236
Influencers are disgusted with Amazon's paltry $25-per-video endorsement offer | It looks like full-time Amazon UCG creators are getting a 90-percent cut in pay (www.techspot.com)
submitted 3 years ago by [M, B] to c/technology@lemmy.world
55 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Influencers are disgusted with Amazon's paltry $25-per-video endorsement offer | It looks like full-time Amazon UCG creators are getting a 90-percent cut in pay::undefined

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 71 points 3 years ago (1 child)

"One commenter pointed out that the amount of work needed to complete such a contract equates to a full-time job."

Oh, the humanity.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 50 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child)

    A full time job that paid $12500 without benefits for roughly 5.5 months of work if they release 3 videos a day, 7 days a week with sponsored content. No one should take that.

    Edit: fixed missing 0.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago* (3 children)

    3 videos a day for 5.5 months (about 167 days). That's 500 videos. 500 x $25 = $12500, not $1250.

    I have no clue if it's feasible to make three videos a day for 5.5 months, but I guess if the length of the video doesn't matter then It must be doable.

    It could be worth it if they can also make money through other companies for the same videos. Plus if they're popular enough that Amazon is paying them then they must already be making ad revenue or something.

    I don't know. I'm not a pro, just spitballing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    People don't tend to work weekends. So, 5 days a week, not 7 days a week. These are sponsored videos, so they are not making money through other companies.

    Do the weirdo simp for Amazon all you want, the maths don't add up in your favour. It's still crap.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Regardless. That’s less than 25k/year for full time work. And no, 3 videos a day is really not feasible. Those things take serious to put together if you want anything with any quality whatsoever.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago*

    US federal minimum wage is still $7.25 and if that's worked for 40 hours a week for a year, that's 15,080. Those people working minimum wage tend to do much more important work than shilling some stupid product online.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -4 points 3 years ago

    Is the article mentioned the criteria for a video? I don't care enough about it to read the article. Can the video be like one of those YouTube shorts and and still be worth the 25 bucks?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago

    I have no clue if it's feasible to make three videos a day for 5.5 months, but I guess if the length of the video doesn't matter then It must be doable.

    It's definitely a feat to do that. Some youtube channels are able to do it but they're working with a team of people generally. With the amount that Amazon is offering, it's not going to be viable to hire people to help and doing it on your own is an enormous amount of work. Even for short form content.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent