Spending €10,000 Monthly on YouTube Ads: Effective or a Scam?
A forum user claims spending €10,000 monthly on YouTube ads works if you have a product to sell. Others doubt the algorithm rewards ad spend.
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
Paying for YouTube Video Promotion: The Method That Divides
Putting money into YouTube ads to promote your own videos works. That is the short answer from a forum user who claims to have been doing it for years. The long answer is more uncomfortable: it works if you have something to sell behind it, and it works even better so that your customers do not see the competition. The rest —views, subscribers, monetization through advertising— is a lottery that YouTube can close overnight.
The issue came to light when a novice creator publicly wondered whether spending thousands of euros on Google Ads generates enough views to make money, enough clicks for the algorithm to antiestéticature them in suggested videos, or if it is all a bait to sell SEO courses. The suspicion has grounds: videos guessing countries by flags or emojis, with zero barriers to entry and no differentiators, appear as promoted content in the most disparate searches.
How Much Does Promoting a YouTube Video Cost and What Does It Return?
The figure handled by those who claim to live off this is striking: €10,000 per month in ads. This is not an investment to capture views and earn from AdSense; it is an investment to capture clients. The return does not come from the video's RPM; it comes from subsequent sales. Those who support this thesis say it bluntly: ads serve to get seen by clients and to prevent those clients from seeing the competition.
The problem is that this return is neither immediate nor measurable within the platform. A promoted video can accumulate plays without converting anything. Meanwhile, the cost per click rises. The calculation made by the novice creator is that of anyone starting out: if I need thousands of euros for the algorithm to pay attention to me, the business only closes if I sell something with high margins. A course, a service, consulting. Not a riddle video.
The Algorithm Doesn't Reward Spend, It Rewards Retention
The belief that paying for advertising gets you into suggested videos is, at best, debatable. The YouTube algorithm orders by retention and engagement, not by budget. A bought video can have thousands of impressions and a lamentable retention percentage, and money cannot fix that. What advertising does achieve is initial visibility, the push that a channel without an audience lacks.
That is the nuance that separates the method from the scam. Buying visibility is not buying organic ranking. It is renting a storefront. If the product in the storefront does not retain viewers, the storefront empties and the money is gone. Those who have been in this for years summarize it with a phrase that should be engraved on every digital entrepreneur's wall: on YouTube, the money is no longer in getting views, but in getting those views to buy something you sell.
Junk Content Floods the Platform and the Algorithm Detects It
The other side of the phenomenon is saturation. Quiz, riddle, and interactive game videos generated with quick editing tools —Canva, FlexClip, Clipchamp, Kapwing— are produced in minutes. One creator confesses it takes him an hour per video from scratch and could reduce it to fifteen minutes with templates. This means anyone with minimal knowledge can copy the format. And they do.
The result is an ecosystem where original content guarantees nothing. Some warn that content generated with robotic voices can be detected and demonetized for repetitive content. Others recount cases of channels with legitimate rights over audiovisual material losing monetization without explanation. The platform does not distinguish between those who copy and those who have rights. It distinguishes between what retains and what does not.
The Guru Trap: Selling the Method, Not Applying It
The initial suspicion of the novice creator pointed directly at course sellers. And the data handled by the sector does not refute it. If promoting videos on YouTube were as profitable as claimed, there would not be so many people selling courses on how to promote videos on YouTube. The course economy rests on the promise, not on the result.
Some defend that the method works, but only for those who already have a product to sell. Others argue that the platform is manipulated and promotes whichever channels it pleases. Between both positions lies an uncomfortable territory: that of those who try, invest, see no return, and quit. Channels that start with enthusiasm and stagnate at ridiculous figures are the norm, not the exception. Paid promotion accelerates growth for those who already have something to offer. For the rest, it is an expensive way to confirm that the problem was not visibility.
The prediction, with all reservations, is that the Romuald method will continue to work for those selling high-margin services and will fail for those expecting YouTube to pay their bills. The platform is not a business; it is a channel. Confusing the channel with the business is the error repeated every season.
Putting money into YouTube ads to promote your own videos works. That is the short answer from a forum user who claims to have been doing it for years. The long answer is more uncomfortable: it works if you have something to sell behind it, and it works even better so that your customers do not see the competition. The rest —views, subscribers, monetization through advertising— is a lottery that YouTube can close overnight.
