Twitch Costs

[@PirateSoftware]

Internal Amazon businesses like Twitch pay for AWS Services like IVS at the same rate that retail customers do. They use an AWS dashboard tool called Isengard to provision and manage this paid infrastructure. All of this is done over internal accounting and as stated in the video Twitch does not get a special discount. www.lastweekinaws.com/blog/the-aws-service-i-hate-the-most/

[@buckdog2005]

Even if they do do this, they should be able to afford it, Amazon is a trillion dollar company they should have the funds to keep twitch functioning and still be profitable because those expenses aren’t real

[@Catokawaii]

Jesus christ thats so much money then...

[@MrBrax]

But they're paying themselves?

[@aprilshowersstormtrooper]

Why is everything named after Lord of the Rings? Palantir and now this? 🙃

[@anonymall]

​@@MrBrax More like paying their own bosses

[@TheMajorStranger]

There's a reason why they skeedadle out of South Korea. Not only is the streaming cost a boatload, but they were also charged on bandwidth.

[@brahtrumpwonbigly7309]

They made those cartoon running noises on the way out.

[@nils7816]

i mean.. its mainly due to south korean government making it so expensive for foreign platforms that its impossible to keep the service running long term.. so they cut out the foreign competition

[@illkissyourightnow]

but my question is, why does it cost them MORE when the viewing quality is *lowered??*

[@waylandwalace3302]

​@nils7816 based. Why should forgein companies be allowed to displace local production? Outsiders stay out

[@nocturn9x]

​@@waylandwalace3302ah yes very modern mentality. That's the free market for ya, adapt or die.

[@MrTindall]

.... The fact Twitch is still alive is INSANE. And I heard there are a few 4K streams out there

[@sebastianPi]

And more streaming sites keep opening!

[@awesam2399]

@@sebastianPiwhere are people moving? I knew Twitch dominated the market since Mixer’s shutdown but I haven’t heard of other sites

[@chillrendbeats]

@@awesam2399it’s basically just twitch and KZbin, maybe kick

[@insolting7070]

KZbin?​@@awesam2399

[@lordderpington8021]

Doesn't amazon own them or something?

[@vexillian]

I'm glad Thor shows this, but Twitch should be the one advertising this information instead of just coming out and saying "we're unprofitable" with Trust-Me-Bro levels of explanation.

[@tylerbrown1160]

They did, and showed a cost breakdown. everyone said they were lying and moved on

[@darragho6358]

I mean this is lies I'm a DevOps engineer Aws and twitch are both Amazon subsidiaries with Aws being the most profitable on all Amazon subsidiaries so twitch would get a massive discount on this or it's just Amazon moving their profits to the already insanely profitable Aws where they have superior infrastructure for avoiding tax already set up.

[@darragho6358]

​@@tylerbrown1160as a DevOps engineer they were lying

[@Ballade90]

​@@darragho6358 word on the street is Amazon doesn't cut twitch a deal at all tho

[@Chalo122790]

Not that I wouldnt like it, but they wont do probably because would be revealing too much information they dont want the competition to know.

[@vladimir_bak]

"It costs 400,000$ to run this stream... for 12 seconds"

[@Gameknight2169]

"I have yet to meet one who can outsmart IRS"

[@filip9587]

​@@Gameknight2169 FAANG Companies: Hello There

[@fluxx7217]

@@vladimir_bak im heavy weapons guy

[@SalehS0]

Stream running at 180,000K 60¹⁰ fps

[@DarkLightReborn]

That would be about 405m viewers on 1080p.

[@Demon-sy1uw]

This makes sense why twitch hates sleep streams

[@Mempavrai]

They hate it so hard that they let it happen

[@_cloudface_]

😒 if nobody watches it doesn't cost them money.

[@Predated2]

@@_cloudface_ It still does tho. Not nearly as much, but the video is still send to their servers and needs to be decoded and recast so that someone gets a feed ASAP.

[@delovann]

Well, if nothing moves on the stream, then the video codec will do a wonderful job compressing that and the bandwidth required will be close to nothing.

[@DrSkeletor]

@@Mempavrai same with hot tub streams they probs have the most hd viewers

[@getsumatsu]

Ah, this must be the reason why whenever I have Twitch playing in the background, it always goes to 360p until I pull it up again...

[@itsTyrion]

Yup. 1080p is usually 6mbps, so 0.75MB per second, per viewer, per stream.

[@alparslanbarbarosari4914]

It can also be a measurement to limit the bandwidth use of your PC, so you don't use a lot of bandwidth and internet on something you're not watching necessarily but listening to only

[@LautaroQ2812]

Nah, this was a change made some years ago where if you tabbed out your res goes to crap to save bandwidth on their side. None of us want to look up something for 3 minutes and go back to garbage that we can't watch. Sometimes even it would never go back to 1080p and sometimes the stream would stop playing, so you'd have to refresh the page. @@alparslanbarbarosari4914

[@rogerwicksell]

i think that has more to do with eco mode on the pc or web browser you use :) i could be wrong tho

[@ChrisCarlos64]

I am most certain that is the PC requesting a lower steam not Twitch. Your OS is managing your broadband usage and if you are having high usage in two competing apps or more it will look at usage and try to give the one that needs it most while lowering your other bandwidth.

[@huntakilla1234]

Tbh, I wouldn't be surprised if twitch caps all streams at 720p, with these kinda costs. Crazy.

[@adrianschick7300]

they cap non-partner streams at 720p

[@kris5187]

tbh 720p is fine, most people don't even realise that they're watching in 480 or 720 on mobile devices anyway 😂

[@Hyperxeon]

But also remember what numbers he put into the calculator. Most people aren't streaming to 8000 viewers. A 10 hour multi-resolution stream to 100 people is only $92 at 50% avg watch time. If someone is streaming to 8k viewers, chances are that they're pulling in revenue that would scale positively with the cost to run it. Not saying that twitch isn't losing money, but that not all streams are costing anywhere near $4K.

[@demonicdragongod3334]

​@@kris5187maybe if you have bad eye site bc I definitely tell a difference between 480 and 720

[@thesuperMasterSword]

@adrianschick7300 last time I checked even non-affiliates could stream at 1080p60. I remember my friend's gf streaming at that rate, iirc she's still not affiliate. Personally I stream at 720p30 just to be nicer to people with worse internet, especially since I'm non-affiliated. Not an ad btw, I haven't even streamed in half a year and no plans to be affiliate.

[@PaintingWinterMusic]

Twitch feels like a kid that's been flung into the adult world way too early and isn't ready to make all its own decisions yet.

[@PaintingWinterMusic]

Like an 18-year-old who was a sheltered kid but is now technically an adult. Also--shameless plug--I'm hoping some of you might like the music I make too :)

[@horgecondaliza6644]

Never thought I'd say that I can really relate to twitch's life experience, but here I am.

[@JACpotatos]

Twitch is paying AWS in this scenario.... So it's Amazon paying Amazon. Companies do this all the time so one of them shows no profit and they don't pay taxes

[@Duck_side]

​@@JACpotatostwitch isn't owned by Amazon anymore

[@Ice_Icemb]

@@JACpotatosthis would still lose Amazon money, which they obviously don’t want.

[@magetsalive5162]

"Per year?" "Oh you sweet, summer child."

[@WinterSoldier100]

😂😂😂 that cuts deep

[@xdoghuman]

do you post on reddit?

[@iHaveOneArm]

that's 1.3 million a year depending if you say only stream 300 days a year

[@Osjey]

I hate this saying. "You sweet..." Makes you feel so smart right?

