If you’re unfamiliar with Tanacon (recently dubbed the FyreFestival of influencer events) here’s the necessary background information–

Best known for her vlogs and pop-music, Tana Mongeau is a 20-year-old YouTuber with over 5 million subscribers across her two channels. Tana recently attempted to create her own, alternative to Vidcon, which she dubbed ‘Tanacon’.

The whole ordeal started when, according to a video Tana created, Vidcon had promised her a VIP pass then withdrew the invite after she’d promoted the conference to her fans. After her anti-Vidcon rant generated millions of views Tana decided to launch Tanacon and make an anti-Vidcon. The original vision for Tanacon was that it would be free and all fans would be given the chance to meet their favorite creators (Vidcon charges for tickets).

Tanacon quickly drew a roster of over 65 well known creators including uber famous YouTubers Casey Neistat and Shane Dawson to make appearances. In the weeks leading up to Tanacon the event built up a huge amount of publicity. Tana promised that fans would get 4X the value of the price of their paid tickets (and promised to let many fans get in free).

Tanacon ended up being a disaster of epic proportions.

Within hours of opening its doors Police shut down Tanacon. Apparently 5,000 fans showed up – almost all of them spent hours in the hot sun waiting to get inside. One fan collapsed and was taken away by paramedics, hundreds of others got sunburns.

The event was massively understaffed, had minimal security, and almost none of the attendees got into the venue to see any of their favorite creators. The swag bags that were promised to be 4x the value of a ticket turned out to be filled with a few stickers and some condoms.

It was exposed later, via a three-part documentary by YouTuber Shane Dawson, that Tanacon was put in the hands of a 21-year-old talent manager with questionable credentials. The documentary exposed countless missteps, but the most egregious was that Tana had agreed to host over 5,000 fans, in spite of the hotel only having capacity for 1,000.

Why does any of this matter, and, why am I writing about this?

I think this shit show is the result of the same kind of behavior we see in (a lot of) influencer marketing. People quickly build audiences and become ‘influencers’ – they oftentimes have millions of adoring fans that hang on their every word and will do just about anything the influencers asks.

The issue then becomes that they don’t have any ‘real’ business experience. While they know how to build their audience and cultivate their community they don’t necessarily have the same skillsets that translate to understanding timetables, budgets, project management, etc. As a result they get in over their head and don’t take their newfound responsibilities of running a business seriously when it comes to working with major brands and companies.

In the case of Tanacon – they signed a contract with the Marriott to host the event, which stated they could host just over 1,000 people. Tana and team decided to say ‘fuck it’ and sell tickets for 5,000 people. This is not the behavior of normal businesspeople, and its wayyyyy out of bounds of common sense.

Unfortunately it is too common.

I’ve worked with thousands of influencers. Some of whom are phenomenal and professional – they’re buttoned up, they know what they know and delegate the rest to their team.

There’s another contingent of influencers that believe because they have their audience the only thing that matters is that they’re ‘authentic’ – that this ‘authenticity’ comes at the price of any real responsibility and is a hall pass to be a terrible business partner. Deadlines are missed, the work promised comes back as something totally different, and communication is lacking. I’ve had influencers ghost on deadlines, come back late and say that they don’t want to post their original idea after they already shot it, have asked to get out of contracts right before deadlines were supposed to be met (and even right after) without real reasons.

This behavior is more common in influencer marketing than in any other business or aspect of marketing and advertising I have ever seen. It is too common. Just after Vidcon I was hanging out with a buddy that is a talent manager. While hanging out one of his talent called to say that a video he’s been working on for a brand for the last week and was already a few days late to post wasn’t going to work for his channel and he no longer wanted to post it. This was a video the influencer concepted and sold to the brand. This was a video he’d edited entirely himself knowing the deadline and where it was going to live. He had 100% creative control, but still didn’t want to post it because he didn’t think his audience would like it.

This is not acceptable behavior for a professional. If it was any other part of the ad industry you’d work late – make it happen (or just think things through far enough in advance to avoid issues).

I don’t mean to disparage all influencers or paint the brush that they are all a pain in the ass. They’re not.