The issue came to light when a novice creator publicly wondered whether spending thousands of euros on Google Ads generates enough views to make money, enough clicks for the algorithm to antiestéticature them in suggested videos, or if it is all a bait to sell SEO courses. The suspicion has grounds: videos guessing countries by flags or emojis, with zero barriers to entry and no differentiators, appear as promoted content in the most disparate searches.
How Much Does Promoting a YouTube Video Cost and What Does It Return?
The figure handled by those who claim to live off this is striking: €10,000 per month in ads. This is not an investment to capture views and earn from AdSense; it is an investment to capture clients. The return does not come from the video's RPM; it comes from subsequent sales. Those who support this thesis say it bluntly: ads serve to get seen by clients and to prevent those clients from seeing the competition.
The problem is that this return is neither immediate nor measurable within the platform. A promoted video can accumulate plays without converting anything. Meanwhile, the cost per click rises. The calculation made by the novice creator is that of anyone starting out: if I need thousands of euros for the algorithm to pay attention to me, the business only closes if I sell something with high margins. A course, a service, consulting. Not a riddle video.
The Algorithm Doesn't Reward Spend, It Rewards Retention
The belief that paying for advertising gets you into suggested videos is, at best, debatable. The YouTube algorithm orders by retention and engagement, not by budget. A bought video can have thousands of impressions and a lamentable retention percentage, and money cannot fix that. What advertising does achieve is initial visibility, the push that a channel without an audience lacks.
That is the nuance that separates the method from the scam. Buying visibility is not buying organic ranking. It is renting a storefront. If the product in the storefront does not retain viewers, the storefront empties and the money is gone. Those who have been in this for years summarize it with a phrase that should be engraved on every digital entrepreneur's wall: on YouTube, the money is no longer in getting views, but in getting those views to buy something you sell.
Junk Content Floods the Platform and the Algorithm Detects It
The other side of the phenomenon is saturation. Quiz, riddle, and interactive game videos generated with quick editing tools —Canva, FlexClip, Clipchamp, Kapwing— are produced in minutes. One creator confesses it takes him an hour per video from scratch and could reduce it to fifteen minutes with templates. This means anyone with minimal knowledge can copy the format. And they do.
The result is an ecosystem where original content guarantees nothing. Some warn that content generated with robotic voices can be detected and demonetized for repetitive content. Others recount cases of channels with legitimate rights over audiovisual material losing monetization without explanation. The platform does not distinguish between those who copy and those who have rights. It distinguishes between what retains and what does not.
The Guru Trap: Selling the Method, Not Applying It
The initial suspicion of the novice creator pointed directly at course sellers. And the data handled by the sector does not refute it. If promoting videos on YouTube were as profitable as claimed, there would not be so many people selling courses on how to promote videos on YouTube. The course economy rests on the promise, not on the result.
Some defend that the method works, but only for those who already have a product to sell. Others argue that the platform is manipulated and promotes whichever channels it pleases. Between both positions lies an uncomfortable territory: that of those who try, invest, see no return, and quit. Channels that start with enthusiasm and stagnate at ridiculous figures are the norm, not the exception. Paid promotion accelerates growth for those who already have something to offer. For the rest, it is an expensive way to confirm that the problem was not visibility.
The prediction, with all reservations, is that the Romuald method will continue to work for those selling high-margin services and will fail for those expecting YouTube to pay their bills. The platform is not a business; it is a channel. Confusing the channel with the business is the error repeated every season.
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (105 replies).
More summaries
-
How Much YouTube Actually Pays in Spain: Real Earnings Revealed
Channels with 200,000 monthly views earn just 70 euros. The myth of €1 per 1,000 views collapses under niche reality.
-
YouTube doubles minimum watch hours for monetization from 2027
YouTube is doubling the minimum watch hours required to monetize channels from 2027. What it means for small creators and the online video business.
-
Making Money with AI: Automated Affiliate Articles and Videos
A forum user generated articles with ChatGPT and affiliate links. The texts work, with several keywords reaching the first page of Google.
-
Truck vs. Bus: Which Driving License Costs More and Pays Best?
Getting a truck or bus license is expensive due to CAP requirements and fees. Public sector bus jobs offer stability, while trucking faces wage stagnation.
-
How 'miefluencers' killed Google Flow's free images
After a week of viral videos about Google Flow, the free limit has dropped from unlimited to 10 images per day. The free-to-play model is taking over generative AI.
-
Group B civil service exams in Spain: myth or reality?
Group B civil service exams (oposiciones) for holders of advanced vocational qualifications do exist in Spain, but they are scarce, poorly advertised and often confused with C1. We unravel the maze.