YouTube has come to the conclusion that time spent with a video is more important than views.
You can read about it here.
The question becomes, if YouTube thinks time spent is more important than views, can ads be far behind?
What is it about view duration that YouTube finds so valuable?
Do you think that it’s because view duration is scalable online, while attempting to scale views is limited?
According to ComScore, while views have dropped on YouTube, the amount of minutes users spend watching YouTube has grown over the past year by 57% to more than 61 billion minutes.
61 billion is a big number.
Or is it because attention, the most valuable asset for any advertiser online, is so difficult to come by?
Attention is measured as time spent.
Is more attention, i.e. time spent with a commercial, better for an advertiser than less time spent with a commercial?
If the answer is yes, time spent will not be far behind YouTube as the metric with meaning for commercials online.
Some advertisers are already starting to experiment with View Duration Compensation as a way to pay their agencies for creating content.
Which means the question isn’t how far behind time spent is from becoming the new metric for commercials.
The question is, how far behind your competitors are you from incorporating it?