However, I do think that there’s a lot out there that are burning bridges for the rest of the industry.

Marketers and agencies are working with billion dollar brands. There are campaign deadlines and bosses these people are accountable to, there are stockholders, and real consequences.

Many influencers are much more like the Hank and John Green who developed Vidcon. That event is buttoned up. It’s been slowly growing over the last nine years and is hands down one of the best-run industry conferences I go to (full disclosure I’m on the Vidcon Advisory Board, but I’d believe this even if I wasn’t).

Hank and John Green have taken the even seriously from the beginning – they’ve planned methodically with venues booked over a year in advance. This past year Vidcon hosted over 30,000 people, hundreds of creators, and worked with dozens of sponsors over the four days of the event. Sessions and keynotes started on time. Security was tight, and the event was incredibly professional and brand friendly. This is no small feat.

I love unbridled ambition and the passion of young entrepreneurs. However, within the influencer-marketing ecosystem there are a lot of bad actors who need to understand that if they want to work with brands they need to take the contracts they sign seriously.

Many influencers are creating terrible experiences for the fans and the brands.

In short – don’t be like Tana and ignore the contracts you’ve signed and not take things seriously. Instead be like Hank and John Green – build your reputation as a trusted source, think through who you work with, the agreements you sign, and the work you decide to take on.

Some of the major points we covered were:

• Subscription video on demand (SVOD) and YouTube competitors
• YouTubers “making it” on television
• YouTuber revenue streams
• How much money his top creators are making in a year
• How creators can better work with brands, and vice versa

The Confessional is a series of anonymous interview with influencers, brands, marketers, agencies, and MCN executives to get honest, no-bullshit opinions on working in the space — the biggest gripes, the toughest lessons, the most valuable advice.

The following has been edited and condensed for clarity.

You’ve been on YouTube for a very long time. How did you first get started?

I got started back in 2009, and I got started because I actually went to high school with another YouTuber. He’s still got pretty large following to this day.

I saw what he was doing and how we was building a community around himself. It seemed like a huge opportunity. So I started working with him a bit, and I was introduced to other creators and collaborate with them. I was able to turn YouTube into a career in about three months.

How has the community evolved since those early days?

What was really interesting about the early days is that once you hit a certain number of subscribers you were immediately part of the community. People had a sense of respect for you and vice versa. Once you hit that level, you could really approach just about anyone and do collaborations, or just strike up conversations and friendships.

As this community of a few thousand people exploded into the millions of creators you now have today, a bunch of micro-communities developed. Now, it’s like everybody sticks to their own clique. It’s almost like high school. So if you’re a beauty guru, you collaborate with other beauty gurus and you don’t really step outside that.

There’s just not as much cross-pollination as there once was.

I think a lot of the playfulness has disappeared as well. Now, we jump onto each new platform – push our audiences to them (the platforms), and then immediately we ask, “How do we monetize this?”

Speaking of fans, you’ve got a sizable following. What’s it like having fans?

It’s actually really interesting. I rarely use the word “fans,” I’ve allowed myself to use it as of late. This is something that I and a lot of my other YouTube friends struggle with.

We want to be humble, but also want to be respected in the same way that Hollywood celebrities are respected and perceived.  

Do you want to be put on the same pedestal as “traditional” celebrities?

Being labeled as a “celebrity” pigeonholes YouTubers because you can be recognizable without being a “celebrity.” I think it goes beyond celebrity. I think it’s about being a public figure.

There’s a new generation of influence sprouting up as a result of social media. You have people that may be an entertainer-creator or maybe they’re a body-positive influencer. There’s people with influence across spheres — politics, entertainment — you can be an influencer around anything now.

Whatever name we end up giving this new type of public figure, I think they are definitely going to be held to a higher esteem and value than they are today.

How has the perception and attitude towards YouTubers changed among brands and agencies?

The marketers have done a lot to catch up these last few years and they value what we do a lot more.

They’re beginning to recognize that we influencers are not a simple plug-and-play, where they can just say “Let’s put our bag of chips in this,” or “Let’s give them a bottle of water.”