[@ncrranger6327]

​@@Osjey Pretty sure it's a reference to game of thrones

[@weenerhutjr]

Just FYI, this website uses the pricing for IVS as a product. Meaning this number is how much it would cost EVERYONE ELSE to run a stream for this long with these specs. Amazon pays far less for this stuff internally because it’s their own product. Amazon is still definitely losing money in comparison to their other services, but fyi the numbers don’t look nearly this bad for them internally when they use it for Twitch.

[@KuribPlays]

The question is how much lower, even if you do another half. 2k, 1k per stream can still rack up. If Thor only streams 5 days a week, that is still minimum 260k a year from him alone. And he is one of many streamers. I think what he is trying to point out is that, bandwidth is expensive, and twitch is definitely not making money back that easily.

[@travis1258]

​@@KuribPlaysamazon only really profits on AWS, they likely overpay for this to show losses on twitch for tax reasons, just a guess but its probably similar to most corporate tax evasion. Tech companies are typically all "unprofitable" yet stocks go up pay goes up etc etc its smoke and mirrors to avoid paying big brother

[@spencer1880]

@@travis1258 It's less about tax evasion and more about where they can show growth to investors. A lot of this accounting actually came about because of Enron doing shifty things with moving money around and is a requirement from the US government.

[@beantrig]

Does anyone know the website name? Been trying to find it but no luck.

[@hmzz596]

@@KuribPlays a lot lower than that. Bulk pricing for customers can dip to 50x lower let alone how much it costs for amazon. Also dependent on if its on demand or not

[@thetheory6159]

I've heard that it's a sort of management scheme, where amazon will charge twitch full price for streaming as a way of knowing how much twitch is spending that way, and then reinvests the difference between what it actually costs amazon and what twitch paid, back into twitch. This localizes fundings and keeps them in amazon itself, and locks up a bunch of twitch's funds, which prevents that specific money from being messed with by twitch people. Keep twitch on an IV drip of funds where you don't ever let it die, but don't give it enough resources for people to fund themselves at amazon's expense.

[@semicedevine6918]

That's so smart, basically amazon is saying do whatever you want, but we won't ever let you be dumb enough to kill off this business venture for us.

[@rewardilicious]

Yep the actual cost is basically 20-30x lower.

[@RdTrler]

A lot of other live-service games feel like they have that same, "we can't die but we can't invest either" vibe. Especially in MMOs where they do something on a strict, predictable schedule: monthly stuff, weekly stuff, quadrannual stuff. The Elder Scrolls: Online is like that. Feels like all their profits get taken away by Microsoft and they're left with a, "I dare you to accomplish something with this," budget.

[@trentswag9324]

⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠@@RdTrlerjust out of curiosity, when you used the word “quadrannual” I’m not sure if you meant quarterly, as in every 3 months (4 times a year) or if you actually meant to say “quadrennial” which means once every 4 years like leap years. I’m not trying to be a Karen I am just genuinely curious. P.S. I think we might have invented a new word 😂

[@El_Locoroco]

If that's real I think it's more about taxes then anything else

[@alistairblaire6001]

Luke from Linus Tech Tips has always said that video hosting and streaming are insanely expensive but I didn’t think it was quite this much

[@MrJunglewhite101]

Luke says u shouldn't believe everything

[@Fredrick046]

How is that different from yt tho? Like should that be much much more expensive since there are like 1000x more views on a lot of videos.

[@TUDORMARCU16]

I think Twitch has some sort of discount for Amazon cloud services given that it's owned by them. Cloud is really expensive but some of the costs are pure profit margins.

[@SkitsofRandom]

@@Fredrick046well that’s exactly the point. It is not public knowledge whether KZbin is profitable or not. It’s completely possible Google endlessly funds KZbin without return because of the cultural power it has.

[@misos1393]

Yeah but once you own the servers, and they've paid for themselves. It's all profit. If you own two companies and one company buys a service from the other company, (amazon and twitch) all of the sudden you have a tax write off for a net neutral money exchange.

[@hhudy]

Jesus, I would’ve guessed about 43 dollars

[@__Brandon__]

Video uses a lot of bandwidth, but there's tech like multicast and peering that can get this down into the 10 to 15 dollars per stream level. Twitches codebase is so old they'd probably just need to start over to implement it, but other services have done it. Some services let you even self host your livestreams and it doesn't use that much bandwidth up. Another big cost for twitch is they have to reencode all the streams into different resolu levels on the server instead of doing it on a streamers PC. It uses a lot of compute time and electricity

[@peterino2]

Its probably closer to that for amazon internally as the only consumable is electricity for them. The rest of the costs, servers, manpower, engineering... are all stuff they pay for regardless of if this particular stream is running or not. Cloud costs are highly jacked up for certain workloads when they sell to customers. Cloud service provision costs are extremely hard to estimate though, it's more of an ongoing operations cost. But if you were trying to make your own twitch and you were buying bandwidth from amazon then it would cost you personally around 4000$

[@darragho6358]

​@@peterino2as a DevOps engineer this dude is spot on both twitch and Aws are Amazon so it's nothing to them

[@koleka3233]

Sounds like we might have to go back to regular tv style broadcasting 😅

[@tc2241]

Cloud costs are HIGHLY inflated. If you were to purchase your own server and host an 8hr stream of a similar size it wouldn’t be 1/100th the cost to operate (that’s excluding software and hardware). Many businesses don’t want to or can’t afford to maintain their equipment or the upfront cost, so cloud platforms take advantage of that. There’s also regional and security benefits of your a global entity. It’s even higher when you use a SaaS that sits on top of a cloud service(which twitch essentially is doing).

[@yenda12]

That calculator is based on AWS public pricing for their video streaming service. AWS is owned by Amazon and Amazon owns twitch for 10 years now. The public cost is way higher than the actual cost. I can believe they still lose money but not 4k per stream

[@obaydahshajrawi1922]

But they could use those servers for something else which is opportunity cost for the company and profit lost though 🤔

[@TomSp88]

You need a bump, the cost is closer to 0.0003 per minute on a saturated cap server but you also need to put up dark fiber investment, the true cost would be closer to 2.4 cents an hour for saturated network, cost goes up with less users/idle state This guy just proved that he has no idea what he’s talking about and sheep just taking it as it is… this is a very dumbed down version btw

[@Ponina7]

@@obaydahshajrawi1922 Maybe but I doubt they would even run twitch if any servers they aquire automatically can be rented out.

[@go-away-5555]

@@obaydahshajrawi1922they actually can't. Twitch has separate datacenters from AWS that were acquired in the justintv acquisition. They still have not unified the data centers to be a part of AWS.

[@duo1666]

@@obaydahshajrawi1922 You are assuming that they would both be used elsewhere if twitch wasnt using it, and that they would make more money off of it than they do with twitch. Capitalism is shit and companies are legally bound to earn as much money as possible for their shareholders. If amazon could drop twitch to make more money, they would.

[@LegendHimseIf]

I'm making sure I always go out of my way to watch in the highest resolution from now on. Thank you Thor 😁

[@adamstlaurent5151]

"That's how THAT works" has been one of my favorite quotes for a while now thank you.

[@frostedlambs]

This is how that doesn't work Do the entire website, according to this site it would cos them like 250 billion a day for their 3m veiwers and their 100k channels

[@adamstlaurent5151]

@@frostedlambs Okay Karen no one asked.

[@frostedlambs]

@@adamstlaurent5151 dude I'm not a Karen lmao I'm trying to give you facts, Is someone correcting you for being wrong a Karen?

[@frostedlambs]

@@adamstlaurent5151 "a different opinion based on evidence?! What a karen"

[@adamstlaurent5151]

You're being an a-hole by leaving a completely irrelevant reply to my comment. Sure it relates to the video but all I did was make a comment discussing the contagious joy this man continues to bring just by being himself.

