just icing on the cake for them. Peaugh is not lucky he has a huge following he built over time because he did something others weren't doing back in 07 and hes raking it in.


EDIT:

https://www.youtube.com/user/MichellePhan/about

FYI this girl is a Millionaire from making youtube videos! 7 million subscribers and over a billion views. I know cause my girlfriend watches her videos. Transformers reivews on youtube is small time compared to more mainstream products out there but make no mistake about it the bulk of the money they are making is not from sponsors it's from the youtube ads, and the free toys? like I said that's icing..

Im not doubting your intellect, but how do you know this ?

We all know Seibertron makes money off advertising. But the difference is Ryan owns Seibertron.com. The reviewers don't own YouTube. Those advertisments that say "you can skip in 5 sec" don't always come up when you click on the same video. And often different ads come before the same video if you hit refresh, or sometimes no ad at all. To my knowledge it's Youtube who is getting paid for running those ads, not the channels owner. Now if the channels owner gets a percentage on a "hit based" system, I wouldn't know for sure. I know that's how file sharing and torrent sites generate money. They might get a percentage of a cent for every hit, so it's in their best interest to keep the free uploads coming.

To say these guys are making a lot of money through Youtube is just as much speculation as my suspicions that they are dishonest. Unless you can get an official acknowledgement from any one of them saying that they make big money from reviews, it's all speculation. The only compensation we know for a fact that they receive is free toys.

Oh god just look things up.. I'm telling you this is what it is and people live off making videos on youtube even if they are not sponsor all you need is viewership. It's a known thing. Optibotimus or whatever his name is even made an LLC (company) out of his channel. Noone makes videos for the love of the fandom.. everyone is just trying to make it big and create a following and fans... and being an honest reviewer goes a long way of course. With Peaugh the problem is he is too involved with the fandom, when he gave Fans Toys a less than stellar review the Fans over at TFW jumped all over him, about how he mistransformed this and how its a great toy and he shouldn't have been so down on it. blah balh blah

if you're too lazy I'll look up the youtube ad ownership agreement for you... but its an easy search.....

megatronus wrote:

Rated X wrote:I wouldnt go a far as calling a company sponsorship as being "successful". He is getting free toys to make videos, in other words dickering. When he starts his own online store and sponsors his own reviewer, than maybe you can call him successful. Right now he is just lucky.

Ummm... If you're getting compensated to do something you like to do, then, well, that's success in my book. Most of these guys were reviewing figures as a hobby, and yea sure, luck was probably involved in building a following and landing their sponsorships. But being lucky doesn't negate success. Just the opposite - often it's impossible to be successful without a little bit of luck.

My question to you is: why do you hate these guys so much? And I don't mean "I'm suspicious of them and don't trust them." That's a borderline understandable position. But everything you spout here indicates you hate them, and I mean hate them with a red hot passion. Why?

Honestly, the possibility that my suspicions could be right is what drives me. If they are lying through their teeth to get free toys, the thought just disgusts me. I'm a person who works hard to buy my figures, So how can I respect people who have the potential to lie to the fandom on video just to get free toys ? It's just too easy to lie to garner sales and keep the retailer happy. We always joke about the term "plastic crack". So what would you do to keep that free plastic crack coming ? I doubt you would put up a crappy review because that would be bad for business.

On a side note, I've been to 4 Botcons. The BBTS and TF Source booths are always full of ass kissers that hang out there all day, every day. They have their lips puckered to the employees asses like a sea lamprey. I cant prove that any of those suck ups are sponsored reviewers or aspiring reviewers trying to be "down". (no faces shown on reviews lol) But it does show the true power of plastic crack. A power that I wager no sponsored reviewer can resist. If I could ask a sponsored reviewer one question, here's what I would ask:

If the free toys stop coming your way, will the reviews still keep coming ?

