Do Cam Sites Compensate Model for Advertising Revenue?

[Smores]

I gather that most of the webcam sites are only paying out the model for tokens that users give her? The problem I see is that most of the traffic in a model's room is freeloaders who just want to sit around and watch for free. The websites make money from those viewers through advertising, and the model is apparently not getting any share of that advertising revenue.

This creates a conflict of interest between the model and the website. Just to use CB as my example, CB has massive numbers of anonymous unregistered users in each room, and most of the registered users are "grey" users who did not even buy any tokens. CB is probably happy to have those users in the room, because they are monetizing them and they do not have to share the advertising revenue.

Supposedly the CB affiliate program gives the affiliate 20% of the revenue from any user who signs up through an affiliate link. Does that include the advertising revenue?

Webcam sites could help models overcome this situation by providing many more features to require or encourage tokens to be paid to the model. Free time in a room could be limited. Video quality for unpaid users could be limited. Models could be given the right to require small mandatory payments every N minutes. Do the webcam sites - because of the above conflict of interest - actually have a financial incentive to NOT develop these kinds of features?

 

[SaffronBurke]

You only get advertising revenue if you're signed up for something like the Pornhub Verified Model Program, which pays you ad revenue earned on your qualifying videos.

Any other time, nope.

Freeloaders can be annoying, yes, but there are a plethora of private-based camsites where it is much harder for freeloaders to get anything for free. If someone is overly bothered by all of the free viewers on token sites, I suggest that they switch sites so it's a non-issue.

 

[snowwolf87]

I gather that most of the webcam sites are only paying out the model for tokens that users give her? The problem I see is that most of the traffic in a model's room is freeloaders who just want to sit around and watch for free. The websites make money from those viewers through advertising, and the model is apparently not getting any share of that advertising revenue.

This creates a conflict of interest between the model and the website. Just to use CB as my example, CB has massive numbers of anonymous unregistered users in each room, and most of the registered users are "grey" users who did not even buy any tokens. CB is probably happy to have those users in the room, because they are monetizing them and they do not have to share the advertising revenue.

Supposedly the CB affiliate program gives the affiliate 20% of the revenue from any user who signs up through an affiliate link. Does that include the advertising revenue?

Webcam sites could help models overcome this situation by providing many more features to require or encourage tokens to be paid to the model. Free time in a room could be limited. Video quality for unpaid users could be limited. Models could be given the right to require small mandatory payments every N minutes. Do the webcam sites - because of the above conflict of interest - actually have a financial incentive to NOT develop these kinds of features?

I'm looking at MFC as a guest now and see no advertising. I do have adblock installed.

Edit: I just checked CB and see none there, either.

 

[Fatquack]

I don't think MFC has advertising, even without adblocker I don't see any ads.

 

[JoleneBrody]

MFC does not have advertising, but chaturbate has a ton.
It looks the same if you enter a room. side bars and bottom ads. All animated so slow computers beware.

 

[Fatquack]

^Holy shit, that's horrible.

 

[JoleneBrody]

^Holy shit, that's horrible.

Luckily they make it easy to hide.

 

[Smores]

Luckily they make it easy to hide.

Maybe, but the point of this topic was that the model doesn't partake of revenue that is directly tied to the broadcast of her image. And - what is worse - this appears to create a system where CB has a financial incentive to get as many freeloaders who never compensate a model with tips into a room as possible.

 

[BobbyB]

Maybe, but the point of this topic was that the model doesn't partake of revenue that is directly tied to the broadcast of her image. And - what is worse - this appears to create a system where CB has a financial incentive to get as many freeloaders who never compensate a model with tips into a room as possible.

A camsite is a business and sources of revenue are normally tokens sold and possibly adds, the models are usually compensated by a percentage of tokens they "earn" on the camsite ( you could consider possible advertising revenue covered with the percentage ), so if a modelis not happy with the compensation she can move to another camsite offering a better deal.....

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

Streammate doesn't have ads either. I'm not very familiar with the other cam sites, but AFAIK few/none of the top ones have ads either.

So really this question boils down to does Chaturbate give models part of the ad revenue? The answer is no. Looking at the traffic growth of CB, it seems like they are spending a good portion (maybe all) of their ad revenue on advertising CB, It seems to be working. I know when I'm on other porn sites, I seem to be redirected to CB all the time (it is fucking annoying).

Now considering all the other problems CB create for models, like banning all the time, I'd think not getting a piece of the ad revenue would way down on my list of complaints.

 

[Guy]

MFC does not have advertising, but chaturbate has a ton.
It looks the same if you enter a room. side bars and bottom ads. All animated so slow computers beware.
View attachment 71316 View attachment 71315

Im surprised that Chaturbate isnt trying to block adblockers like Forbes and Wired are.