[@dumbotterlover2558]

Them beign bought by AWS... I mean Amazon, must have helped them MASSIVELY. Amazon's own ads are probably the only reason they still exist.

[@NotMyActualName_]

Amazon also charges twitch ridiculous rates so that twitch loses money intentionally. Keeps the profits down which keeps them out of the crosshairs of shit like antitrust regulations. Amazon might charge twitch 4000 for this stream, but it doesn't COST them more than 50 bucks.

[@taliker]

@@NotMyActualName_ If they can't use those servers for other clients then it's costing them the same price as those other clients would pay. That's how that works.

[@doomse150]

​@@NotMyActualName_Did you really just unironically say 50 bucks??? Do you just pull stuff out of your arse with absolutely zero knowledge in the field whatsoever?

[@choilive]

Twitch pays the same for AWS like everyone else. And yes, it’s insanely expensive

[@NotMyActualName_]

@@choilive it really isn't though. Twitch "pays" in the sense amazon wants toake it look like twitch is losing a ton of money while AWS is making a ton of money. It's just accounting shit. The actual cost for Amazon to provide those services for itself is tiny.

[@SuperSmashDolls]

Those numbers are what AWS would charge to a third-party using their video delivery platform - not what Amazon pays themselves for bandwidth. Amazon almost certainly has settlement-free peering that drives that cost down. Same thing with Google. Every big tech company pays to build out private lines to every ISP because it's way cheaper than paying for transit. Any ISP that wants to kill a video platform can just refuse to peer and it kills them (see Comcast's peering spat with Level3 13 years ago, they wanted Level3 to pay extra for carrying Netflix traffic).

[@Michael-sb8jf]

Except they charge themselves this number more or less to write it off on taxes

[@boblikes]

​@@Michael-sb8jfcurious, doesn't AWS then post a profit to the exact amount you're proposing they're charging twitch as a write-off completely undoing the proposed write-off for their taxes? I've heard this repeatedly said but I'm not sure it's reality.

[@swankshire6939]

Okay so it's what it costs kick, since they use AWS

[@Jack_L]

@@boblikesCompanies just reinvest the money they make back into themselves to grow, to avoid paying taxes on that money afaik

[@L2002]

Still expensive though

[@travislefebvre7341]

I love that I’ve come back and seen this short again. This short has reached so many people and the reactions to how much it cost is priceless

[@mr_inconspicuous]

The "per year?" Made me remember that ten years ago I'd be rich

[@Potatotenkopf]

10 years ago I would be 10 😞

[@walterroux291]

10 years ago I'd no longer be disabled and in chronic pain 😞

[@Leo9ine]

This turned into a support group real fast 10 years ago she'd still love me

[@-Sean_]

​@@Leo9ine10 years ago I'd be in a worse spot mentally

[@joncents2000]

10 years ago, it was so much easier to become erect

[@voodoo1094]

That data is very, very misleading. That price is what you'd pay Amazon if you wanted them to provide a twitch like experience to you as a service. Something where they'd make a whole lot of money. This is not what it costs Amazon to provide that service. If you check the Amazon IVS pricing details you'll see that even as a normal customer without special deals you'd pay 50% less than this due to bulk rebates. In practice CDNs give out rates lower than $0.001/GB to large customers. There's extra cost for the infrastructure required to transcode the data, etc but nowhere near that magnitude.

[@Dankatron69]

I was just about to comment something along the lines of "I'm sure Twitch gets it at a much cheaper bulk rate just like any business" But this was a much better explanation than I could come up with.

[@krad1314]

Ivs is mostly for business meetings and events, good luck trying to use that for real time live streaming for thousands of people.

[@tankasxxl]

let's also not forget who provides said IVS services, AND sumultaneously owns Twitch. The true cost for Amazon is absolutely a miniscule franction of this estimator calculates it to be, if it can be calculated at all.

[@JSp4wN]

​@@tankasxxl I bet the only bill they have is electricity. Atleast that's what it sounds like.

[@doomse150]

​@@JSp4wN It's mostly electricity and internet bandwidth, but electricity costs for cooling large server farms are insanely high.

[@danhonks6264]

Keep in mind that this is based off of the pricing of Amazon IVS, which Twitch almost certainly don't pay full value for because they're owned by Amazon.

[@mohaa556]

Yep, this is exactly it, the real cost is probably a fraction of this (hell might even be just actual running the hardware cost), because why the hell would Amazon charge full price for one of their own services?

[@backstabber3537]

@@mohaa556 not a fraction u act like cost to amazon is free

[@jtowensbyiii6018]

​@@backstabber3537 you actually believe that? 😂

[@mohaa556]

@@backstabber3537 It's not free but it doesn't make sense to charge yourself full price. It makes senses to charge a third party this price since that will give AWS a profit, but Amazon essentially ccharging themselves full price makes no sense what so ever.

[@gbarcalow]

Unless you work there, I would bet this isn't true. So they get a discount? Sure! But even within their own companies, divisions "charge" each other against services rendered. You can't just add 10k servers and 2TB of bandwidth on the AWS side without the accounting to justify the expense. Even if the cost is on paper, it exists for accounting, for taxs, for metrics, for ROI, etc...

[@DeerLord6616]

Dude you have become one of my favorite people to see shorts from. You've got so many different neat tidbits of facts that I'd never have known that I've learned from you, in such an aesthetically pleasing delivery - your voice. Thank you for doing what you do!

[@HeadsetProfessional]

They may need to add that "Are you still watching?" prompt to help with this. Because personally I fall asleep to twitch and it runs all night because people host each other.

[@Shinu_Pain]

That sounds like a you problem 💀

[@HeadsetProfessional]

Its not a 'problem' for me at all. I dont mind it what so ever but it could help with twitch costs. Your comment makes no sense. Leave the comment section alone and go watch more anime.@@Shinu_Pain

[@Shinu_Pain]

@@HeadsetProfessional Looks like I touched a nerve my bad 💀

[@kaustabhchakraborty3158]

Nah, then how we would do afk stream for those sweet drops ? 😅

[@RedAISkye]

​@@HeadsetProfessional That is definitely a YOU problem if you sleep with a device on like that even if you think it's not a problem. 💀 It wouldn't help twitch costs at all, would just annoy people that are actually watching. 😂

[@billhancock8881]

This is mostly from Amazon IVS billing of $0.072/h of video 720p video. This roughly lines up with Amazon S3 bandwidth costs, which assuming 1 hour of 720p video is 1GB would be $0.05/h. However, the same bandwidth on Digital Ocean would only cost $0.01/h. Assuming Digital Ocean isn't losing money on bandwidth, Amazon is marking up their IVS costs by at least 5-7X. And as Amazon owns Twitch, this means their actual costs are at least 5X cheaper than that number.

[@bahnny]

they are running over amazons own infrastructure so while they probably record the 'losses' on paper, the reality is the cost is 0 because amazon's aws isn't shutting down ever. its just a comfortable way for them to avoid the tax man. nothing more

[@joergsonnenberger6836]

Wholesale bandwidth price is something less than 1EUR/TB.

[@Kushibunny]

​@@joergsonnenberger6836 yeah, Thor usually has good takes but this one is bullshit. Bandwidth doesn't cost anywhere near that much. Somehow Amazon is pissing money up the wall with Twitch and still posting record profits.

[@3snoW_]

@@joergsonnenberger6836 720p is about 1GB/h. So 8000 viewers for 8 hours would be about 64TB, so about 64€ according to your pricing. That's a LOT lower than the 2,180.00$ that he showed... Not doubting you but where did you get that number?

