[Loopy]

This probably doesn't surprise anyone but their current business model is terrible. Why would anyone click on a text based ad which distracts them from the video they want to watch. I don't see why anyone would voluntarily do that. At some point google is going to have to bite the bullet and have video ads. Even if they are on after a video is shown they would be far more effective and desirable for advertisers.

[jfoutz]

Because, if youtube is ever profitable, they will be sued. over and over until the end of time.

much better to just miss breaking even. Shovel all the user data into doubleclick, and all the video data into crazy data mining algorithms.

[_cbsz]

On the surface, your argument has intuitive merit. However, you don't sue a business unit (Youtube), you sue a company (Google). Google is profitable.

[jfoutz]

On the surface, your argument has intuitive merit. However, youtube isn't a business unit. it's a subsidiary.

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/01/look-ahead-at-google-... http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-6153267-7.html

edit: sorry, that was sorta snarky. and things may have changed since the viacom lawsuit. (it was a subsidiary in late 2008)

[_cbsz]

Touche! Didn't do my homework on this one.