Posted February 2 Clearly this is not true since tech youtubers are people who love tech and made a career out of talking about cool consumer tech and broadly related topics. However this youtube video raises a thought provoking question (Hmm I wonder who this is supposed to be legally distinct from?) The question is this. Why do companies go along with tech Youtube VS trying to compete with it? Like where are the official YouTube channels that do the things we wee on LTT or MKBHD etc? Do they exist and are just so awful at it, due to being ran from a big corporate C suite, that YouTube doesn't recommend them? Why send a "free" (but not free) top of the line version of the new doohickey of the month out instead of flooding the zone with their own marketing, then making the Youtubers wait in line to buy it to review it? It also strikes me that it is almost never the midrange gizmo that is sent for review. You know the one that most people would actually be able to afford. This is as much a marketing thought as a tech thought, and an excuse to share something funny. What do you all think? Edited to add ... found the full length version of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 2 They have existed and some bought existing channels but they basically all fail due to being a corporate thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 2 All I got from that video was a good laugh, thankful AF I'm not a tech tuber, and a little mortified. As for why they send their crap to tech tubers instead of keeping it in house to start. Conflict of interest probably, and people always want to hear what other people think. And they sort of do some marketing in house look at AMD's, Intel's, Apple's, etc press releases they say how great their product is compared to competitors or past products, but in reality that honestly seems to be a load of garbage, because of all the fine print and hype. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 2 17 minutes ago, Uttamattamakin said: The question is this. Why do companies go along with tech Youtube VS trying to compete with it? Like where are the official YouTube channels that do the things we wee on LTT or MKBHD etc? Do they exist and are just so awful at it, due to being ran from a big corporate C suite, that YouTube doesn't recommend them? Might I remind you that Linus started out on NCIX's YT channel, Paul and Kyle both started out on Newegg and Logan from Tek Syndicate started out on TigerDirect? It's not like companies haven't tried... And now it's probably simply too late and not diverse enough content to watch a company's YT channel. Razer's YT channel is just full of ... well, Razer laptops. Who wants to watch that? 20 minutes ago, Uttamattamakin said: It also strikes me that it is almost never the midrange gizmo that is sent for review. You know the one that most people would actually be able to afford. Of course. Do women go out only with half their makeup done? No, they want to look the best they can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 2 He got those Team Fortress 2 eyes from gaben himself. Yes, tech youtubers show things I'll never be able to afford BUT they also show things that are pure unobtanium in my lame banana republic, that's the interesting part for me. Though I have some standards and never watch any videos on smartphones or wearables. Caroline doesn't need to hear all this, she's a highly trained professional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 2 many tech youtubers started with a company, LTT with NCIX. Some worked at tiger direct. (Tek Syndicate) Newegg did its own thing with paul and kyle. And viewers rightly do not trust companies to be fair with their own content as the incentives are fucked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 2 4 minutes ago, Senzelian said: Of course. Do women go out only with half their makeup done? No, they want to look the best they can. This made me laugh so hard. I say to hell with looking my best. But still would be nice to see more mid-range(mainstream) gizmos. What I really hate is when you see something and you want it, like I want that Leviathan Shark case or whatever, but I have cats... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 2 3 minutes ago, FangerZero said: This made me laugh so hard. I say to hell with looking my best. Of course only in certain scenarios. The companies also only do their best when it matters. 3 minutes ago, FangerZero said: But still would be nice to see more mid-range(mainstream) gizmos. I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 2 52 minutes ago, Uttamattamakin said: Why send a "free" (but not free) top of the line version of the new doohickey of the month out instead of flooding the zone with their own marketing, then making the Youtubers wait in line to buy it to review it? For three reasons: 1. Sending out a product for review is a negligible expense for a company like Apple or Intel or Nvidia. Even 1,000 copies of a product is a drop in the bucket when you intend to sell millions of them. 2. They actually do flood the zone with their marketing. What do you think the Nvidia CES livestream was? And why do you think that the official Nvidia YouTube channel has over 1 million subscribers? But the videos hardly get any views, and marketing products there it isn't that effective because... 