[@youjying]

Additionally, cloud, in general, is expensive AF. The whole point of the cloud is to be dynamic and versatile, not an infinitely scaling service. Even digital ocean costs are super high compared to what I can do with a custom data center buildout. When the entirety of twitch has always existed, they should be able to just make a couple capital expenditures and deal with the monthly OPEX as a portion of bulk rent/DC fees, and because they have the biggest DCs and internet pipes in the world, they get the best at scale rates. I currently pay about $0.04/Mbps/mo for 100gbps circuits. Well, when you stream HD video, that is about 5mbps per stream, 40gbps total, if you streamed for a full month that should cost you $1600/mo.. or /3/30, ~$17/8 hour stream. And that isn't even "at scale" costs

[@Stompash]

i have worked at twitch, twitch has its own video stack similar to IVS, and heavily discounted where IVS is used, they pay like 3% of the total cost, that’s based off public IVS calculations I assume so not accurate at all. But yes it will be incredibly expensive but not that much.

[@tm6569]

Makes more sense Its obvious to anyone with a brain that these figures are far to high to be realistic and obviously a big company like Amazon is operating with massive discounts on their expenses

[@Zarkahs]

@@tm6569 exactly, he didn't even read the link amazon themselves posted about twitch's infrastructure, yet all the comments with thousands of upvotes are just mindlessly agreeing with this completely factually incorrect video

[@someonestolebigboi-imbigboi]

I have never felt more glad to have backed out of streaming..

[@GRAYWOLF232]

time to open 10 twitch tabs at 1080p

[@misterpizarro5512]

That's pretty much exactly how it works... ​@@huehuehue-x3c

[@Dathgarion]

​@hecticphusion yea that's exactly how it works my dude. Twitch effectively has to pay for the stream to go to each viewer. The more viewers a stream has the more the stream costs to run.

[@Deimatos]

​@hecticphusion wouldn't it though if it was a different stream on each tab because they would have to send each stream to said ip (I'm genuinely asking I have no clue how this stuff works)

[@DanianDL]

Data getting sent to 1 IP doesn't magically make the data redundant or free. You pay for bandwidth, not for a IP reservation. The more streams you watch, the more data you download and the more bandwidth twitch needs to allocate for you.

[@addictedtoRS]

​@@huehuehue-x3c Is it really that hard to educate somebody on something without being a total jerk?

[@TunaPiana]

i loved the per year part, was waiting for someone to genuinely question the stupidity of this being real but thor coming in with basically “its very real”

[@EEEEEEEE]

‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎E

[@craigarmstrong7564]

Except it's definitely not real

[@MrVohveli]

@@craigarmstrong7564 I (sometimes) work with Cloud Infrastructure and cost optimization is almost the only thing that I do, so can confirm: it absolutely is real. You're thinking on the "how much my setup cost and how many people it could stream to" -level of costs. So allow me to explain: A 1gbps connection to your house is about 25$/month and you use barely a fraction of it's capacity, so you're billed for the ability to use 1gbps on demand, not the whole 1gbps as data: An enterprise client paying for 1gbps, is expected to use 1gb of data every second, of every hour, of every day to make money and is billed accordingly... .... and then on top of that it's server costs, disk costs and infrastructure recovery costs and of course, what I want to make all of this happen.

[@sexylazercatwizard]

Yeah this isn't real. It's about 2.4 cents an hour for them to run their own servers, they're not gonna charge themselves anything to use their own service, let alone the public price😂

[@MrVohveli]

@@sexylazercatwizard No sir, here's how this works out: Twitch (Amazon subsidiary) buys their servers from AWS (Amazon Subsidiary) and Amazon as the parent company wants profit out of both. Now, if Twitch were to get compute at cost from AWS, that would not only incur a loss over at AWS's book keeping (now you're using servers you COULD sell at a higher cost to anyone else, to run Twitch) AND you get an anti-trust lawsuit for selling your own company servers at a loss/cost - and the competition has to buy them from you/azure/google, so that's a consideration. Even though at a high level it's just Amazon shuffling money around with some loss to taxes etc, in order for Twitch to return a profit, and for Amazon to have it generate the desired effect in Share Price: Twitch needs to operate profitably while paying market price for compute - so they do. ========================= TL:DR; one of the subsidiary companies is going to have to have the expenses in their books, Amazon can't (legally) let AWS sell them at a discount, so it's going to be over at Twitch's books.

[@Shy--Tsunami]

Absolutely bonkers i want more context i wish i knew where to find this clip in the vod it was clipped from

[@darragho6358]

It's not true the company given this quote is also Amazon and it's a mad jacked up price

[@ciknay547]

@@darragho6358 Thor has said on other streams that twitch doesn't get a discount from amazon. That may have changed since a few months ago, but there was a long time where amazon company was buying amazon services at retail prices. Wild stuff.

[@AHersheyHere]

'Just chatting' single handily holding up Twitch.

[@Vizimech]

Is this based on the "retail" cost of Amazon IVS video delivery? Amazon would obviously not be paying the same rate they charge people for to stream video from their own servers.

[@leonhardable]

also twitch would not have been paying that rate, considering they (even pre amazon) did bring a pretty big userbase. i simply cant believe 4000$ for 8 hours of stream, this must be around as accurate as all these "how much is youtuber X worth" and calculated on some old ahh numbers

[@Domedwho]

@@leonhardableYep, its just a marketing technique. Twitch/Amazon make money off the service, and invest heavily into it because they do make money and can. This guy made 25k from BITS ALONE IN ONE STREAM. Amazon gets half, wow an 8k profit from only one source of their 4+ income sources?! Wow seems like twitch is rly losing money

[@krad1314]

@@leonhardable “Approximately 10,000 viewers for a one-hour live event using a high definition (HD)-1080p encoding profile is approximately $13.04 for live encoding and packaging + $1,492.56 for 18,017GB distribution = $1,505.60 for the one-hour event.” From AWS’s own webpage. At least do a google search before you act like the data is fake bro lmfao

[@danny208YT]

You nerds really think piratesoftware doesn't know twitch gets a better deal? It's in his numbers he calculated.

[@pilodrou4213]

@@leonhardable 8 hours of stream to 8000 people. Thats 64,000 hours of data sent out. If it was sent out to 100 people it would be far less.

[@thelazygamer1370]

The fact twitch never showed this is insane

[@WayStedYou]

the fact people didnt know live video was expensive is insane

[@thelazygamer1370]

@@WayStedYou I mean I knew it was a good bit but that’s waaaaay more than I thought

[@BearMetro]

@@WayStedYou You're gullible if you think Twitch is actually paying that.

[@doomse150]

​@@thelazygamer1370 Who do you think is gifting them hardware and electricity for them to not pay the cost of their infrastructure?

[@NACLGames]

Not really. Imagine if they did. Either people wouldn't believe it, or they'd say something like "you make a lot of money anyway, I don't care how much you're losing in comparison to it". Which sounds absolutely silly but...there's a thousand examples out there about how the 'big rich evil corporates' will always lose this 'argument' with your average keyboard warrior, regardless how much evidence exists to the contrary. It's different when a single outside expert like Thor says it. There's no irrational anger and hate and disbelief automatically directed his way versus Twitch. But it's funny, because comments like yours "why don't they just show it themselves" quickly follow soon after.

[@crew_the3rd]

It's crazy seeing you feature on the Philip Defranco Show so smoothly, you fit right in. I've been watching Phil since 2008 and the way people reference you, it's as if you've been big on KZbin since the jump. You're a new classic. Glad I'm early for this one, the lore will be awesome.