X Please watch this

https://creatoracademy.withgoogle.com/page/lesson/ad-types

mooncake623 wrote:X Please watch this

https://creatoracademy.withgoogle.com/page/lesson/ad-types

Ad revenue is split bwt youtube and content creator.

mooncake623 wrote:

Rated X wrote:

mooncake623 wrote:

Rated X wrote:

Gauntlet101010 wrote:

NOS wrote:

Rated X wrote:

Delta Magnus wrote:

we would still be in good hands with unsponsored reviewers

AH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA no.

Seriously. I don't fancy nothing but potato-quality video and depressingly fudged reviews (complete with barely-audible voices and atrociously overinflated runtimes mostly bloated by them fudging about with their dollar store camcorder). One of the reasons people like the sponsored guys (aside from the regular update rates) is that the production quality (which is important because if someone's doing a review with a 240P camera phone then I'm not getting a proper impression of the figure) is actually acceptable. Pretty much the only decent unsponsored reviewers are Thew (as he doesn't take it at all seriously and is hilarious to watch) and Baltmatrix (and even then only because he does some figures others don't do and doesn't have a totally dreadful camera- the amount of times I've heard him complaining about a slightly loose balljoint and just wanted to shout through the screen "JUST PUT SOME VARNISH/SUPERGLUE ON THE JOINT YOU IMBECILE" is beyond counting).

So yeah. If you want to stick with your 2003-quality reviews you do that. I'll take Peaugh and Vangelus and other people who know what they're doing.

You pretty much just admitted in this comment that what you want is a video that will help you make a buy or don't buy decision. I'm inclined to believe the unsponsored reviewers have nothing to lose by being both honest and blunt. Sure you don't get all the smoke and mirrors that make the video seem so "professional". But you get the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

And yes Peaugh and Vangelus know exactly what they're doing. They're selling you toys. When Im buying, I don't need the opinion of a salesman. I need the opinion fellow collector who vouches for the figure by means of their own income.

To be fair, I think X's view . . . -this- time . . . has a level of merit and I say this loosely. Each individual reviewer is not going to be the same. In fact, only those who want to produce high quality reviews will invest in decent equipment to do so. With that being said, I believe you're more likely to get an "honest" review out of someone who isn't being sponsored. They're offering a personal opinion strictly due to wanting to give a personal opinion. They actually bought the figure so they have nothing to lose or gain other than followers to their youtube channel which is likely only to increase/decrease due to video quality and performance.

Keep in mind . . . I'm not saying that's the rule, it's just more likely you'll get an honest opinion from someone who isn't being sponsored. Not 100% as anyone can be biased. The quality of a video does nothing to prove the honesty of ones motives. However, once you see that "sponsored by insert name here" tag you would be wise to believe that the person reviewing isn't being sponsored for their opinion, but rather to do a job to increase the sponsors sales. It's just business.

In fairness, questioning the honesty of someone's motives just because they've been successful is pretty disingenuous. I get casting a critical eye on what you hear, but if someone's successful it seems to be that they're honestly invested in what they're doing and the quality of what they do.

For all the hubbub in their thread about not being able to trust sponsored reviews because of any number of reasons, the only one that seems to be picked on is Peaugh. Proof's in the pudding. Even if there's a logical argument to be had against sponsored reviews if only one is being a problem (and that's very debatable, really) then we seem to be well served.

I wouldnt go a far as calling a company sponsorship as being "successful". He is getting free toys to make videos, in other words dickering. When he starts his own online store and sponsors his own reviewer, than maybe you can call him successful. Right now he is just lucky.

You know these guys make money from youtube ads right? With the amount of money these guys are pulling from youtube ads (those commercials in the beginning of the videos) some reviewers do this full time. They don't even have another job (Optibotimus) cause they can live off that ad money.. LOL X for talking so much you really know so little.... If all of these reviewers no longer get sponsorship it wouldn't really matter them much... it's just icing on the cake for them. Peaugh is not lucky he has a huge following he built over time because he did something others weren't doing back in 07 and hes raking it in.


