4 ms·

> It's good for the majority of publishers if they accept it as their preferred solution as you wrote. Unless you think they ought to be driven by other motives

> It's good for the majority of publishers if they accept it as their preferred solution as you wrote. Unless you think they ought to be driven by other motives than making sound business decisions - like cruelty or whatever you were trying to insinuate with your slanted rhetoric. Perhaps my rhetoric is slanted, but yours is fully bent. When only one solution eventually exists, it doesn't make it the preferred solution, it makes it the nuclear option. Quit spouting nonsense about cruelty. I'm suggesting that advertising-supported businesses are eventually going to have one remaining option. That isn't slanted rhetoric. That's common sense. Unless of course we come up with a completely new way for content creators to earn a living with their content outside of charging for it, or using advertising for it. Because new forms of compensation in exchange for content are popping up all the time. > Well, go ahead and use it then. What's holding you back? Altruism and the urge to save users from the consequences of their personal choices? Oh, please... I'm starting to believe you are just putting words together so you sound smart. No one is going to change to paywalls until every has to. Until then the middle of the pack is going to continue fighting for scraps while the giants in the industry (Google, Facebook, Microsoft) continue to profit on the sheer mass of their user base, and hedging their bets with non-advertising products. But you keep spouting pseudo-Socratic arguments about how "nothing is stopping us" from moving to a model nobody wants but the end-user is steadily preventing any other alternative.

lazyjones 11y ago
> When only one solution eventually exists, it doesn't make it the preferred solution, it makes it the nuclear option. [...] I'm suggesting that advertising-supported businesses are eventually going to have one remaining option. That isn't slanted rhetoric. That's common sense. Unless of course we come up with a completely new way for content creators to earn a living with their content outside of charging for it, or using advertising for it. Because new forms of compensation in exchange for content are popping up all the time. You don't make any sense. Why would it become the only option when other forms keep popping up? Even with very hypothetical 100% penetration of (unblockable) ad blockers, this won't be the case. > No one is going to change to paywalls until every has to. You must have missed the NY times, the largest german newspaper (BILD) and other large publications switching to paywalls then. Perhaps look around some more before beating dead horses here... Also, your inflammatory language hurts your cause.
- jhall1468 11y ago
  > Why would it become the only option when other forms keep popping up? Even with very hypothetical 100% penetration of (unblockable) ad blockers, this won't be the case. Name me one other form of a successful website that does not use one of the following methods of monetization: ads, donations, currency-exchange or none (free) Because none of those are recent. > You must have missed the NY times, the largest german newspaper (BILD) and other large publications switching to paywalls then. Perhaps look around some more before beating dead horses here... Also, your inflammatory language hurts your cause. Because I'm not talking about organizations that already have millions of customers as a base. They are going to survive regardless of the ad-blocking penetration. Just like Google and Facebook will. What won't survive is anything that isn't enormous. And you started the inflammatory nonsense by putting words into my mouth.
  - lazyjones 11y ago
    > Name me one other form of a successful website that does not use one of the following methods of monetization: My former company (founded in 2000; majority sold in 2014; ~2.5 million users) has 95% revenue from other sources than those you named, it's a price comparison website. Most competitors operate in a similar fashion. Ads are used only as an insignificant additional revenue source (with lots of doubt and disputes internally). Other examples: large classified ad pages, dating websites, real estate brokers (syndicated/search websites), airbnb, hotel and flight booking sites. > Because I'm not talking about organizations that already have millions of customers as a base. OK, how about the newly founded austrian branch of swiss publication NZZ - it started with 0 users and paywall.
    - jhall1468 11y ago
      > large classified ad pages It literally has the word "ad" in it. > dating websites Either ad-driven or membership based, in which case the membership is received as a currency-exchange. > real estate brokers (syndicated/search websites) Just because your content is an ad doesn't make it less an ad. > airbnb See above. > hotel and flight booking sites. See above. Every one of those sites are classified ad sites, which is problematic on two fronts: 1. All the content is the ad. 2. It's not unique content, it's content created for the sole purposes of selling something. Literally everything you listed requires that there be something to sell, whether a product or sex/dating. So the Internet should effectively be one big shopping district? > OK, how about the newly founded austrian branch of swiss publication NZZ - it started with 0 users and paywall. A subsidiary of a 300 year old establishment is your example of a startup making it day one with a paywall. Okay...

lazyjones 11y ago

> When only one solution eventually exists, it doesn't make it the preferred solution, it makes it the nuclear option. [...] I'm suggesting that advertising-supported businesses are eventually going to have one remaining option. That isn't slanted rhetoric. That's common sense. Unless of course we come up with a completely new way for content creators to earn a living with their content outside of charging for it, or using advertising for it. Because new forms of compensation in exchange for content are popping up all the time. You don't make any sense. Why would it become the only option when other forms keep popping up? Even with very hypothetical 100% penetration of (unblockable) ad blockers, this won't be the case. > No one is going to change to paywalls until every has to. You must have missed the NY times, the largest german newspaper (BILD) and other large publications switching to paywalls then. Perhaps look around some more before beating dead horses here... Also, your inflammatory language hurts your cause.

jhall1468 11y ago
> Why would it become the only option when other forms keep popping up? Even with very hypothetical 100% penetration of (unblockable) ad blockers, this won't be the case. Name me one other form of a successful website that does not use one of the following methods of monetization: ads, donations, currency-exchange or none (free) Because none of those are recent. > You must have missed the NY times, the largest german newspaper (BILD) and other large publications switching to paywalls then. Perhaps look around some more before beating dead horses here... Also, your inflammatory language hurts your cause. Because I'm not talking about organizations that already have millions of customers as a base. They are going to survive regardless of the ad-blocking penetration. Just like Google and Facebook will. What won't survive is anything that isn't enormous. And you started the inflammatory nonsense by putting words into my mouth.
- lazyjones 11y ago
  > Name me one other form of a successful website that does not use one of the following methods of monetization: My former company (founded in 2000; majority sold in 2014; ~2.5 million users) has 95% revenue from other sources than those you named, it's a price comparison website. Most competitors operate in a similar fashion. Ads are used only as an insignificant additional revenue source (with lots of doubt and disputes internally). Other examples: large classified ad pages, dating websites, real estate brokers (syndicated/search websites), airbnb, hotel and flight booking sites. > Because I'm not talking about organizations that already have millions of customers as a base. OK, how about the newly founded austrian branch of swiss publication NZZ - it started with 0 users and paywall.
  - jhall1468 11y ago
    > large classified ad pages It literally has the word "ad" in it. > dating websites Either ad-driven or membership based, in which case the membership is received as a currency-exchange. > real estate brokers (syndicated/search websites) Just because your content is an ad doesn't make it less an ad. > airbnb See above. > hotel and flight booking sites. See above. Every one of those sites are classified ad sites, which is problematic on two fronts: 1. All the content is the ad. 2. It's not unique content, it's content created for the sole purposes of selling something. Literally everything you listed requires that there be something to sell, whether a product or sex/dating. So the Internet should effectively be one big shopping district? > OK, how about the newly founded austrian branch of swiss publication NZZ - it started with 0 users and paywall. A subsidiary of a 300 year old establishment is your example of a startup making it day one with a paywall. Okay...