[@TheTiredPirate]

Phil defranco 💀 🤡

[@avakiin6614]

@@TheTiredPirate What's wrong with him? And actually for once provide examples and not generalizations how he's "biased" (as if no one is)

[@_cloudface_]

​@@avakiin6614okay, he made A HUGE "FUCK YOU ALL, I'M OUT!" declaration video claiming he'd never return to KZbin and he was exclusively using his own app because he could make far more money on it than continuing to do KZbin. Then apparently not enough people wanted to pay a monthly subscription fee on a separate app to watch his basic regurgitated pop news takes so he slinked back to KZbin and pretended like he never quit. Now he seems to be regurgitating "world news" with his speed talker schtick in amongst the same "pop and entertainment world gossip" he used to do.

[@_cloudface_]

😒 do you actually think Thor reads through all these simping comments hoping for praise?

[@TwoScoopsofDestroyer]

Ah so that's why twitch offers audio only mode. I bet that little feature saves them buckets of money.

[@Kyle_116]

Thank you for demonstrating this. As someone that has been watching stuff on Twitch and KZbin for 16 years at this point, I know this very well. Data streaming on a big scale is EXPENSIVE, platforms like Twitch still lose money on it and KZbin was losing money until I believe they turned a profit like 5 years ago. No clue if KZbin backtracked at all though. But it's extremely common for people to not understand these companies lose money on streaming and not understand why they do certain things that are money and ad related.

[@hssy2jrocker]

Why would a new company show profit? You show profit, you pay tax. Rather show loss, use that money to invest and increase value of stock prices. Take loans against those stocks and enjoy your lifestyle! Only catch is after a few years many companies fail to increase value of their stock prices and interest rate of loan becomes higher. For ex, if youtube fails to grow userbase, their stock prices will take a hit and repaying loans may become difficult. So they are putting their resources into ensuring that more people join YT as creators or viewers. ^That's what I understand. I maybe wrong.

[@TheBloodypete]

​@@hssy2jrockercan't issue dividends to your shareholders without profits...

[@BlackPaperMoon18]

And people are mad bcs of ads... If this is THAT costly. Ofc we need to watch ads. Like i can have 40h on yt per week xD i Will never use ad block bcs im paying for content im watching by watching ads. Its acctualy very fair to me i feel. Like some ad here and there for unlimited content. And im watching this shit from beggining. Like from 2006 or something 😅

[@RealErikHansen]

The premise of ads isn’t the bad part. It’s the unscrupulous data mining/gathering/stealing that these big companies do to try and sell YOU as a viewer. And by YOU I mean, you: white male, 25yesrs old, $100k income, with a house valued at 500k, 1 child 3yrs old, with a ford truck, trailer, and a dirt bike. This is just scratching the surface of the data they collect and use to sell YOU to anyone who will pay. And once they are done selling ads, they sell YOU to anyone else who wants the data.

[@thomasmann3560]

That's why KZbin turned off 4k for non premium members

[@switchstarboard]

Based on this supposed estimate it would have cost twitch about $1.5 billion to operate last year. From what i can tell their revenue last was about $165 million so that would be over a billion in losses every year. Pretty sure that would have been shut down long ago if it was losing THAT much.

[@KevKlopper]

THIS, everyone with a little business sense can tell that his math MUST be off by a mile...

[@jackb.207]

I'm sure they use that number in their taxes lmfao

[@SarcasticData]

Google says Twitch generated approximately 2.8 billion revenue in 2022. Your estimate of 165 million in revenue seems off, which may explain why they haven't been shut down. Also go look up who owns Twitch and see how much money that company made, then you will have your answer as to why Twitch hasn't been shut down.

[@rawbmar1166]

@@SarcasticData The real answer is because it's far more profitable than this video is leading on. Twitch uses Amazon servers and Amazon owns twitch. They make 50% of every subscriber on the website except for a select few people who were grandfathered in at a higher rate and they also make ad revenue. So with all that money made plus the cheaper cost of owning the servers themselves this video is kind of just wrong.

[@switchstarboard]

@@SarcasticData sadly the data isn't easy to get for revenue and I saw both numbers, though the $165m number was the only one I saw broken down into quarters, which makes it seem more likely. That said, at $2.8b with 2022 average concurrent viewers, twitch would have to be making about $0.30/viewer per day, which seems pretty high, but I suppose it's possible. But again, if that number is correct, then twitch is now making a $1.3b/year profit, which kind of contradicts the whole point of this.

[@justthisguy2976]

This guy is very smart but I literally promise you Twitch isn't paying anywhere near that much to broadcast this one stream. They would go bankrupt in 24 hours if that was the case.

[@Seether97]

Negative gearing homie. Same reason musk "lost" money on X/twitter.

[@rickyrico900]

Exactly, you’d have to actually be braindead to think Twitch pays full PAYG pricing. The fact that he says this with the same confidence as every other video he makes…

[@HelloMoto393]

Glad some people actually have brains lol... This Thor guy has some stupid takes sometimes

[@fabianfeilcke7220]

Obviously an ad-hoc price is higher than a regular customer price and much higher than an internal price, but the true cost of a video stream is much higher than many people realize.

[@heroe1486]

He's actually the opposite of smart, they wouldn't pay the tenth of that, you don't pay the public prize when you're one of the biggest client, and well Amazon owns both Twitch and AWS, AWS being the biggest cloud provider it's thus probably costing them close to nothing.

[@Justgoodvids]

The subtle 9000 to 8000 DBZ reference was great

[@OctagonalSquare]

People don’t realize how expensive live data streaming is on larger scales. Sure, one or two people streaming a 4K video isn’t that expensive, but millions adds up

[@luriddream]

Do you think every stream is watched by 8k people on live?

[@youjying]

​@@luriddreamno, but add all streams together, you will have millions of viewers all across the world.. That being said you can build infrastructure that supports the demand and reduce your operating costs significantly..

[@wfd8771]

​@@youjying Yeah but Amazon owns Twitch and Amazon hosts one of the biggest Cloud platforms with huge data centers. So Twitch is backed by crazy infrastructure and they dont pay that much like shown in the Video.

[@IAmTheRealBill]

@@wfd8771 not necessarily. I’ve been at plenty of companies that charge between departments. When it is a hard resource they are charged full price. Because in companies like that, each department is weighed on its revenue, and do give discounts puts you at risk. I can’t say Amazon does this anymore than those who claim they ate. I’m just pointing out that it isn’t as common as many assume.

[@youjying]

@@wfd8771 I explain this in other posts, but as an ISP my cost for a stream like this(8 hours FHD to 8k viewers) would be about $16. If twitch runs one ad per 15 minutes and gets paid $1-5/mille twitch can make $32-150/stream gross.

[@HoneyBadgerVideos]

Bet Amazon hates having to pay Amazon over 4k dollars.

[@larsgitaar1]

Ah yes you have no idea how this works

[@Mogeli]

Good point. Also if you own a restaurant and just pay yourself, you can have all the food you want for free! Infinite food glitch right?

[@johnmactaggart1757]

@@Mogeliof course not but your actual costs are not £4K they are way way less than that…

[@VitorHugoOliveiraSousa]

​@@johnmactaggart1757not really, the problem with streaming is not server is bandwidth. Amazon sure has a very expansive network infrastructure but they probably buy a lot of bandwidth from tradition ISP to connect their data centers to the wider internet. Sure it probably will be less, but not that much less. You just remove Amazon profit margins from it.

[@go-away-5555]

@@johnmactaggart1757but your potential sales are 4k which you're ignoring in order to service yourself.

[@ivucica]

Of course, this is the cost that AWS charges, not what it costs Twitch (which is AWS owned) to stream.

