4 ms·
Not who you are replying to, but I do! What sites are so essential that we couldn't replace them?
by CaptSpify 10y ago
Not who you are replying to, but I do!
What sites are so essential that we couldn't replace them?
- ori_b 10y agoGoogle is an example of an ad-supported site that would be rather hard to replace. And, apparently, they make a ridiculous amount of money per user, so replacing advertising revenue with user payments is going to be expensive -- they'd have to charge you $277 per month, if you believe this: https://mondaynote.com/the-nytimes-could-be-worth-19bn-instead-of-2bn-8ab635bc6262 https://mondaynote.com/the-nytimes-could-be-worth-19bn-inste...
- dTal 10y agoThat would imply that I am rendering $277 worth of value to Google each month. I would happily receive that in cash and eschew all Google services, which I mostly try and do anyway for privacy reasons. Where do I sign? Cuts both ways.
- ori_b 10y agoWell, the value you give google is the average probability of purchasing products. I'm sure that if a large number of companies were able to cut $277 from your average aggregate monthly spending in exchange for a guarantee that you were buying their products, they'd be signing up. Perhaps some sort of subscription service that you couldn't opt out of. You can try doing that as a startup.
- CaptSpify 10y agoI would agree that Google search would be hard to replace, but I think it could be done, and probably done better. But one site is not worth keeping a crappy system in place, IMO.