Suppressor Meltdown!
Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:48 am
The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://texaschlforum.com/
Lighten up Francis.JustSomeOldGuy wrote:anyone else find this exercise moronic in it's predictability? and a waste of the price of a can for somebody?
anygunanywhere wrote:Lighten up Francis.JustSomeOldGuy wrote:anyone else find this exercise moronic in it's predictability? and a waste of the price of a can for somebody?![]()
I thought it was pretty cool. Real guys enjoy moronic exercises. It is what makes us guys. Automatic firearms, suppressors, and lotsa ammo. All it needs is bacon.
Posted using my best Warren Oates impersonation.Jusme wrote:anygunanywhere wrote:Lighten up Francis.JustSomeOldGuy wrote:anyone else find this exercise moronic in it's predictability? and a waste of the price of a can for somebody?![]()
I thought it was pretty cool. Real guys enjoy moronic exercises. It is what makes us guys. Automatic firearms, suppressors, and lotsa ammo. All it needs is bacon.
Channeling you inner Stripes I see.![]()
Yeah, anyone that can afford to burn through 700 rounds of ammo, sacrifice a suppressor, a barrel, and maybe other components, doesn't care how moronic it is, as long as they get it on film, for Youtube.
As my chemistry teacher explained, the world is made up of protons, neutrons, electrons and morons!JustSomeOldGuy wrote:anyone else find this exercise moronic in it's predictability? and a waste of the price of a can for somebody?
Mmmmmm bacon. It's like meat candy.anygunanywhere wrote:
Lighten up Francis.![]()
I thought it was pretty cool. Real guys enjoy moronic exercises. It is what makes us guys. Automatic firearms, suppressors, and lotsa ammo. All it needs is bacon.
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/pe ... -works.aspOneGun wrote:As my chemistry teacher explained, the world is made up of protons, neutrons, electrons and morons!JustSomeOldGuy wrote:anyone else find this exercise moronic in it's predictability? and a waste of the price of a can for somebody?
The real question is other than destroying the gear, what did they really accomplish?
The video above has almost 1 million views. If they have monetized their youtube channel, and the rate in the article above is still accurate (it's a few years old, so it has likely changed), then he probably made enough from the video to pay for the damaged equipment and then some.In 2013, the average cost per thousand (CPM) for YouTube was $7.60. CPM (cost per thousand) is an industry term that represents revenue per thousand views. In 2013, the average income for each YouTube content creator was $7.60 per every thousand views. A video with 500 views would have earned roughly $3.80. A video like Gangnam Style with a billion views would earn $7.8 million. Some videos earn a higher or lower than average rate depending on the video content.
youtube rates are much lower and each view does not mean an ad is counted, so I'm doubting they did. Maybe made $500 total.Flightmare wrote:http://www.investopedia.com/articles/pe ... -works.aspOneGun wrote:As my chemistry teacher explained, the world is made up of protons, neutrons, electrons and morons!JustSomeOldGuy wrote:anyone else find this exercise moronic in it's predictability? and a waste of the price of a can for somebody?
The real question is other than destroying the gear, what did they really accomplish?
The video above has almost 1 million views. If they have monetized their youtube channel, and the rate in the article above is still accurate (it's a few years old, so it has likely changed), then he probably made enough from the video to pay for the damaged equipment and then some.In 2013, the average cost per thousand (CPM) for YouTube was $7.60. CPM (cost per thousand) is an industry term that represents revenue per thousand views. In 2013, the average income for each YouTube content creator was $7.60 per every thousand views. A video with 500 views would have earned roughly $3.80. A video like Gangnam Style with a billion views would earn $7.8 million. Some videos earn a higher or lower than average rate depending on the video content.