There is a heated debate on German Twitch about what the key employees of Twitch streamers should earn if the YouTube channel they manage goes viral. The streamer Trymacs explains why he gives Cutter a percentage of a success, but only up to a certain extent, then that has to be capped. When an editor didn’t want to get involved, he just looked for a new one.
This is the basis of the debate: A large number of content creators today, whether MontanaBlack, Trymacs or Asmongold, earn their money in a somewhat strange, two-track way. MontanaBlack has broken down how exactly he earns his million euros a year:
The streamers themselves are mostly active on Twitch, in long live streams in which they interact with other content creators or the chat. They react to videos, play games or simply chat.
They don’t actually earn money on Twitch, but on YouTube, where advertising is worth a lot more money.
Other people, editors, watch their Twitch streams, make videos or clips from them and then upload them to YouTube on their own. The streamer then gets the money from these videos, usually the main source of income.
The streamer also makes special videos just for YouTube, which the editor then prepares; these often include so-called placements, directly placed advertising.
These are the 5 most relevant German streamers on Twitch in 2024, according to Google
More videos
Autoplay
My editor will not earn more than a chief physician in Germany
This is the crucial scene in question: The current discussion on German Twitch triggered a scene in which an editor’s salary was discussed.
According to Max Schradin, who is still relatively new to Twitch, an editor should not earn more than a chief doctor in Germany. The editor should be paid fairly and very well, but you cannot give an editor 30% of a well-running channel. That would be €40,000 per month.
The more experienced Twitch streamer Trymacs welcomed the fact that Schradin had regulated this so clearly. It is precisely this point, an open percentage share of a cutter’s profit, that often causes a clash between influencers and cutters.
Cutters provide all-round support for a Twitch streamer
This is the job of an editor: In the modern world of Twitch, an “editor” is much more than someone who just puts “cuts” together and puts together a video by cutting out all the unimportant passages. In principle, editors are the editors, producers and video editors of Twitch streamers:
The term “cutter” has become established as a description of the job in Germany. In the USA we speak of the “editor” – here the emphasis is more on editorial work.
How does the editor get paid for this? That’s the debate right now. There are different models, so cutters can:
A percentage share of the profits for cutters brings great advantages for streamers
Participation has these advantages: If a cutter is involved in the profit of a channel, this offers two advantages for the streamer:
The model offers a big advantage for the editor: If the streamer and his channel really go viral and do outrageously well, then the editor will also earn an outrageous amount of money
Trymacs fired its editors when they wanted too much money
Does such a case happen? The most relevant German Twitch streamer, MontanaBlack, did not set up his own reaction channels on YouTube himself, but rather they were teenagers (Die Crew and Rechter Kevin) who he ultimately “persuaded” to let him win to participate.
After they built the channels, MontanaBlack made a deal with them whereby he got 50% of the revenue. Before, he did not benefit from these channels. But he could have had the channels closed on YouTube at any time, as it is his content to which he has the rights that is processed in the videos.
But as the channels continued to grow, MontanaBlack decided to reduce the “50%” share of cutters to 40% or 30% – this is not exactly known. But MontanaBlack made it clear that the cutters had no other choice here. He could always find someone who would do it for much less money.
Trymacs was probably in a similar situation: When his channel went through the roof, he offered his editor a fixed amount. But the cutter wanted to continue to have a percentage of the profits and not get involved in a trade.
Trymacs says:
But then he wanted something worth five figures and then placements were blocked and not edited and more or less blackmailed… and then: I said, Diggah, that’s not possible, and I looked for a new editor.
Trymacs wants Cutter to share in the success – unless there is too much success
The Trymacs model provides: For Trymacs, in conversation with Max Schradin, a model is ideal in which an editor has a percentage share in the success of a channel, but only to a certain extent, then a cap has to be put on it.
He justifies this with “supply and demand”: There are some in Germany that are suitable for what an editor has to do. He was willing to pay them a “good salary,” but not an insane amount either.
Only if he had extremely high standards that only gifted editors like Jules or the people from Simplicissimus could meet would he be willing to pay €15,000 or €20,000 a month for an editor. But 18-year-olds could also get what they need in their free time; they would then receive €5,000 at 18. They should be happy with that, that’s a lot of money.
This is the opposite position: The editor tim0cy explains:.
The YouTuber also earns way too much money, so it’s only fair. Trymacs, who was so lucky in life, should also allow other people to have so much luck in their lives. For Cutter, the percentage shareholding without an upward cap is the only chance to become as rich.
How is this commented? In the comments, Trymacs is criticized for apparently not understanding the problem or at least not engaging with the editor’s argument.
One says: Almost all workers hate their bosses for statements like “I can get someone who would do it for less” – the employee’s performance is not valued here.
Trymacs is also known as Kack Chef.
Editors and influencers have different vested interests and the influencer is in the driving seat
This is what lies behind it: There are different interests being pursued here: Trymacs finds the idea of paying an editor €50,000 just because he earns €150,000 himself crazy.
Simply because he doesn’t have to pay that much.
Trymacs applies a “supply and demand” logic here, without rewarding the “historic performance” of the cutter, whose performance has made the channel grow to the point where there is now so much money that can be distributed.
Trymacs thinks business-wise. He pays what he has to pay to get the service X that he needs.
If a cutter has brought him to the top, then in principle he doesn’t want to reward this achievement, but he says: It’s like at VW. Just because the company has grown 30 times, an employee doesn’t earn 30 times as much.
The employee earns what he is worth based on “supply and demand”.
Trymacs doesn’t see why he should give up more of his share than is necessary. He already pays well.
He repeatedly says: He doesn’t understand why people don’t understand his position; it would be crazy if editors got as much money as a chief physician.
Ultimately the problem is here. Editors and influencers work together to achieve success – but the influencer is clearly the boss and in the position of power. All rights belong to him. While the editor may be the brains of the operation, the influencer is the face of the operation – the editor is replaceable, the influencer is not.
If all of these deals are concluded without real contracts and run on a kiss-it-gets-out basis, then conflicts like those with Trymacs can arise, with the successful editor being thrown out if the channel exceeds a certain amount.
Trymacs is in the position here: Everything just needs to be clarified beforehand and then it’s okay. From the perspective of others, Trymacs goes through the golden door into the world of wealth, but closes the door behind him for the cutter.
In fact, only watertight and binding contracts that clearly award the cutter a certain part of the canal as their ownership would be a possible solution to the problem.
By the way, Trymacs apparently has no problem getting a lot of money out of his wealth if the state or a company wants it: “It’s expired, I can’t get it back” – after 3 years, Trymacs notices that companies owe him €240,000