They’re starting to take a step back and invite us in as collaborators. They’re asking what excites us and what ideas we have. It’s becoming a bit more of a conversation than it used to be.

Also, it’s interesting — as demand has increased, you see influencers being represented by four or five different managers and talent agencies. You don’t quite see that in the traditional talent world.

The fact that an influencer can be so freely represented and not be limited to one representative shows me that in some ways the influencer has more negotiating power than traditional celebrities.

I hear from a lot of the creators that “brands don’t get it.” To your point, and in my own experience, it seems as though brands are “getting it” more and more. Do you feel like creators are doing more to adapt and empathize with the brand’s perspective?

Yes and no. You and I have known each other over the years, we’ve seen people come and go.

For the most part, the ones that we’ve seen go are the ones that didn’t develop much business etiquette, or, even just the willingness to put aside some of their stubbornness to be open to some of those brand conversations and feedback.

The ones that have stayed around have been able to have conversations. They don’t just say no to an idea, they offer up solutions.

You have to be able to adapt and work towards a solution where everyone is happy with what they’re getting. It’s only a success if the creator is happy, the audience is happy, AND the brand is happy.

Some creators not willing to put forth the effort, and aren’t open to ideas or build off of ideas that are not their own.

Are you still with an MCN or are you independent?

All my channels are within different MCNs.

The deals I’ve structured are different than what most creators get. They’re in my favor more so than most of the contracts that these MCNs have with the 40,000 other people who signed with them.

What advice would you give to an up and coming creator? What kind of things would you advise them to keep an eye out for?

The first thing to keep in mind is that you’ve got a lot more negotiating power and leverage than you think.

In some cases I get 100% of my revenue. Oftentimes the MCNs will try to offer a revenue split over a certain amount of views. They say, “Hey, look, we did our math and over the last 12 months you averaged out this amount of views. We’ll do a rev-share split of this amount of views over your average amount of views.”

I say no to that because the last 12 months doesn’t mean anything to me. The last three months are going to be the most important numbers to me. And when you go down that math, you’re not going to come to an agreement.

I would also say if you’re going in with an MCN or any other company, you should do it with the idea of getting them to invest in you and your content (whether with upfronts or production support). By having them support you in creating more content, they’ll be invested in your success.

Also, limit your deal to no more than a year in length. Lastly, make sure you’re not just joining

for brand deals. Brand deals are great but you can get multiple managers and agents to represent you to get you those deals.

Where do you see the future of YouTube going? How do you juggle all these different platforms, and does YouTube have staying power?

I feel that YouTube is going to have staying power because of its massive library of content.

Facebook doesn’t have that much content, and I’m not sure if they are ever going to have it.

I think Facebook is similar to what YouTube was back in 2005-2009 — there are a lot more amateur videos and far fewer professional creator videos. YouTube on the other hand has really matured, and is closer to Netflix in the sense that the content has really developed and become more professional.

I feel that YouTube Red is a step in the right direction. And honestly, I think video platforms are going to evolve across the board between Twitter and Snapchat and everything else. We’re going to see different platforms cater to different types of content. I may go to Facebook one day to find a new viral video, but I’ll got to YouTube Red to watch something from a premier independent creator.

How do you as a content creator juggle all of these new platforms? How do you decide where to invest your time and develop an audience?  

It’s actually really natural.

I produce my content with the idea of being able to repurpose it for different platforms. So if it goes up on YouTube, it’s going to go up on Facebook. If it’s going to go up on Instagram it can go up on Vine.

Getting that content distributed across each platform isn’t really hard. I play around with each for a bit and figure out what works.

I took a great deal of interest in Facebook over a year ago and I played around with my content there and it did pretty well. Now I’m playing around with Instagram and it’s doing well there too.

I think people are thinking of their audience as being on every platform. The reality is that if it’s on YouTube, put it up on Facebook too. Put it up on Instagram. Put it up on everything you can. Do a quick edit and cut it down a little bit. Do whatever it takes. The amount of time that you’re going to put into repurposing and customizing content for each platform is going to show a return.

What’s the formula for success on YouTube? What does it take to build a successful channel?

