Peter wrote:
including quite good looking women
That’s the key to success on youtube. We’re at most a small step away from apes. 
Indeed, non-YT funding channels will be good, like the countless camping / outdoor equipment video people (including quite good looking women) getting funded by the product manufacturers.
It surely helps to have some good looking women on it, but by now there are many channels who have huge followership without it.
In GA, Jimmy has not had any good looking woman on it for a while, even though his wife certainly qualifies. In cars, there are many channels who have not had any “lookers” on it but who will be sponsored by equipment manufacturers such as Carly and others.
Who will fund the TB20 guys? Just look at the comments. They have a sponsor calles Squarespace. Additionally they have a mechandise store. Iˆve not checked anything else, but I am sure they have other sponsors pop up from time to time.
He is a roofing contractor, and an Airman, Business buyer, Real Estate Investor & Entrepreneur’s Organization Accelerator Trainer.
Jimmy’s roofing company (now sold per his Linked in page) apparently gets good reviews 
He seems to be making money buying small businesses, building them up and eventually selling them. A roof for my house lasts 30 years and is $25-30K to re-do. The material doesn’t cost that much so there’s money to be made in re-roofing US houses. Not a glamorous business but one that can make money.
Real money is ‘always’ made in housing, especially given that you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to do it Then you can play with planes and if so inclined try to make it pay for itself with a video channel. Whatever cost remains might be a business expense write-off for another activity.
30 year life for a roof shocks me. My rented-out house has lasted almost 60 years with tiles, and my present home, with slates, was reroofed 38 years ago, for the first time in over 100 years.
Indeed, the life of a roof in the UK is ‘forever’ as far as most people are concerned. You are unlucky if it needs to be repaired or replaced during your ownership / lifetime, and if it does then you can safely assume you’ll never have to do it again.
The exception would be a thatched roof, where a 30 year life is about right – perhaps longer with good maintenance and favourable conditions. A good friend of mine in the village is a thatcher and is booked up for the next year at least. That, combined with the ~30 year life, tells you something about how prevalent thatched roofs are around here! In certain areas conservation regulations prevent a change to tile or slate, but the owners seem to have little desire to change anyway – thatch offers excellent insulative properties, keeping houses warm in winter and cool in summer, as well as excellent sound-proofing. For centuries it was the default and ubiquitous roof covering throughout the British Isles (other than turf in parts of Scotland and Ireland), but by the early 20th century had come to be seen as a mark of poverty. By the late 20th century it was back in vogue…
I believe US housebuilding is a bit more ‘light duty’ than some of us in Europe may be used to, with various forms of timber construction predominating. A quick Google suggests that 90% of US housebuilding remains timber-framed.
In the UK everything is brick or stone. In my locality everything is solid stone, walls 2-3ft thick, and most houses between 200 and 400 years old with plenty much older than that.
In my case, ‘replacing’ the roof means lifting concrete tiles, replacing the sealing paper underneath, then reinstalling the same tiles. It’s hot, nasty work but perhaps not the same thing you’re thinking of.
Timber framing is the norm locally, and like a tube and rag aircraft it works well enough and is easily enough maintained for an indefinite period. Also easily modified and resistant to earthquakes. In Florida they like block walls to resist hurricanes… horses for courses.
My house is about 35 years old and the original ‘30 year roof’ has never been done. My roof guy tells me ‘it’s consumer choice’ whether to replace the roof (meaning the sealing paper) entirely or just pay him $600 to do a section if/when it leaks. That means lifting a section of tiles, maybe replacing an area of plywood underneath if there’s been a leak, then putting down new sealing paper and replacing the tiles. Since we seem to have fixed all the minor leaks (he’s a good guy) and haven’t had any for a couple of years, we’re leaving well enough alone. It only rains here for a few months a year so from roughly March to December it makes no difference regardless.
Silvaire wrote:
In my case, ‘replacing’ the roof means lifting concrete tiles, replacing the sealing paper underneath, then reinstalling the same tiles. It’s hot, nasty work but perhaps not the same thing you’re thinking of.
No, much the same. When we ‘replace’ a tile or slate roof in this country, people typically re-use as much of the original tile and slate as remains serviceable – generally most of it. The job is more about deterioration of the bitumous membrane underneath (which is only a second line of defence so doesn’t matter so long as slates/tiles don’t shift or fall) combined with enough shifting / falling of outer material that you may as well do the whole lot rather than try to fix individual areas.
I believe our typical pitch is also steeper, which means the state of the lining is less vital. Many older roofs are unlined. We also don’t use any ply – there are just battens fixed to the rafters and then lining plus outer material nailed to the whole lot.
Silvaire wrote:
Timber framing is the norm locally, and like a tube and rag aircraft it works well enough and is easily enough maintained for an indefinite period.
I guess it depends on one’s definition of indefinite! My bet is that timber-framed houses won’t be standing in a few hundred years.
The original 140 year old wood framed houses in the town where I live seem to be doing fine, and when they aren’t you can rebuild the structure for not a huge amount of money. The reason they’d disappear or be modified beyond recognition is their lack of amenities and size in comparison to the land value, but they are historic at this point and people sign up for hugely reduced property taxes in order to maintain them in their current state. I think assuming stable politics they and also my house are nice enough to maintain for a long time