[@zee-fr5kw]

eh amazon still likely charges that much. amazon wants amazon to make money they don't care about twitch

[@Domedwho]

@@zee-fr5kwFor tax purposes. The money doesnt actually change ownership. Thats how business works buddy.

[@liftedmax]

Good catch

[@kasomoru6]

It's over 8000! -Vegeta

[@JayBirdJay]

"Oh no! Shit's doing numbers again!" -Twitch Central

[@dylanfortune1391]

All right, I very appreciate that comment my friend you should look at what I said.🎉❤

[@georgewoofbates]

That’s the cost that AWS charges third parties to use the Twitch backend platform, not what it costs them to run it. They own all the datacenters, networking and CDN edge that delivers the stream. It doesn’t cost them nearly as much as that

[@btf_flotsam478]

It only costs them... 70% of it. Which is still a fuck-ton of money.

[@discontinuity]

@@btf_flotsam478 It costs them the rent and electricity bill and some change.

[@bren.r]

@@btf_flotsam478source? Did AWS just claim that? Did you forget Amazon is a massive company that takes every opportunity to mitigate their tax burden?

[@jessed197]

The hidden variable in here is the millions of people streaming with no audience but still monitoring on their phones.

[@VengFPV]

Just disabling that possibility for streamers with less than X viewers would probably save a lot of money..

[@brightestlight9462]

@@VengFPV yeah fuck letting anyone get a chance to develop a following

[@VengFPV]

@@brightestlight9462 how tf would preventing stream monitoring prevent anyone from developing a following? It could quite easily be replaced with an active check to confirm if the stream is running, rather than doubling the bandwidth usage..

[@atomdecay]

​@@VengFPVDude, over 95% of streamers on Twitch have less than 10 viewers per stream.

[@frostedlambs]

Do the entire website, according to this site it would cos them like 250 billion a day for their 3m veiwers and their 100k channels

[@digi6849]

That color scheme got me confused for a second

[@jopro0]

Wow, that's so much, and that's only for a single stream of one streamer. Where does twitch get all the money from?

[@Epwnaz]

I'm not familiar with this calculator but the cost is probably subsidized since the video streaming service IVS and Twitch are both owned by Amazon, I doubt it costs twitch the usual IVS rates. Though Amazon certainly can't escape whatever the base costs are for actually running those IVS resources

[@__Brandon__]

They could also just use IPv6 multicast and cut that bandwidth down 99% or more

[@mycelia_ow]

Subs and ads more than make up for it.

[@giantturd5157]

...from revenue? Do you think twitch is just free?

[@KuribPlays]

Amazon, and recoup a little from ads. Pretty much they use it to upsell stuff like amazon prime or big sports event and have a dedicated channel to host it. They lose a lot of money off non affiliated and small streamers.

[@theaureliasys6362]

And it's at that point that people should learn why CDN is so hecking expensive.

[@frostedlambs]

Its wrong ah Do the entire website, according to this site it would cos them like 250 billion a day for their 3m veiwers and their 100k channels

[@TonyMariani]

Exactly. This is not remotely accurate. Amazon owns Cloudfront (the CDN). Amazon owns the interactive tooling (IVS), and Amazon owns the encoding MediaLive. Amazon doesn't pay anything besides maybe some ISP fees which they probably also don't.

[@cheesy4582]

Why should we? Why should I give a shit?

[@danielgarcia9688]

most don't care and most dont' even know what that is. (a big chunk of people have no clue). I built a Digital Pathology CDN and man it's nice but not cheap.

[@Socsob]

@@frostedlambsno even on the highest end of numbers it would only be about 5 mil a day. Looks like they spend about that a month tho, since people watch in lower definition, there are less average concurrent viewers and they own the infrastructure

[@justanapewithinternetacces9803]

noted, i shall watch streams at 1080p all the time

[@justanapewithinternetacces9803]

@@zee-fr5kw no i dont actually watch twitch but i have heard a lot of negative things about it im not saying this because of those negative things tho

[@queden1841]

Oh no poor multi billion dollar company. I feel so incredibly bad

[@groundsymphony]

Everyone seems to miss the part that Amazon owns Twitch, so the cost is not zero but it certainly way cheaper than that.

[@Me-ui1zy]

What you seem to miss is that Amazon owning Twitch means that Amazon are happy to lose millions of dollars a month on Twitch. They brought Twitch to make more money. They are currently losing money on Twitch. Its clear from Twitch decisions that Amazon has told Twitch to get close to break even. Just because Amazon owns it doesnt mean they want it to be a money sink. Long term it needs to be self sufficient. Currently its not close.

[@hiltedhobbies]

It helps Amazon avoid paying taxes, everyone forgets how little Amazon pays in taxes due to business practices like this.

[@SarcasticData]

Everyone thinks running Twitch extremely expensive until they realize daddy Amazon makes 554 Billion dollars in revenue annually and they own the service they stream on.

[@DKTeddyBear]

And someone had a good point it doesn't say what they make on ads...

[@jasonchangdalekrule]

AWS runs on a ~30% profit margin.

[@davidmunoz8171]

And to think Thor has done 12-15hr streams of full play-throughs.

[@TheEmptyInbox]

Summit doing 24 hour streams to 50k people

[@quistador7]

@@TheEmptyInbox summit makes up a percentage of twitches income. They like him doing that. You missed the point of the video entirely. 8000 people, there isn't a lot of donations or subs. 50,000 they are actually making money off the stream.

[@NaatClark]

Man out here comparing retail prices to wholesale lmao

[@joshuaadkins9820]

i mean even the CEO said they make 0 dollars.. So even if the comparison isn't 100% accurate its accurate enough.

[@MartilloWorkshop]

You can generate 1 million in revenue, have 500k in expenses, then re-invest the other 500k into something random and technically make 0 dollars in profit. It's what Amazon has always done. Twitch does the same. It's how a company "losing money" has grown from 200 employees to several thousand since being acquired by twitch. That didn't happen by making 0 dollars. It happened by taking every penny and re-investing into hiring people. Also, Amazon owns the infrastructure Twitch "pays for" - They're paying their owner in order to make "0 dollars" while the owner still sees all the revenue, which is then re-invested into buying more companies etc. But saying "Twitch makes 0 dollars" is a great cop-out for running an atrocious service and pushing detrimental revenue policies @@joshuaadkins9820

[@malte54]

It might not be accurate, but it gives an idea. That's enough for me.

[@NaatClark]

@@malte54 That was a site showing what Amazon charges other people for bandwidth. Remind me again which company owns Twitch....

[@emilioestevezz]

@@joshuaadkins9820 Amazon owns both AWS and Twitch. Those IVS fees are massively inflated and no large streaming service would pay them, they'd simply build their own and just pay bandwidth costs. If twitch is actually using IVS it's some kind of account trick to move their money into Amazon without having to pay tax.

[@ITzDaveXD]

Asmon not running ads is why twitch is losing money 100%

[@lucakun3455]

and not even small amounts. he's a big streamer with long often streams, I get way more understanding for the twitch ceo now since asmongold is just expecting twitch to pay the price For his stream.

[@PhoenixCat]

Thanks for showing me this. Now I will make sure to watch every stream at max quality to make Jeff lose as much money as possible

[@FriendlyClips]

he thinks he makes an impact cute

[@fastydave]

You're not very bright

[@ThatDudeDeven]

Thank god they own the service they’re hosting the streams on lol

[@myfb3936]

Owning doesn’t mean shit. Company I work for manages Microsoft’s Data Servers, they pay us $3,500,000,000 per year (3.5 billion) to maintain their UPS and data centers. Microsoft owns their servers, they don’t own the maintenance for them.