EDIT:

https://www.youtube.com/user/MichellePhan/about

FYI this girl is a Millionaire from making youtube videos! 7 million subscribers and over a billion views. I know cause my girlfriend watches her videos. Transformers reivews on youtube is small time compared to more mainstream products out there but make no mistake about it the bulk of the money they are making is not from sponsors it's from the youtube ads, and the free toys? like I said that's icing..

Im not doubting your intellect, but how do you know this ?

We all know Seibertron makes money off advertising. But the difference is Ryan owns Seibertron.com. The reviewers don't own YouTube. Those advertisments that say "you can skip in 5 sec" don't always come up when you click on the same video. And often different ads come before the same video if you hit refresh, or sometimes no ad at all. To my knowledge it's Youtube who is getting paid for running those ads, not the channels owner. Now if the channels owner gets a percentage on a "hit based" system, I wouldn't know for sure. I know that's how file sharing and torrent sites generate money. They might get a percentage of a cent for every hit, so it's in their best interest to keep the free uploads coming.

To say these guys are making a lot of money through Youtube is just as much speculation as my suspicions that they are dishonest. Unless you can get an official acknowledgement from any one of them saying that they make big money from reviews, it's all speculation. The only compensation we know for a fact that they receive is free toys.

Oh god just look things up.. I'm telling you this is what it is and people live off making videos on youtube even if they are not sponsor all you need is viewership. It's a known thing. Optibotimus or whatever his name is even made an LLC (company) out of his channel. Noone makes videos for the love of the fandom.. everyone is just trying to make it big and create a following and fans... and being an honest reviewer goes a long way of course. With Peaugh the problem is he is too involved with the fandom, when he gave Fans Toys a less than stellar review the Fans over at TFW jumped all over him, about how he mistransformed this and how its a great toy and he shouldn't have been so down on it. blah balh blah

if you're too lazy I'll look up the youtube ad ownership agreement for you... but its an easy search.....

If you wish....

But I don't think all those cute puppy and baby videos that get millions of hits get the account owners paid. So why would reviewers be any different ?

Rated X wrote:

mooncake623 wrote:

Rated X wrote:

mooncake623 wrote:

Rated X wrote:

Gauntlet101010 wrote:

NOS wrote:

Rated X wrote:

Delta Magnus wrote:

we would still be in good hands with unsponsored reviewers

AH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA no.

Seriously. I don't fancy nothing but potato-quality video and depressingly fudged reviews (complete with barely-audible voices and atrociously overinflated runtimes mostly bloated by them fudging about with their dollar store camcorder). One of the reasons people like the sponsored guys (aside from the regular update rates) is that the production quality (which is important because if someone's doing a review with a 240P camera phone then I'm not getting a proper impression of the figure) is actually acceptable. Pretty much the only decent unsponsored reviewers are Thew (as he doesn't take it at all seriously and is hilarious to watch) and Baltmatrix (and even then only because he does some figures others don't do and doesn't have a totally dreadful camera- the amount of times I've heard him complaining about a slightly loose balljoint and just wanted to shout through the screen "JUST PUT SOME VARNISH/SUPERGLUE ON THE JOINT YOU IMBECILE" is beyond counting).

So yeah. If you want to stick with your 2003-quality reviews you do that. I'll take Peaugh and Vangelus and other people who know what they're doing.

You pretty much just admitted in this comment that what you want is a video that will help you make a buy or don't buy decision. I'm inclined to believe the unsponsored reviewers have nothing to lose by being both honest and blunt. Sure you don't get all the smoke and mirrors that make the video seem so "professional". But you get the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

And yes Peaugh and Vangelus know exactly what they're doing. They're selling you toys. When Im buying, I don't need the opinion of a salesman. I need the opinion fellow collector who vouches for the figure by means of their own income.

