It seems awfully high in light of the current advertising recession
In an article about Tim Armstrong’s departure from Google, the WSJ offhandedly says:
But advertisers mostly haven’t committed a large amount of ad dollars to these emerging areas. YouTube, for example, will account for only roughly 3% of Google’s net revenue this year, or $500 million, estimated Youssef Squali, an analyst at Jefferies & Co.
That YouTube revenue estimate is far higher than other estimates I’ve seen. In November, Screen Digest provocatively claimed that Hulu would catch YouTube in revenues in 2009, but at the much lower level of $180m. Said the FT:
Neither company breaks out its advertising revenues but Arash Amel, analyst at Screen Digest, forecasts that in 2008 YouTube will generate about $100m in the US, compared with about $70m at Hulu. Next year, both sites will generate about $180m in the US, he says. YouTube currently earns around half of its revenues in the US, while Hulu has not yet launched internationally.
I suspect the $500m estimate of YouTube’s 2009 revenue is way too high, especially in light of the current advertising recession. What do readers think?
(For more from Jeremy, visit his blog)
(Image source: socialcomputingmagazine.com)
