Ever thought of being a movie star or perhaps an internet-sensation?
Well, YouTube just opened it’s doors to you. They have a Partner Program designed to turn you into a skilled creator of popular videos, and get paid for it too:
YouTube has now announced that its expanding the eligibility to the program across the twenty countries that it’s available in, meaning it’s not just those with the popular videos who are invited to join the scheme.
The YouTube Partner Program is currently available in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Japan, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom and the United States.
“We’re excited to provide more creators with the opportunity to become partners and have access to programs and resources to help them be successful on YouTube,” said YouTube in the announcement.
Prior to this, the program was only open to producers of the most popular video content, who could gain additional privileges and choose to run advertising on their videos in return for a share of the spoils. But now it’s open to anyone who’s up for making some dollars from their finely crafted videos.
As we all get finished with our taxes so do the President and First Lady. It turns out that the Obama’s came in with a 20.5% tax rate on income of $789,674 (married filing jointly), including donations worth $172,130.
The bulk of that income came from presidential salaries, $394,821, and book sales, $441,369.
In 2010, their income was $1.7 million with the increase due to book sales, and in 2009, it was more than $5.5 million from book sales and Barack’s Nobel Peace Prize award money.
In comparison, Mitt Romney pulled in an estimated $20.9 million in 2011, and is paying a %15.3 tax rate on that. It seems that both our politicians are paying lower rates than average Americans.
The first royalty payments from Apple’s iTunes Match are in, and they got me excited – the total amount is over $10,000 for the first two months.
This is magic money that Apple made exist out of thin air for copyright holders.
A person has a song on her computer hard drive. She clicks on the song and plays it. No one is getting paid. The same person pays iTunes $25 for iTunes Match. She now clicks on the same song and plays it through her iMatch service. Copyright holders get paid.
Same action, same song, one makes money for the copyright holder, and one does not. This is found money that the copyright holders would never have gotten otherwise.
I bet you’re thinking this is a no-brainer and the coaches win by far. Not so fast, the medical departments at colleges rake in money for patient care and consulting.
Here is a breakdown for the UC system in California which includes Berkeley, UCLA, and San Francisco with a combined 100+ Nobel Laureates:
Coach – $2.4 million – Jeff Tedford (Berekeley)
Coach – $2.1 million – Ben Howland (UCLA)
Prof. – $2.0 million – Ronald Busuttil (UCLA)
Coach – $1.9 million – Mike Montgomery (Berkeley)
Prof. – $1.8 million – Khalil Tabsh (UCLA)
Prof. – $1.5 million – Anthony Azakie (UCSF)
Prof. – $1.5 million – Philip Leboit (UCSF)
Prof. – $1.5 million – Timothy McCalmont (UCSF)
Prof. – $1.4 million – Richard Shemin (UCLA)
Coach – $1.2 million – Rick Neuheisel (UCLA)
The coaches hold four of the ten spots. The disparity in pay between the two groups isn’t all that great either. Average of the top 10 has the professors earning $1.6 million and the coaches earning $1.9 million.
If you keep going, the next fifteen are all on the healthcare side with twelve professors and three health executives. Of the top 100 they take up 84 spots, with only fourteen non-healthcare salaries.
It’s also worth noting that the next coaches on the list are Norm Chow (UCLA) at #95, and Joanne Boyle (Berkeley) at #119.
I have to admit the numbers are pretty shocking. The common understanding is that professors make little money, while doctors make good money. Combine the two and it’s a gold mine.
One that doesn’t pull money from the schools themselves. Like the coaches they are largely paid with the money they pull in. In the world of college academics this is called an “auxiliary program” (thanks Norman), and the opposite is normally true. These programs (sports, healthcare) funnel money, prestige, and students to the schools.
A final note, these salaries are determined by combining each persons base pay with their incentives and bonuses. For the coaches this means winning, playoffs, and championships. For the health professors it means seeing patients and receiving awards for their research.
Take out this extra pay and not one in the top 10 earns above $317,000 in base pay. Many of those lower on the list have a set base pay of $500,000 and $800,000.
Interesting, to say the least, and I hope I informed your opinion of college salaries.
If you’ve ever wanted to know why CPC is better than CPM and CPA here is a great description why.
CPM – cost-per-thousand
CPA – cost-per-action
CPC – cost-per-click
Cost-per-thousand (CPM) was huge in the early days and very simple, get paid by the thousand viewers. But, it was it very limited in effectiveness. It placed all of the risk on the advertiser. They created the ad and made the payments, while all the website had to do was display the ad (often in the worst locations).
Then, cost-per-action (CPA) came into play where the website had to actually close a deal. The website didn’t get paid unless they got a viewer to buy something (or sign-up for something). This is the most common program used by the wide range of affiliate companies who offer high percentages (5%-15%) of the sale. But, this switches the game by placing all the risk on the website. The website places the ad and no matter how many views or clicks it receives they only get paid if the viewer commits the desired action. The advertiser receives all the free views and clicks with no impetus to create a compelling ad.
Finally, the balance came with cost-per-click (CPC). In this case the website gets paid for each click on the ad and it forces them to display it in the best possible spot. It also encourages the advertiser to create an interesting and relevant ad because they still need to convert the click into an action (purchase, sign-up).