To be fair, I think X's view . . . -this- time . . . has a level of merit and I say this loosely. Each individual reviewer is not going to be the same. In fact, only those who want to produce high quality reviews will invest in decent equipment to do so. With that being said, I believe you're more likely to get an "honest" review out of someone who isn't being sponsored. They're offering a personal opinion strictly due to wanting to give a personal opinion. They actually bought the figure so they have nothing to lose or gain other than followers to their youtube channel which is likely only to increase/decrease due to video quality and performance.

Keep in mind . . . I'm not saying that's the rule, it's just more likely you'll get an honest opinion from someone who isn't being sponsored. Not 100% as anyone can be biased. The quality of a video does nothing to prove the honesty of ones motives. However, once you see that "sponsored by insert name here" tag you would be wise to believe that the person reviewing isn't being sponsored for their opinion, but rather to do a job to increase the sponsors sales. It's just business.

In fairness, questioning the honesty of someone's motives just because they've been successful is pretty disingenuous. I get casting a critical eye on what you hear, but if someone's successful it seems to be that they're honestly invested in what they're doing and the quality of what they do.

For all the hubbub in their thread about not being able to trust sponsored reviews because of any number of reasons, the only one that seems to be picked on is Peaugh. Proof's in the pudding. Even if there's a logical argument to be had against sponsored reviews if only one is being a problem (and that's very debatable, really) then we seem to be well served.

I wouldnt go a far as calling a company sponsorship as being "successful". He is getting free toys to make videos, in other words dickering. When he starts his own online store and sponsors his own reviewer, than maybe you can call him successful. Right now he is just lucky.

You know these guys make money from youtube ads right? With the amount of money these guys are pulling from youtube ads (those commercials in the beginning of the videos) some reviewers do this full time. They don't even have another job (Optibotimus) cause they can live off that ad money.. LOL X for talking so much you really know so little.... If all of these reviewers no longer get sponsorship it wouldn't really matter them much... it's just icing on the cake for them. Peaugh is not lucky he has a huge following he built over time because he did something others weren't doing back in 07 and hes raking it in.


EDIT:

https://www.youtube.com/user/MichellePhan/about

FYI this girl is a Millionaire from making youtube videos! 7 million subscribers and over a billion views. I know cause my girlfriend watches her videos. Transformers reivews on youtube is small time compared to more mainstream products out there but make no mistake about it the bulk of the money they are making is not from sponsors it's from the youtube ads, and the free toys? like I said that's icing..

Im not doubting your intellect, but how do you know this ?

We all know Seibertron makes money off advertising. But the difference is Ryan owns Seibertron.com. The reviewers don't own YouTube. Those advertisments that say "you can skip in 5 sec" don't always come up when you click on the same video. And often different ads come before the same video if you hit refresh, or sometimes no ad at all. To my knowledge it's Youtube who is getting paid for running those ads, not the channels owner. Now if the channels owner gets a percentage on a "hit based" system, I wouldn't know for sure. I know that's how file sharing and torrent sites generate money. They might get a percentage of a cent for every hit, so it's in their best interest to keep the free uploads coming.

To say these guys are making a lot of money through Youtube is just as much speculation as my suspicions that they are dishonest. Unless you can get an official acknowledgement from any one of them saying that they make big money from reviews, it's all speculation. The only compensation we know for a fact that they receive is free toys.

Oh god just look things up.. I'm telling you this is what it is and people live off making videos on youtube even if they are not sponsor all you need is viewership. It's a known thing. Optibotimus or whatever his name is even made an LLC (company) out of his channel. Noone makes videos for the love of the fandom.. everyone is just trying to make it big and create a following and fans... and being an honest reviewer goes a long way of course. With Peaugh the problem is he is too involved with the fandom, when he gave Fans Toys a less than stellar review the Fans over at TFW jumped all over him, about how he mistransformed this and how its a great toy and he shouldn't have been so down on it. blah balh blah

if you're too lazy I'll look up the youtube ad ownership agreement for you... but its an easy search.....