It’s a combination of having fun and being logical. Everything I’ve ever done had to excite me and that doesn’t necessarily mean I didn’t get frustrated with it or I wanted to not do it at some point. You’re going to have speed bumps. But I was very excited to start. Very inspired. And I was very logical. I asked myself, “Okay, how much time am I putting into this? How much money am I putting into this? If this was money, how much money is this of my time? And how quick of a return can I get off of this?”

So when you go from being a personality on camera to investing into content and putting a team behind it, the decisions you make are all about ROI.

So I would say, if you want to be successful, do what you love but put some logic behind it. Put some business sense behind it.

Anything else to add?

The one thing that I will say that I’ve noticed over the years within this industry is that publicly we all say, “Yeah, everything’s all great and dandy.” But, privately you turn to your friend and you’re like, “F this. This does not make sense. This is so stupid. This is terrible. This is horrible.”

We’re all having these private conversations with each other, but we’re afraid to have them openly because we think we’re going to make people feel bad or it’s going to turn into some sort of World War III.

Or so the thinking goes.

However, when it comes to influencer marketing, there can be too much of a good thing.

Over the past few years, there has been a wave of companies extolling the virtues of influencer marketing at scale (often using marketplaces to make the process turnkey).

While it’s terribly convenient for all parties involved, these companies operate on a flawed premise that you can automate relationships, creative, and credibility.

I’d argue that these influencer marketing marketplaces are quickly eroding credibility, and as a result, effectiveness.

Why is this?

There are countless platforms where influencers with a few thousand followers can opt in to create branded content (YouTube videos, Instagram and Facebook posts) in exchange for product or payment.

The “one-off” nature of these brand activations creates trust issues. An influencer can create a piece of content for a brand, then turn around and do another promotion on behalf of a competitor shortly thereafter.

There’s also the human element that is lacking from these arrangements. Simply reading a creative brief without talking to anyone is likely to leave a lot open to interpretation, and inevitably will result in miscommunication.

Talking points are important, but having someone represent your brand without even having a conversation seems sloppy and careless.

What is the impact of this going to be long-term?

Brand credibility gets diluted, influencer credibility gets diluted, and brands will have a ton of garbage content with few people buying.

In an era where anyone can fire off an email, having a conversation is more important than ever.

There is something to be said for having an in person meeting with. In my experience, people want to do ‘right by you’ if you’ve interacted with them in person. Enthusiasm and passion is infectious, but only if people can experience it and see it for themselves.

Automated influencer marketing are a shortcut that is undermining trust in the long run.

Influencers are different from banner ads. You’re not buying impressions — you’re working with people. We need to insert a human element into influencer marketing.

My latest interviewee for The Confessional is a manager of top YouTube talent. Several of the creator’s in this individuals roster regularly receive tens of millions of YouTube views per month and hundreds of millions per year. In this extensive interview, we discussed the business of YouTube, the goals of this individual’s talent (both on and off YouTube), and the how much money top online video creators are really making. Some of the major points we covered include:

• SVOD and YouTube competitors
• YouTubers ‘making it’ on televisions
• YouTuber revenue streams
• How much money his top creators are making in a year
• How creators can better work with brands and vice versa

(Editor’s Note: The following interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.)

All the big platforms are going to continue to grow as marketplaces, both for integrations and for original content. I foresee Facebook developing its own YouTube Red, and Facebook developing content that they own. Netflix is going to open its doors to YouTube creators because these people are proven at driving digital audiences. People with a track record of driving digital audiences are going to have more and more opportunities, on platforms such as Amazon, Hulu, Go90, and Netflix. That’s where I see big opportunities in the near future.

You’re in a unique position in that you’re seeing both brand deals and entertainment deals. Do you want to talk a little bit about the SVOD deals that you’re seeing?