3. While we like to joke about sheeple and NPCs online, and fanbois do exist, most people are not so stupid as to assume that all information about a product from a company is 100% accurate and genuine. Third party review outlets, on the other hand, are considered by most to be a reliable source of information. Which is also not always ideal, because technically Userbenchmark is a 3rd party review site, but it's still better than blindly trusting that Nvidia isn't lying to you when they say that the RTX 4070 is 2x faster* than the RTX 3090! * In one single game, and with DLSS 3.0 FG enabled So while you might think at first glance that it's a bad idea to send out review samples, it actually makes the companies more money than it loses. Which should be obvious, since they basically all do it. Nvidia is often called "Ngreedia" for a reason - they are a publicly traded company. They wouldn't be handing out free RTX 4090 cards if it was actually losing them money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 2 4 minutes ago, YoungBlade said: most people are not so stupid as to assume that all information about a product from a company is 100% accurate and genuine Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 2 3 minutes ago, Senzelian said: Really? Really. And it doesn't have to be a truly independent third party, it just can't be a company spokesperson. That's why pitchmen like Billy Mays (RIP) were so influential. People actually can be skeptical of a claim from a first party, but when Billy Mays told them how good the product was, and did a demo on TV showing how the product worked, they were much more likely to believe him. Now, if your brand already has clout, then you can spend some of that on first party advertisements, and some will believe them, but you'll notice that, again, most ads include a third party if possible. Why do you think all those crypto companies got celebrities to be featured in their ads? It lets them borrow credibility from a third party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 2 4 minutes ago, YoungBlade said: Really. And it doesn't have to be a truly independent third party, it just can't be a company spokesperson. That's why pitchmen like Billy Mays (RIP) were so influential. People actually can be skeptical of a claim from a first party, but when Billy Mays told them how good the product was, and did a demo on TV showing how the product worked, they were much more likely to believe him. Now, if your brand already has clout, then you can spend some of that on first party advertisements, and some will believe them, but you'll notice that, again, most ads include a third party if possible. Why do you think all those crypto companies got celebrities to be featured in their ads? It lets them borrow credibility from a third party. I agree with what you're saying, but I don't think that believing someone else's bullshit makes this situation any better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 2 2 minutes ago, Senzelian said: I agree with what you're saying, but I don't think that believing someone else's bullshit makes this situation any better. It can certainly still be a problem, but it works in favor of reviewers, so it's not all bad. That doesn't mean it's all good. Like I mentioned, Userbenchmark is technically a third party, and it is sadly trusted by millions... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 2 Author 2 hours ago, Senzelian said: Might I remind you that Linus started out on NCIX's YT channel, Paul and Kyle both started out on Newegg and Logan from Tek Syndicate started out on TigerDirect? I knew about Linus and NCIX. Didn't know about the other ones though. 2 hours ago, Senzelian said: Market is flooded perhaps and ... it's gotten hard for a new channel to rise to the heights compared to before. 2 hours ago, Senzelian said: Of course. Do women go out only with half their makeup done? No, they want to look the best they can. Depends. but I take your point. 1 hour ago, YoungBlade said: True a multil billion dollar company won't care too much. At the same time they also tend to be bean counters in such companies. 1 hour ago, YoungBlade said: 2. They actually do flood the zone with their marketing. What do you think the Nvidia CES livestream was? And why do you think that the official Nvidia YouTube channel has over 1 million subscribers? But the videos hardly get any views, and marketing products there it isn't that effective because... I sort of agree with this. Part of the issue is official channels like that just don't know how to reach people very well. In fact they seem to look askance at the things that will reach the young folks. 