Revamping Podcast Pay

[Archon]

As it currently stands, a one hour podcast is worth $3 million, with multiple participants usually dividing the money equally.

As the article bonus program encourages articles of a specific length, I think podcasts should likewise encourage multiple participants.

Objectively, podcasts are more interesting with multiple people as opposed to one hour long monologue (no disrespect to Ricardo Sandoval) but the payouts mean that having extra people is less worthwhile.

Two people get $1.5 million each which is decent for an hour's effort, but $1 million for three people and $750,000 for four people make the investment less worthwhile.

Proposal:

Keep a single podcast of 1 hour's length at $3 million
A 1 hour podcast with 2 people gives $2 million each
A 1 hour podcast with 3 people gives $1.5 million each
A 1 hour podcast with 4 people gives $1 million each

[cosbornballboy]

no disrespect to Ricardo Sandoval

None taken, I finally have a working mic

[Sweetwater]

As it currently stands, a one hour podcast is worth $3 million, with multiple participants usually dividing the money equally.

As the article bonus program encourages articles of a specific length, I think podcasts should likewise encourage multiple participants.

Objectively, podcasts are more interesting with multiple people as opposed to one hour long monologue (no disrespect to Ricardo Sandoval) but the payouts mean that having extra people is less worthwhile.

Two people get $1.5 million each which is decent for an hour's effort, but $1 million for three people and $750,000 for four people make the investment less worthwhile.

Proposal:

Keep a single podcast of 1 hour's length at $3 million
A 1 hour podcast with 2 people gives $2 million each
A 1 hour podcast with 3 people gives $1.5 million each
A 1 hour podcast with 4 people gives $1 million each

As a podcast creator, I like this idea. As an HO member, I want to like it, but i can see some potential issues with this, so it will definitely need discussion.

[Archon]

As an HO member, I want to like it, but i can see some potential issues with this

What issues do you see?

[Sweetwater]

What issues do you see?

Biggest one is that while you all each put an hour of your time in, you arguably didn't put in an hour of work. You split the work between 2/3/4 people. If you each write a portion of an article you don't get a bonus for additional writers, it's based on length. The argument could be made that the max payout could be raised, but that again would require discussion.

While I personally believe podcasts are more interesting with more people, and encouraging that only adds to quality content, I do understand the need to maintain a level of monetary regulation. The league isn't supposed to just hand out cash so everyone gets all the training and all the gear with ease, you're supposed to work for it. The truly elite talent put in the work.

Unfortunately, until recently, podcasts were basically non-existent, so not much discussion was had regarding their pay. Seeing as more and more have started popping up, I'll definitely be bringing it up for discussion with the rest of the HO.

[Archon]

The league isn't supposed to just hand out cash so everyone gets all the training and all the gear with ease, you're supposed to work for it. The truly elite talent put in the work.

<_<

Well that didn't take long.

[kckolbe]

I think that a 2 person podcast is ideal. Just as our word count bonuses are structured to encourage certain length articles, podcast pay should encourage what we want to see as well. Personally, I think 3 million for one hour is just way too much. I have never written a 2,200 word article in one hour. With the exception of mass interview articles, I don't think anyone has. I would recommend lowering single-person podcasts to $2 million. That's still a 1,400 word article equivalent, which I still think is too much, but it is a LOT closer.

I would offer something like this:

A 1 hour podcast with 1 person: $2 million
A 1 hour podcast with 2 people: $3.2 million ($1.6 million per)
A 1 hour podcast with 3 people: $3.6 million ($1.2 million per)
A 1 hour podcast with 4 or more people: $3.2 million ($0.8 million per)

From my 2 man podcasts with tlk, Sweetwater, and Archon, I feel like I am doing a LOT of work. I'm coordinating what we talk about beforehand, looking stuff up as the other one talks...it's a lot of fun, but also draining. Personally, I think this is what we should be targeting, so I made the pay per individual only slightly lower than a one person podcast, because I feel it's just as much effort.

A 3 man podcast was cake. I enjoyed it, but I didn't *really* feel I was working. That said, it was a nice change of pace, and folks really seemed to like the more relaxed tone, so maybe there's something to it. This is where it gets really easy to sit back and get undeserved pay. If you listen to the CA Chess interview, Sweetwater and 4D Chess really carried it. I kind of just sat back unless I felt an interjection added value, but while my intentions were noble, you can see how easy it would be for someone to be "on the podcast" without really contributing.

I've done two 4 man podcasts, and both were less than ideal. Not counting technical issues, I think these were EASILY the least impressive, and I wouldn't want to encourage them. I think they COULD be good. If 4 people (say, one from each team in a conference) did a podcast on one topic, and it were well-organized, it could be good. However, I think the majority would blow. Whether it's 4 people all stepping on each other or some people hiding in the background while the others talk, there is usually going to be a drop off in quality. I think this situation is where graders come in. If there is a GOOD 4 person podcast, throw them a bonus, but I wouldn't increase the base payout.

[cosbornballboy]

If you listen to the CA Chess interview, Sweetwater and 4D Chess really carried it.  I kind of just sat back unless I felt an interjection added value, but while my intentions were noble, you can see how easy it would be for someone to be "on the podcast" without really contributing.

Seeing as this would really be considered someone mooching off of someone else's work, I think it's really just up to the host of the podcast whether to have someone on it with them if they don't provide any real value

[Archon]

Seeing as this would really be considered someone mooching off of someone else's work, I think it's really just up to the host of the podcast whether to have someone on it with them if they don't provide any real value

You mean like on our recent podcast where your brother was called out on exactly that. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[cosbornballboy]

You mean like on our recent podcast where your brother was called out on exactly that.  :rofl:  :rofl:  :rofl:

Yeah, but we kind of overshadow him personality-wise. He has good insight tho haha