Are Subscribers A Useless Metric
-
There are many pundits proclaiming that subscribers are no longer a viable metric, is this something that you've found to have some slivers of truth? Looking into the world of YouTube the subscriber number is used in a way to count as a stepping stone for whether your account is deemed good enough to gain access to monetization on the platforms. You'll also receive a shrunken plaque for your background depending on the number of subscribers you have.
Do you value this number into what you would deem as successful especially in how your business is ran? This could be important in how sponsors would look into your business worth. Take for example in how a sponsor would like to see that their product can reach a large number of eyeballs through your channel, compared to another channel that is a quarter less than you. To the sponsor the higher number would be ideal but, for the smaller channel their community is much more engaged. They provide a better ROI even though there are less subscribers.
What are your views on subscribers and the number you have?
-
Even though the SEO is the only way to get into the ranks, small publishers are unable to spend huge money on SEO where as big publishers can not only spend money on premium tools but even spend money on SEO, so practically speaking it is not possible to outsmart them.
-
Most people agree that the subscription metric is quite flawed. However, it still serves as a reasonably good reference point for content creators. The real problem arises when YouTube keeps things like monetization locked behind these metrics. It is better to reward people's engagement and watch time.