1 hour ago, YoungBlade said: 3. While we like to joke about sheeple and NPCs online, and fanbois do exist, most people are not so stupid as to assume that all information about a product from a company is 100% accurate and genuine. Third party review outlets, on the other hand, are considered by most to be a reliable source of information. I've had people fight me about whether a press release from a company was more reliable than an unflattering Reuters or Associated press report on the same company. Because you know news reporters are so powerful compared to companies. LMBO. I'm sure there is some calculation that says that this form of marketing works better than commercials or just having their own in house YouTube presence. Somehow the culture of a big corporation would have to find a way to have a Xerox PARC like place where they can let some people off the chain to make that content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 2 3 hours ago, Uttamattamakin said: Why do companies go along with tech Youtube VS trying to compete with it? Because a lot of influencers have built up a reputation that causes people to listen and follow them. When you hear someone like Linus say "I really like this product", you trust him because he is basically a friend to you (through a parasocial relationship). A lot of people on this forum for example will think of Linus as their friend because they have spent so much time "with" him (actually just watching him). It's hard for a company to take on the position of a "friend" in the same way, and if your viewers don't view you as a friend then marketing is less effective. Think of it like this, if your friend told you "this product is great" then you are far more likely to listen to their recommendation than if you saw an ad on TV for the product saying "this product is great". Tech YouTubers, and influencers in general, play the role of a "friend" recommending you products to buy. They are salespeople, but masquerading as friends to make the marketing more effective. 3 hours ago, Uttamattamakin said: Do they exist and are just so awful at it, due to being ran from a big corporate C suite, that YouTube doesn't recommend them? Some of them do exist, and a lot of the big YouTube channels started out as them. But as I said earlier, the parasocial relationship doesn't work as effectively if it's very clear that there's a big brand behind it. It works way better when it's personality-driven because it makes the "they are my friend and want to help me" appeal stronger. 3 hours ago, Uttamattamakin said: It also strikes me that it is almost never the midrange gizmo that is sent for review. You know the one that most people would actually be able to afford. That's because they are trying to go after the halo effect. If for example AMD makes a certain processor that manages to get the highest score in some game, they can advertise "the fastest gaming CPU". You might not be able to afford that particular CPU, but because you now associate the AMD brand with "having the fastest gaming CPUs", you will think more positively of their other products too even though they might potentially be even slower than the competitors for gaming outside of that one super high-end product. If you can get someone to market one of your super expensive products as "the best", then people will assume that your other products that are affordable are also good by extension. "AMD has the fastest gaming CPU, so their midrange CPUs must also be really good for gaming". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 3 4 hours ago, Uttamattamakin said: The question is this. Why do companies go along with tech Youtube VS trying to compete with it? Like where are the official YouTube channels that do the things we wee on LTT or MKBHD etc? Do they exist and are just so awful at it, due to being ran from a big corporate C suite, that YouTube doesn't recommend them? Because it's ridiculously effective and cheaper than doing it yourself. Say which one would you trust more when looking for a new car: A) The car manufacturer telling you their car is the best ever for you or B) Your friend Suzie being happy with her new car? B, unless you know that Suzie is a complete idiot and you wouldn't trust her even to boil water without burning the whole house down, but you would still give Suzie's opinion more weight than the pure ad of the car manufacturer. So, now you have your friendly neighborhood Linus Sebastian bringing you daily whacky content on YouTube and he says putting seaweed into your water will turn your life upside-down and cure even the stupidity of Suzie. He is your friend, he is smart, he makes whacky videos, he would never lie to you. Will you buy the seaweed brand Linus recommends to you? Traditional marketing is super expensive. For top end example, you want your ad into the most watched yearly sport event in the US with crazy reach, that's going to be 30-second ad spot on Superbowl and your marketing budged has just realized to be over $7,000,000 and you still need to pay for the actual making of the 30-second ad. And that still doesn't mean anything and your ad could be just a fart in Sahara if the half time artist has wardrobe malfunction. Normal TV ads depend on time they are shown, length and the show during which they are shown but I would remember we are talking about hundreds to tens of thousands per play. And those are just to get the ad spot, you still need to pay for the actors, camera crew, editor, writer, get the equipment, the shooting location and all that. LTT video ad spot probably costs around $5-10k and it includes making of the ad, per one million views that is 6th of the Superbowl ad spot cost at worst (LTT videos collect around 1-2M views while Superbowl 2022 gained 115M views). