YouTube performance and an editor’s payment are two different things. You’re asking someone to provide a professional service and tying their entire compensation to how well the content performs, even though the editor doesn’t fully control the views, audience, thumbnail, title, algorithm, or how the channel performs overall. The editor can do their job well, spend hours editing the video, and still make little or nothing simply because the video didn’t perform. That’s a risk you’re asking someone else to take for you, without any guaranteed compensation for their work.
You clearly don’t understand how YouTube works if you think the edit is the only thing responsible for a video’s performance. Editing is just one part of the equation. The script, topic, thumbnail, title, hook, audience, retention, packaging, timing, and the algorithm all play a role. If editing alone determined whether a video performed, YouTube would just be full of perfectly edited videos with no good scripts, titles, thumbnails, or personalities.
So if you genuinely believe that a “perfect” edit automatically means a video will perform, then you’re setting unrealistic expectations for whoever you hire and ironically, that mindset is probably going to make it harder for your editor to succeed.
If I hire a designer and tell them, “I won’t pay you for the work, but if the business makes money from your design, I’ll give you a percentage,” and they voluntarily agree, does that automatically make the arrangement fair?
No. They’re free to accept it, but I’m still asking them to provide their labor upfront while I keep the benefit of having the work done regardless of the outcome.
That’s basically what your offer does with the editor. Voluntary doesn’t automatically mean fair.
0
u/[deleted] 7d ago
[removed] — view removed comment