If you wish....

But I don't think all those cute puppy and baby videos that get millions of hits get the account owners paid. So why would reviewers be any different ?

WAtch the link i linked above. you need to set up your account with youtube to actually produce any type of revenue.

In an ideal world, there will be NO chalatans. But we live in a not so ideal society. Again, boils down to common sense. We can use our power to post/click ontheir videos and use them as a guide. That's all.

And congrats to the successful and honest ones...........they deserve whatever monetary benefits from their beloved hobby.

wait a minute... I thought this is general Knowledge... do you people really not know that people live off making youtube videos?

mooncake623 wrote:

mooncake623 wrote:X Please watch this

https://creatoracademy.withgoogle.com/page/lesson/ad-types

Ad revenue is split bwt youtube and content creator.

I watched the video. I suppose if you have somebody negotiating marketing deals through Youtube, there's money to be made. But lets look at the niche hobby we indulge in. How many hardcore 3rd party Transformer collectors do you know within a 50 mile radius from you ? I live in a huge city (Miami) and I only know 3. I don't think Walmart, Coke, McDonalds or T-Mobile is lining up to get a piece of Peaugh's subscribers views. Peaugh is not Grumpy Cat.

Rated X wrote:

mooncake623 wrote:

mooncake623 wrote:X Please watch this

https://creatoracademy.withgoogle.com/page/lesson/ad-types

Ad revenue is split bwt youtube and content creator.

I watched the video. I suppose if you have somebody negotiating marketing deals through Youtube, there's money to be made. But lets look at the niche hobby we indulge in. How many hardcore 3rd party Transformer collectors do you know within a 50 mile radius from you ? I live in a huge city (Miami) and I only know 3. I don't think Walmart, Coke, McDonalds or T-Mobile is lining up to get a piece of Peaugh's subscribers views. Peaugh is not Grumpy Cat.

nononono YOutube decides what ads runs on your channel. not Peaugh.. Peaugh just provide youtube with the fanbase to watch those ads when they watch his videos. and youtube gives everyone the same deal on the split with escalators based on viewership and subscriptions.


EDIT:
I can't believe I'm explaining this now. I know you love to argue X but please do some research or learn a little bit about what you don't know. Or at least just read some more or look something up instead of coming back here and arguing about how you're still right

Rated X wrote:

megatronus wrote:

Rated X wrote:I wouldnt go a far as calling a company sponsorship as being "successful". He is getting free toys to make videos, in other words dickering. When he starts his own online store and sponsors his own reviewer, than maybe you can call him successful. Right now he is just lucky.

Ummm... If you're getting compensated to do something you like to do, then, well, that's success in my book. Most of these guys were reviewing figures as a hobby, and yea sure, luck was probably involved in building a following and landing their sponsorships. But being lucky doesn't negate success. Just the opposite - often it's impossible to be successful without a little bit of luck.

My question to you is: why do you hate these guys so much? And I don't mean "I'm suspicious of them and don't trust them." That's a borderline understandable position. But everything you spout here indicates you hate them, and I mean hate them with a red hot passion. Why?

Honestly, the possibility that my suspicions could be right is what drives me. If they are lying through their teeth to get free toys, the thought just disgusts me. I'm a person who works hard to buy my figures, So how can I respect people who have the potential to lie to the fandom on video just to get free toys ? It's just too easy to lie to garner sales and keep the retailer happy. We always joke about the term "plastic crack". So what would you do to keep that free plastic crack coming ? I doubt you would put up a crappy review because that would be bad for business.

On a side note, I've been to 4 Botcons. The BBTS and TF Source booths are always full of ass kissers that hang out there all day, every day. They have their lips puckered to the employees asses like a sea lamprey. I cant prove that any of those suck ups are sponsored reviewers or aspiring reviewers trying to be "down". (no faces shown on reviews lol) But it does show the true power of plastic crack. A power that I wager no sponsored reviewer can resist. If I could ask a sponsored reviewer one question, here's what I would ask:

If the free toys stop coming your way, will the reviews still keep coming ?