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 3 i thought this also. its crossed my mind a more than a few times. who in their right mind would buy x, who has money for x. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 3 I find I'm watching less and less YouTube and other such sources of tech info, mainly because I become frustrated over what I can't afford and how nothing is perfect anyway. I guess I don't need any more tech right now. But it does strike me as odd when someone has some sort of device I had never heard about before. Just a couple weeks ago I saw a smart watch for the very first time, although admittedly I did know they existed before I saw it. But other than it being a smart watch, I have no idea what they actually do nor have much interest in them, nor spatial computing, nor VR, nor anything else. I haven't even finished my original childhood Super Mario Bros on my NES, why do I need more stuff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 3 Author 7 hours ago, Issac Zachary said: .....why do I need more stuff? IF your sufficiently entertained by what you have and hae no mission that requires more tech, then you don't need more stuff. Truth be told a good laptop can do everything most people will ever need done. That and a cheap not so smart phone. Or heck even a smart phone from 4 years ago can do most things people need done. What frustrates me is when there is fundamentally different tech like going from GTX to RTX and I can't afford it. I can't afford it for love or money because it is so artificially scarce that no one has it to sell. That is rare in computing these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 3 Honestly, I'm at a point in my life where I don't really care about keeping up on the latest and greatest consumer electronics anymore. I could buy most of these new shiny things as they come along fairly easily, but I just... don't want to. Most everything I have in the regular "tech YouTuber" categories (phones, watches, headsets, cameras, etc) is just too "good enough" to justify replacing it only because the new Device N++ was released. Maybe it's sensibility that comes with impending middle age, maybe that wanting has shifted to intangible things, maybe it's just plain burnout or malaise, I don't know. I still keep my ear to the ground so I'm not completely out of touch, and I still like watching entertainment-leaning tech YouTube content, but I'm done keeping up with the Joneses. Even when I do want to upgrade, I'm not always going for the latest and greatest. I'd rather try out yesterday's flagship for today's midrange prices. (The latest for me has been digital cameras and 'AI'. The "best" camera I have is a Canon T6i, which is nine years old. I wanted to play with larger upsampling and content generation models, so I got a used 24GB 3090.) Maybe that's why most of the tech YouTubers I watch show off tech I can afford now, decades after it was released at unobtainium prices. Knowing which gadget to buy is easy when you already know what the whole gadget lineup was! Spoiler I sold my soul for ProSupport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 3 Author Just FYI a full length version of the video that prompted this has been obtained. Spoiler They got Linus in there a little bit too. 3 hours ago, Needfuldoer said: Honestly, I'm at a point in my life where I don't really care about keeping up on the latest and greatest consumer electronics anymore. Me too basically. It need to be a significant functional upgrade for it to really make a difference. Right now my current PC has a Ryzen 5700G APU. 8C 16T Yet with it I can run Windows in a VM and game in it while doing other things in Linux. I admit I do look at a Threadripper and if I had to build a new computer and had 5-10K to do it with I might go there. BUT what I have does what I need well enough. I need to see double the performance for half the price before I think an upgrade is really mandatory. In short I need to see the kind of leap going from 8086 to 80486 or 80486 to a Pentium was. As in my current thing simply cannot do something that I want or need to do. They kinda talked about this on the WAN show. The halo 1500 or 2000 dollar GPU is kinda uninteresting because no one can afford it. While the midrange parts, the obtanium is more interesting. 3 hours ago, Needfuldoer said: Reveal hidden contents For me this would be a SGI Indigo2 IMPACT workstation with all the trimmings. OR actually a working version of the last Tandy computer I owned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 6 On 2/2/2024 at 5:02 PM, Uttamattamakin said: Why send a "free" (but not free) top of the line version of the new doohickey of the month out instead of flooding the zone with their own marketing, then making the Youtubers wait in line to buy it to review it? It also strikes me that it is almost never the midrange gizmo that is sent for review. You know the one that most people would actually be able to afford. It's not even reviews: product placement is the most effective form of marketing. Say Linus wants to make a janky CPU cooler? Companies will be desperate to provide them not just with a top-tier CPU, but also motherboards, PSUs, RAM kits... They don't need them to advertise