3 ms·

Show HN: PageScrub – A mitigation service between ad-blockers and providers

herbst 10y ago
I don't fully get it, and that the site links on the top/bottom don't work does not help ether. Pricing is ment for publishers? Or consuments? Both? Who gets the money how? And which money? What can i expect per paying user and will that not get less the more publishers you accept (If so, how do i know that i not actually lose money when more and more users would use your service other than clicking my rather lucrative ads)?
brudgers 10y ago
Our solution is to give readers the change to see your articles without ads but ask them to pay for it. 1. 'chance' not 'change'. 2. This is in small text. It's the answer to 'what is it?' It should be at the top of the page. It should be in big text and short and to the point, for example: Let your readers read ad free (while still making money) [but it should probably be better]. 3. There's a trend toward putting pictures of the development team at the bottom of product landing pages. It rarely creates a positive impression on me. I've scrolled to the bottom for more information about the product. If I saw a picture of Peter Norvig, I'd be like, "Oh Wow, maybe it is worth checking out." When it's someone less obviously awesome, the odds of a positive effect go down and as the obvious awesomeness goes down the effect might go negative. My advice: don't end the sales pitch with 'the last thing' the potential customer might care about. Keep the focus on how the product solves the problem. A photo of the developers doesn't do that. The problem it attempts to solve is something related to investors [youth is sales collateral for investors, the product is what matters to potential customers]. 4. The primary problem the product solves is authors getting paid. It is not ad blockers. The second problem it solves is random ads. Again not ad blockers. The value proposition is a better user experience without loss of revenue. Advice: everything on the page should support those ideas. The entire pitch should all fit in a single screen. If the user follows the call to action without scrolling down, that's success [scrolling down is success when the goal is to show more ads on a page]. 5. See my somewhat related comments here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12289898 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12289898 Good luck.
- BrandiATMuhkuh 10y ago
  Thank you for your great advice. With the two-sided market, readers + publishers, it's not so easy/clear whom we should target. I also think that the UX is one of the best values we can give readers. And somewhat publisher too.
  - brudgers 10y ago
    I first read about micropayments as the solution to people reading for free on the web in the 1990's. I won't say it will never work because the idea of making $0.01 everytime someone reads some body else's content on the internet is so attractive and rooted in the way we think about goods. I don't think that there is a scalable good user experience to be had. A good experience is a balance between the content the user wants/needs/enjoys, the nature of the layout, and the costs [in time, money, and complexity]. The marketplace problem isn't technical, it's variation in values among buyers and sellers. Everyone is committed to arbitrage and increasing the complexity of transactions doesn't make life easier.

I don't fully get it, and that the site links on the top/bottom don't work does not help ether. Pricing is ment for publishers? Or consuments? Both? Who gets the money how? And which money? What can i expect per paying user and will that not get less the more publishers you accept (If so, how do i know that i not actually lose money when more and more users would use your service other than clicking my rather lucrative ads)?

brudgers 10y ago

Our solution is to give readers the change to see your articles without ads but ask them to pay for it. 1. 'chance' not 'change'. 2. This is in small text. It's the answer to 'what is it?' It should be at the top of the page. It should be in big text and short and to the point, for example: Let your readers read ad free (while still making money) [but it should probably be better]. 3. There's a trend toward putting pictures of the development team at the bottom of product landing pages. It rarely creates a positive impression on me. I've scrolled to the bottom for more information about the product. If I saw a picture of Peter Norvig, I'd be like, "Oh Wow, maybe it is worth checking out." When it's someone less obviously awesome, the odds of a positive effect go down and as the obvious awesomeness goes down the effect might go negative. My advice: don't end the sales pitch with 'the last thing' the potential customer might care about. Keep the focus on how the product solves the problem. A photo of the developers doesn't do that. The problem it attempts to solve is something related to investors [youth is sales collateral for investors, the product is what matters to potential customers]. 4. The primary problem the product solves is authors getting paid. It is not ad blockers. The second problem it solves is random ads. Again not ad blockers. The value proposition is a better user experience without loss of revenue. Advice: everything on the page should support those ideas. The entire pitch should all fit in a single screen. If the user follows the call to action without scrolling down, that's success [scrolling down is success when the goal is to show more ads on a page]. 5. See my somewhat related comments here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12289898 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12289898 Good luck.

BrandiATMuhkuh 10y ago
Thank you for your great advice. With the two-sided market, readers + publishers, it's not so easy/clear whom we should target. I also think that the UX is one of the best values we can give readers. And somewhat publisher too.
- brudgers 10y ago
  I first read about micropayments as the solution to people reading for free on the web in the 1990's. I won't say it will never work because the idea of making $0.01 everytime someone reads some body else's content on the internet is so attractive and rooted in the way we think about goods. I don't think that there is a scalable good user experience to be had. A good experience is a balance between the content the user wants/needs/enjoys, the nature of the layout, and the costs [in time, money, and complexity]. The marketplace problem isn't technical, it's variation in values among buyers and sellers. Everyone is committed to arbitrage and increasing the complexity of transactions doesn't make life easier.