[@DKTeddyBear]

But they already had the servers for Amazon TV etc... theyre not losing money, they're not even willing to "lose" money to pay their employees to be able to have proper work conditions or pay, and you think they're willing to lose money on paying themselves? They're not saying how much they make on ads, no one else is gonna buy that much bandwidth or they would make their own servers like Google for KZbin, if it was really a problem they would do like KZbin during the pandemic of reducing the quality you can watch videos in, and they're not saying how much it ACTUALLY COSTS TO RUN THE SERVERS only what the normal rate of SELLING the bandwidth, which again is being produced anyways for their other projects and they knew they had the extra bandwidth when they bought Twitch.... And they don't have to pay taxes on the ad income and twitch subs and bits because they're saying they're losing money

[@sbbillusionist]

What many are forgetting here except a few in the comments is that Amazon owns Twitch and the AWS systems behind it. Therefore, the actual cost is probably close to 50% of what is it for non-amazon customer.

[@MasterLittica]

Twitch pays Amazon full price to use AWS, the real question should be what is the actual running costs and how much of the 'price' payed to Amazon can twitch use as a tax write-off. Would not come as a surprise of what they make by doing it this way more than breaks even

[@DKTeddyBear]

And the money they make on ads, and even then, they obviously have all that bandwidth extra and no one else will buy that much or they wouldn't have bought twitch in the first place and kept it running for 10 years, and even the marketing for Amazon alone is worth a lot

[@TheRenegade...]

Also it's Amazon so they can loss lead anyway

[@btf_flotsam478]

That's still cracked.

[@Dharengo]

AmAzOn Is A tRiLlIoN dOlLaR cOmPaNy.

[@bleeb1347]

Decentralized streaming. It’s the best path forward. Anyone familiar with decentralized mesh networking, like SDWAN but scaled to colossal proportions. I worked with a company that was developing this similar mesh for a trucking company so the tens of thousands of dash cams and driver cams could be accessed by their 6,000+ stores and offices. I know this is a smaller scale, but applicable and the concept can scale even though there were only two devs working😢 on the project.

[@booi]

Twitch is owned by Amazon which owns AWS. They aren’t paying nearly that amount

[@batt3ryac1d]

I think unfortunately they are. They shouldn't be amazon should be giving them a deal but from what I've read they aren't 😅

[@LookingAway359]

​@@batt3ryac1d No, they are owned by Amazon.. if they are "charging" them full price it's literally just for tax purposes lol.

[@krad1314]

Yeah I’m sure all the shareholders for Amazon are super happy to give away profits to subsidize twitch. Wake up and take a business 101

[@Solinaru]

Just to add to this: the infrastructure to have steady and reliable streaming is expensive, but the cost for each stream and upkeep is just a few cents in comparison to the installation cost. There's no possible way that the cost for twitch for 1 minute of video is more than whoever is the next biggest AWS user is. (3rd party not bought out by Amazon)

[@Domedwho]

@@batt3ryac1dYou are dumb if you think a “full charge” by the same company means anythhing lol. Tax and writeoffs buddy

[@wreagfe]

Cloud services run on a 70-90% margin. And stated prices aren't real for bigger customers. Twitch is owned by Amazon zo there are tax reasons to use the "retail prices" as internal calculation fees.

[@BrazyUK]

Classic. Amazon created a Prime partnership with them, wined and dined Twitch to the point where they took over their entire infrastructure, then priced them out of the game to bring in their own streaming service. Genius.

[@ZiggyTheHamster]

I would be surprised if IVS weren't just Twitch with some DNS entries changed and a control plane that uses the AWS API system

[@NoblemanMiau]

I am glad one ad break will get that money back

[@BrianChrisShort]

To clarify this is “twitch as a service” which factors in profits for AWS. The tech was built by Twitch and adopted as an AWS Service for other developers to use. The actual operating costs for twitch’s infra is considerably less per stream, but still very expensive at scale.

[@DragonJusticia]

No way they're paying that ❌

[@multitablez7825]

yeah also Kick pays amazon (twitch) for their servers, they woulndt pay that price. no way

[@user-ve9xl9uo2c]

They're not. He doesn't know what he's talking about

[@chrisprilloisebola]

​@@multitablez7825they don't pay twitch lmao. Aws is separate

[@EAGLEVISION666]

@@user-ve9xl9uo2c yea reason why anyone can stream and not buy in to do it

[@Chaoticchips]

@@user-ve9xl9uo2che obviously does, he’s credible. Unlike you and I

[@andrejspetersons8500]

TF2 Heavy's introduction video comes to mind.

[@Action2me]

It costs $400,000 to fire this weapon… for 12 seconds.

[@I_am_Just_Unlucky]

twitch losing money is a tax write off for amazon btw. i work for a small company thats part of a larger companie, it is losing money every year the past 10 years yet here we are still existing (germany btw but should also aply if not even more for the us)

[@ichalw4973]

I saw Asmon watch this clip and then calculated his own 😂😂😂 Bro is one of the Top 💀

[@georgerobinson3534]

Absolutely refuse to believe those numbers are real. 8 hours streaming at 1080p does absolutely NOT result in a $4.3k cost, that's ridiculous

[@RazomOmega]

You forgot to take the "times 8000 viewers" into account my man

[@georgerobinson3534]

No, it's still not going to equate to $4.3k my man. Streaming video is incredibly cheap nowadays, and the architecture of the platform is literally built for scale and streaming to a large number of users. $4.3k was pulled out of this guys ass with no actual knowledge on the true costs.

[@EAGLEVISION666]

@@RazomOmega so how come kick, twitch, youtube, dont force anyone to buy in to stream? if these services are sooooo expensive how come no one has to pay to stream

[@bren.r]

@@RazomOmegakeep licking the boots of Amazon. You actually think Twitch, owned by Amazon isn’t profitable? 🙄 Do you seriously think the retail price is what twitch pays? Use some common sense.

[@krakatoa542]

@@georgerobinson3534 You have to run, build, maintain the servers. Electricity, server maintainance, personel, hard drives with backups for clips. This shit is expensive.

[@Seed]

Amazon will pay significantly less though as they own AWS..

[@Brave_Falmingo]

If I am not wrong, the twitch staff has confirmed that they pay the same as everyone

[@trashjash]

​@@Brave_Falmingo Why would you trust Twitch staff when they've said stuff before like "Everyone gets the rules applied equally to them" and "The rumors of some of our staff having relations with certain female streamers are false"?

[@simen9485]

im sure they pay the same, but how expencive is it really if your sending the money in a loop@@trashjash

[@dyhidrogenmonoxide]

Pretty sure AWS is not running a massive profit margin and therefore can’t offer big discounts. You can look at the cost of hardware and energy for running a system and see that they are offering competitive prices.

[@Frostyfrog]

@@trashjash How can I trust that any human on Earth can tell the truth? They're all liars according to your logic.

[@amymagdaleneta]

My partner was on the board for a company with subsidiaries, you charge those subsidiary companies the B2B rate yes, but the mother company also buys services from the subsidiary at the standard B2B rate. At the end of the fiscal year, you then transfer the differences into the correct companies.

[@raynkeiko4222]

Could you make a longer Video explaining this fully and how it could be changed, if you know?

[@tallspy7150]

It could be changed by opening up a pay wall for higher resolutions. Unfortunately, there is no real good answer outside of eating the cost and raising ad rates.

[@llandy123]

I admin a bunch of servers that host a bunch of high traffic websites and I can tell you for sure that they don't cost anywhere near what that calculator showed at lesat for the bandwidth and server costs. I'd be interested in seeing how that calculator comes up with those values.