YouTube Red budgets are very legitimate. And they’re going to be producing really great content. They’re enabling people with creative visions who started out on YouTube to do what they want to do. I think they’ve got a strong chance of succeeding. However, Google is a search company at its core, not an entertainment company, and they’ve stumbled so many times when they’ve tried to dabble in content and entertainment. Like when they gave $100 million out to all those different players, they told them to create YouTube channels and they all kind of fizzled. I feel like that might happen again. If they really want to spend the money then they might as well do it right and buy a proven player like Netflix to be their equivalent of YouTube red. Then they could integrate Netflix into the Google ecosystem.

We got offers from Vessel, but I brought those offers to YouTube and got YouTube to pay us to keep uploading on YouTube first. Facebook has been reaching out and having soft conversations – but they’re not shelling out money for content the way Vessel and YouTube are. At least not yet.

Is the talent you manage interested in making the leap from digital to traditional media? Do they want a TV deal?

Yeah, several of the talent I work with want a TV show. They came out here to be in traditional entertainment and that’s their end game. However, that’s really not the case for everyone I work with. Some of them want to focus exclusively on YouTube. Several of them think YouTube is the holy grail. It’s a platform that’s internationally accessible and free and reaches a massive audience, and you can shop on it. You can talk about a product, put the link in the description, and somebody can click on that link and buy it. There is so little friction between consumer and the product via YouTube.

How are the conversations with TV networks being received so far?

We haven’t sold a show yet, but there are a lot of conversations. The fact that these creators have this loyal and engaged audience, that’s very appealing to the network executives. Broad City started as a YouTube show, Justin Bieber started on YouTube, Workaholics started on YouTube, and Garfunkel and Oates started on YouTube. There are enough case studies at this point of individuals and shows that have moved from the web to TV. But even people who’ve been in the TV game a long time and are really great at it, it’s still like a tough game.

Kurt Sutter, who Sons of Anarchy, just got his show cancelled. He worked on The Sopranos, then The Shield, then Sons of Anarchy. He just started a new show. It was called The Executioner’s Son and it was cancelled after a few months. TV is a tough, tough business. And so, yes my creators have big audiences, but like it’s still a business that you have to try your ass off to get into.

Do your talent want to maintain a YouTube presence even if they get a TV show?

Definitely. They never want to totally abandon YouTube. That is like the kiss of death, if you just abandon your YouTube channel. You’ve got to nourish that audience.

What do you think went wrong with Grace Helbig’s show? That was so short-lived.

If you’re taking somebody from YouTube, where a big portion of the audience may be international or not even have a cable subscription, and then you’re expecting all that audience to magically appear on an antiquated delivery system, then you might be left disappointed.

What kind of revenue are your creators generating in a year?

Maybe like $500,000 to $1 million per creator. My top 5 are generating that much revenue. Of the ten talent I work closely with, I’d say the average is probably $400,000 per year.

Where are your creators generating their revenue? Are there any revenue streams that are working well that you think most people don’t know about?

Merchandise. If you broke down most of my talent’s revenue it’s probably a third adsense, a third brand integrations, and a third merchandise.

What you do think about people who hate on the YouTube stars and say they don’t deserve all the money they’re making?

I look at television at something like Real Housewives. To buy airtime on Real Housewives you’re going to be spending $300,000 for 30 seconds. Is that highly crafted, premium content? Did those people go to acting school or do they have years of theater experience before they were on camera? No. They’re just shows where you just have random people doing their thing. Duck Dynasty has probably one of the most expensive ad blocks on television for years, and this is a random hillbilly family in Louisiana. What do they do that’s so special? So, all of a sudden because somebody’s on a smaller screen and not backed by a TV network they’re not worth those same financial and brand opportunities?

One of the things I’ve heard a lot from creators is “Brands don’t get it!” Often times I agree, but not always. But, on the flipside, do the YouTube creators “Get it”?

Creators have to understand that the moment they take money from somebody you’re going to have to make some compromises. They have to be respectful of what the objectives of the campaign are and how they’re going to achieve them. If you want to play at a higher level, then you have to elevate your game entirely. And that means how you listen to people. You have to be mindful of how you speak to people, how you execute on things. You’ve gotten to a certain point, but if you want to continue then you’re going to need to adapt. A perspective shift is healthy. If you are comfortable with complacency, then you’re not the creator you think you are and you’re not going to be the creator you want to be.