Okay, so "the possibility that my suspicions could be right" isn't a justification for animosity, and I don't think anyone can say you're driven, since cause you haven't put any real effort into proving your overarching point. Look above - you were unwilling to learn something fairly basic and well-known like how YouTube ads work. Mooncake had to do that for you. You can't not do the research and then blithely assert your rightness. I would say you've been aggressively aimless, not driven.

Since the sponsored reviewers were uploading reviews before they got sponsorships... isn't the answer to your question self-evident?

Becoming successful isn't a good reason to just start assuming everything someone says is a lie.

Also, reviewers also work hard to get their toys. They work hard to make videos that people want to watch (which means that to many they have to be reliable videos), to cultivate a fanbase, to make the relationships with stores and companies in order to make their videos worthwhile. They start out as nobodies just like everyone else, but are good enough and lucky enough to make something of themselves in the reviewing game.

And, frankly, good for them. Really! Standing out is hard.

This motivation sounds more like jealousy than anything else.

I was going to post a big long rant on this, but...you guys have already posted it.

So yeah, to summarise, X:

1: What part of "Most of their revenue comes from YouTube ads" don't you understand?

2: Why do you hate these people so much (and "Because my insane theories might be right!!!11!" is not a justifiable reason)?

Gauntlet101010 wrote:Becoming successful isn't a good reason to just start assuming everything someone says is a lie.

Also, reviewers also work hard to get their toys. They work hard to make videos that people want to watch (which means that to many they have to be reliable videos), to cultivate a fanbase, to make the relationships with stores and companies in order to make their videos worthwhile. They start out as nobodies just like everyone else, but are good enough and lucky enough to make something of themselves in the reviewing game.

And, frankly, good for them. Really! Standing out is hard.

This motivation sounds more like jealousy than anything else.

Totally disagree. To be "jealous" of them I would have to have a drive to do what they do. Money is not an issue for me. I could buy the best camera and editing programs if I desired and beat them at their own game If my heart was into it. But it's not. I have no desire to be a mouthpiece to get free stuff. I would rather pay for it and be commitment free. So Im not "jealous" of anything they own cause I either already have it or have the means to get it.

Delta Magnus wrote:I was going to post a big long rant on this, but...you guys have already posted it.

So yeah, to summarise, X:

1: What part of "Most of their revenue comes from YouTube ads" don't you understand?

2: Why do you hate these people so much (and "Because my insane theories might be right!!!11!" is not a justifiable reason)?

What I do understand is that every tom, dick, and harry that opens up a Youtube account doesn't get paid for it. All Mooncake offered was a glimpse into the realm of possibility of youtube as a business. He didn't connect ANY reviewer to these possibilities through vetted proof. he just offered pure speculation. But that's cool because this thread was built on pure speculation. The only difference I he speculates something different that I do. Ditto for you.

I already replied to Megatronus as to why I "hate" sponsored reviewers. Please refer to that quote for my answer.

mooncake623 wrote:Oh god just look things up.

X is really against doing the legwork. he loves talking though!

megatronus wrote:Okay, so "the possibility that my suspicions could be right" isn't a justification for animosity, and I don't think anyone can say you're driven, since cause you haven't put any real effort into proving your overarching point. Look above - you were unwilling to learn something fairly basic and well-known like how YouTube ads work. Mooncake had to do that for you. You can't not do the research and then blithely assert your rightness. I would say you've been aggressively aimless, not driven.

Since the sponsored reviewers were uploading reviews before they got sponsorships... isn't the answer to your question self-evident?

thank you for that

this thread probably would have ended ages ago without you (X), but NONE of your contributions have been evidentiary to your claims.

seriously. put up or shut up.