[@stuxnewt]

Idk if I buy this. Even coming from Thor

[@GustvandeWal]

Thor just made a whole lot of people a whole lot dumber with this video. He is obsessed with bewildering people...

[@Chaoticchips]

Pretty sure the short hasn’t changed anything. Your comment on the other hand. Short but really stupid

[@nuttcase1uk]

Are we forgetting the Ads that are ran on stream which twitch sold and they take a cut from as well as a cut from subs revenue. Also they use AWS at a competitive rate, not heavily discounted bur competitive. So I think the figure is alot less.

[@darragho6358]

Sorry I'm actually a devops engineer and that's just not true at all thats aws's base price twitch would get at least a 50% discount on that even kick are probably getting 30%. Corps dont just pay the aws market rate...

[@Benjamin3.5]

🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓🤓

[@OmriKipi]

its after 50% discount.

[@darragho6358]

​@@OmriKipi all they need to cover is the cost to Aws nothing else. Everything else is just money being moved

[@chicken]

Twitch pays less for AWS services because Amazon owns both platforms. The public pricing doesn't accurately reflect the actual costs for Amazon.

[@trashak3]

Making a 1080p for all of the streamers as a default quality, and making it unable to change it if there are less than some viewer hours is INSANE from their side

[@VividFlash]

It only costs them encode if they actually encode. If it's just source they don't reencode it

[@dcane8262]

Personally, I think that's a bad list because you can't see what income comes from the ads you're running. Even if you don't display ads yourself, there's still advertising from Twitch itself. I don't think the platform would continue to run if they were only making a loss.

[@PirateParadoxVods]

Ah, but you forget one important fact. Twitch is owned and operated by Amazon. They have datacenters and network lines and leased network costs already built into running those data centers and power costs already built in. So there's not really an expense other than whatever bandwidth and drive space that twitch is using currently. resources that could be used by someone else. Twitch/Amazon isn't out money simply because no one is requesting the resources that twitch uses. If some big monster appeared that suddenly needed Twitch's real estate in their data center and was willing to pay more than it costs to run + profit that Twitch brings in. I'd bet my left testicle Amazon would shut this shit down overnight.

[@Devve6]

Any hosting Amazon does for Twitch is hosting they can't do for someone else so even if AWS gives them a discount it would be a loss of profit for them on a service they could have provided to someone else instead

[@ohdaesu9395]

@@Devve6 Kick pays them, it's fine.

[@lordtitan.21]

So you’re telling me to open up a whole bunch of tabs and watch twitch streams on the highest resolution?

[@CheebiCeg9]

let's bankrupt them..

[@markclayton8977]

If AWS does it right, requests to the stream source should be batched as they go through the CDN. So it might use more data in the last peering between AWS’ edge server and your ISP, but the cost of sending it over the whole internet would be minimized. Now if you used a VPN to get one stream and let the other pass through your home connection, that would double the cost.

[@gdgd5194]

​@@markclayton8977I am not an expert but it doesn't take to be a genius to increase bandwith. Opening multiple streams wdefinitely works 😊

[@xyphold]

No, that's how much Amazon would charge for someone else. It cost them very little.

[@DKTeddyBear]

Yeah, and they're not saying what it costs to produce it, they're stating selling price, not cost of running the servers, WHICH THEY ALREADY HAD ANYWAYS, plus they don't say how much they make on ads

[@MatttKelly]

I work for the NOAA and we get a special discount w AWS to the tune of $0.00 for 65 PETABYTES of our data stored on their platform. The catch is that its publicly available so people outside the NOAA can download and use it. For a fee of course.

[@S3iF3]

80% of todays internet traffic is videos. And people tend to forget that it takes energy to transfer data.

[@LasseRafnDk]

With retail prices yes. Twitch doesn’t pay retail. Big companies save up to 70% by making deals, using reserved nodes, savings plans etc. Our EC2 cost us like $100 a month despite having 24/7 usage and hundreds of cores, due to enterprise deals etc

[@reidsimonson]

Well, not exactly. It’s way cheaper but the plebs like to hear this.

[@Wildcat12]

I know yall have a humiliation kink but of all the people you could come say this dumb shit in response to you pick the DEFCON Black Badge lol

[@robotsix6268]

Also why they LOVE just-chat streams. The static backgrounds, with just the head and body moving, are more efficient to stream. Cheaper to maintain and makes more money.

[@randomdamian]

He is a game programmer and I do fullstack webdev... Amazon has Amazon AWS... and Amazon owns Twitch... they have thousand of backup servers that are running now also for twitch... so they don't really lose money, they use the hardware that would just be there without any use. Also, I have my own streaming server at home and you can stream to 4 devices using a mini PC not a 128core 1TB server node. Once the stream is rendered in specific resolutions it's basically copy paste... so you don't do that for each user.

[@Wyrade]

That sounds impossible for it to cost that much. Not to mention that bitrate matters too, not just resolution.

[@stpierresteve23]

is this why Summit just did like 35 hours straight? lmao

[@Fl0yd-]

I wouldn’t think a multi billion company like Amazon is gonna lose money over a few small thousands of dollars per stream

[@LiquidBlackWolf]

Twitch: ad time!

[@KingdomDumb]

At 8000 viewers the AD revenue is way more than $4000. If Twitch is losing money, it is NOT because of this.

[@Cannabis_Connoisseur]

No kidding. I can convert $500+ in sales of less than 400 views on yt, and my channel only has 1.3k subs. I can only imagine the kind of money and conversion a channel with 1m+ viewers can do that's been around for years and is well trusted already. Off of 4 vids with around 50 views each, I've gotten 19 clicks through my affiliate link with around $500 usd in sales. All this with 4 videos and less than a month making this content style. I think my conversion says 17%. What if I got 1m view video and 17% clicked my link and spent the same average as usual. Don't care for the math, but it's a lot im sure. So yeah even with rates like that Twitch still has money to be made for them if they advertise correctly I think.

[@alexturnbackthearmy1907]

@@Cannabis_Connoisseur And that is just small part of it. Think about all other stuff they get a cut from, and all services they provide.

[@Dhalin]

Yeah, but don't they take like 40 cents out of every dollar for every superchat or donation? Some of their bigtime streamers can pull in a million+ on a single stream. That's $400,000. And then you got the constant ad rolls, where every 3-5 minutes you get 90 seconds of unskippable ads that take up 90% of your screen.

[@jasonchangdalekrule]

"Some of their bigtime streamers can pull in a million+ on a single stream." No, numbers upwards of $100k basically only happen on major subathons by large streamers (yeah, I guess a one month stream is 'one stream'), or charity streams (of which twitch takes nothing).

[@DLTyrus]

"Losing money" is a funny way to say "not making the bumper profits we expect quarter on quarter."

[@Parthuran]

Bro the orange and black made me think Thor was on a different website…

[@GenericInternetter]

Well someone is still getting fkd so it fits the theme.

[@Mempavrai]

Go outside

[@rustyshackleford6927]

I don’t understand why people feel they need everything in HD. I always nerf my settings to 720, sometimes even 480 or lower depending on the circumstances. As long as I can tell what’s going on on the screen idc about HD details my eyes can’t even see. Honestly 4K gives me a headache with anything that’s live action, and since I also know the science of how our brains interpret what our eyes see, HD is basically superfluous & a waste of data even if you’ve got 20/20 vision. It’s just a way for companies to keep selling new “improved” specs that your brain is just gonna blur out anyways.

[@leobottaro]

These prices are most probably jacked up as it's aimed at corporations doing their own stream shows. Can't imagine the real cost being actually that high... right?

[@MrRaja]

Twitch is the best thing Amazon bought... It let's them evade taxes so much easier 😅