them, praise them, or anything other than use them, and perhaps list them in a part lists at some point in the video. Their presence alone in the video instills a latent demand in the viewers. This then helps companies in two ways: 1) increase demand for higher-tier products, at a price range most people shouldn't / wouldn't be buying otherwise; 2) create a halo product effect, leading buyers to get whatever product from the same brand they can afford, unconsciously expecting it to be better than a similarly priced competitor. All this is more important than reviews, hence why intel would send an 18-core, "walk-in-the-rain" CPU for Linus' 3-year old daughter PC. The best illustration of this is an LTT video from back when Zen hadn't launch yet. In that video, Linus went over the products bought in Amazon using LTT's affiliate code. In that video, the best-seller CPU was a K i7, despite every LTT video telling viewers they didn't need more than an i5 for gaming, nor a K chip unless planning to overclock (which probably also wasn't worth the cost in FPS/$ terms). The explicit message was against Intel desires ("don't pay 50% more for an i7, get the i5"), but all the i7s and HEDT builds in the channel were able to overpower the explicit message. In the end, the whole tech youtube ecosystem (and similar ones for other industries) strived and consolidated on the basis of channels acting as marketing arms for manufacturers, not in the blatant shilling or "paid reviews" sense, but in this, more indirect way: companies were willing to sponsor the channels and supply parts for their projects because their mere existence was good for business, regardless of what they said about one particular product or other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted February 7 Author On 2/6/2024 at 9:39 AM, SpaceGhostC2C said: It's not even reviews: product placement is the most effective form of marketing. Say Linus wants to make a janky CPU cooler? Companies will be desperate to provide them not just with a top-tier CPU, but also motherboards, PSUs, RAM kits... They don't need them to advertise them, praise them, or anything other than use them, and perhaps list them in a part lists at some point in the video. Maybe .... depends on if they want it back or auctioned off. (If you don't know the reference don't ask. Just don't.) On 2/6/2024 at 9:39 AM, SpaceGhostC2C said: Their presence alone in the video instills a latent demand in the viewers. ....... The explicit message was against Intel desires ("don't pay 50% more for an i7, get the i5"), but all the i7s and HEDT builds in the channel were able to overpower the explicit message. You have to maybe break LTT's viewership into two basic parts. People like those who would build a PC and the vast majority who just buy a laptop. Many of us who build a PC know that spending more up front can buy you years more usability in the long haul. So, we know the advice "buy midrange now" is good enough for most people who will just buy a laptop and use it for 2-3 years. With 10 million subscribers the audience is 75% "most people". People who would rarely dare to upgrade their RAM. While someone who went all in on HEDT, and built their own, in 2018 still has a very capable computer. Case in point someone who went all in on a first gen 8C 16T threadripper or better in 2018 likely still has a system that is competitive with Apple M1 max (workload and software dependent of course.) My pc there is not a threadripper but a Ryzen 7 5700G 8C16T and while supposedly a sucky APU I've not yet seen reason to upgrade. People like us are the minority. Most people see a computer, phone or laptop as a disposable status symbol. At most kin to buying a car. How many people would build a car from a kit, which is a thing people do, VS jut buying one? On 2/6/2024 at 9:39 AM, SpaceGhostC2C said: In the end, the whole tech youtube ecosystem (and similar ones for other industries) strived and consolidated on the basis of channels acting as marketing arms for manufacturers, not in the blatant shilling or "paid reviews" sense, but in this, more indirect way: companies were willing to sponsor the channels and supply parts for their projects because their mere existence was good for business, regardless of what they said about one particular product or other. I think that is part of it. It's not just that channels like LTT influence people who have local influence in their companies, and communities. IF you are the one known to have built your own computer and done more than use it for basic work, people will take your advice related to computing issues. LTT videos can influence those people. At least that's my working hypothesis. At the same time. It would make sense for a company to create a Linus Sebastian or Marquez Brown Lee and just keep them on a long, loose leash. Give them inside access to what's next before anyone. While also letting them do other interesting things. Afterall can you see the current crop of tech tubers doing this in 10 years maybe.... 20 years or more... Wan show will be sponsored by Depends or there will be LTT branded incontinence garments. While if companies created these tech idols from time to time it would ensure the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now