I had a peek at one of the replies and saw it was, indeed, about jealousy. You said you didn't like them getting free toys while you have to work at it. That sounds like jealousy to me.

Rated X wrote:

Delta Magnus wrote:I was going to post a big long rant on this, but...you guys have already posted it.

So yeah, to summarise, X:

1: What part of "Most of their revenue comes from YouTube ads" don't you understand?

2: Why do you hate these people so much (and "Because my insane theories might be right!!!11!" is not a justifiable reason)?

What I do understand is that every tom, dick, and harry that opens up a Youtube account doesn't get paid for it. All Mooncake offered was a glimpse into the realm of possibility of youtube as a business. He didn't connect ANY reviewer to these possibilities through vetted proof. he just offered pure speculation. But that's cool because this thread was built on pure speculation. The only difference I he speculates something different that I do. Ditto for you.

I already replied to Megatronus as to why I "hate" sponsored reviewers. Please refer to that quote for my answer.

It's not pure speculation it is a fact. And yes everyone can open up a channel and make a business out of it but if you have like 200 views for every review you put up you are not making any money. YOUTUBE pays you base on the views you get.

http://www.optibotimusreviews.com/faq.html

here is a Q&A from Optibotimus

Q: What is your real job?
A: This is my real job. My hobby has become my career.

Q: How do I become a YouTube Partner?
A: Check out YouTube's Partner Page at https://www.youtube.com/yt/creators/creator-benefits.html

He has of course expand his business with his own website but He made his money from YouTube before getting all the sponsorship and business opportunities.

but whatever believe what you want. I'm done with this topic.

Gauntlet101010 wrote:Becoming successful isn't a good reason to just start assuming everything someone says is a lie.

Remember I have that street mentality. I got this little thing called instincts. Call it shoot first, ask questions later if you like. Maybe it's not a popular way of thinking in the TF community. But I stand up for what I believe in. You win some, you lose some. Everybody here is so busy searching the anal cavities of the internet to prove me wrong about the reviewers integrity. But what if I am at least partially right ? Everybody has their theories and intuitions, but nobody has offered a statement or confession from the reviewers themselves. Their defenses are no more credible than my accusations. it's all speculation based on different mindsets.

Rated X wrote:Remember I have that street mentality. I got this little thing called instincts.

Instincts cut both ways. You could have absolutely awful instincts.

Rated X wrote:Call it shoot first, ask questions later if you like. Maybe it's not a popular way of thinking in the TF community.

Shoot first ask questions later isn't a popular way of thinking, well, anywhere.

Rated X wrote:But I stand up for what I believe in. You win some, you lose some. Everybody here is so busy searching the anal cavities of the internet to prove me wrong about the reviewers integrity. But what if I am at least partially right ?

It's not about proving you wrong, it's about getting you to prove yourself right. Great, you stand up for what you believe in. But you've shown yourself unwilling to consider the evidence brought here, or to even explore or bring evidence that proves your position. You haven't demonstrated belief - you've demonstrated blind faith. To mirror your own phrasing: But what if you are at least partially (or entirely) wrong?

Rated X wrote:Everybody has their theories and intuitions, but nobody has offered a statement or confession from the reviewers themselves. Their defenses are no more credible than my accusations. it's all speculation based on different mindsets.

This is misdirection. Not only that, but you're moving the goal posts saying "Even if you reach this point, I would still think it's BS." So what's the point?

The YouTube ads are not speculation. That's how YouTube works, and that's how people make money off their channels.

Uch. You are so jelly.

I think X is just sad because he didn't get a Citizen Stack as a review sample. He's actually a real tsundere for the guy, which is why he won't stop talking about how much he dislikes it and how rubbish it is- he's in denial and he actually wants to marry it.

"Hmph....s-s-stupid Citizen Stack...It's not like I'm posting about you because I like you or anything! B-Baka..."