4 ms·

regarding your suggestion .....how is a blogger going to know whether his new blog is going to net $10/year or $1000/year without turning on ads and therefore p

by credo 16y ago

regarding your suggestion .....how is a blogger going to know whether his new blog is going to net $10/year or $1000/year without turning on ads and therefore paying the $300 fee ? Here in Washington state, businesses are required to pay 1.5% Business tax. However, if the business earns less than $28,000, the govt does not collect any taxes. I think a sole proprietorship business license (for a real business, not a blog) costs $15. imo charging $300 for a license to run a blog with ads is high. Not exempting low-revenue blogs from the $300 fee is also absurd.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
JangoSteve 16y ago
Likewise, how is a restauranteur going to know whether their new restaurant will make $50k its first year, or take a $100k loss, before building the restaurant and paying the $300 fee? I'll go ahead and answer both questions. Just as an entrepreneur can create a business plan and analyze the market, a blogger can do the same. Except with a blogger, it's much easier; if your blog only gets a few hundred visits a day, you know you're in the $10/year range without having to turn on ads or pay the licensing fee. Not exempting low-revenue blogs from the $300 fee is also absurd. I agree.
- chmike 16y ago
  I guess the 300$ is to be considered part of the investment. It won't make a big difference to the 100K$ investment. It looks like the law didn't consider very low revenues and hobby activity like blogging.
- skinnymuch 16y ago
  Did you mean to say a few hundred visits a year? If you did or you just meant something else...then I'm sorry for the rest of my post. A few hundred visits a day is respectable. Though not easy or common, it is possible to do $10+/day with a few hundred visits/day. Quick math: let's assume few hundred = 300 visits/day. Also have to assume the blog is self hosted so all revenue is kept in-house (unlike the bloggers in the article). So 300 visits x 5 page views = 1500 pageviews/day. That equals $7 CPM and a bit over $10/day or ~$3,750/year. Not messing with revenue from the feed or anything since this is just hypothetical numbers anyway. The change above the $10 will be enough to pay for hosting + domain costs. Alternatively, if you meant a few hundred views/day then dividing $3,750 by 5 still yields $750. Ah...I'm rambling and I doubt anyone cares too much so I'll stop. Regarding the actual post, I don't agree with the fee either. This reminds me of a homeless SF guy trying to get back on his feet by shining shoes - SF came up to him and demanded he get a license and some other stuff too. Thankfully there was a small uproar and the city didn't end up screwing him over.
  - JangoSteve 16y ago
    Um sure. The exact numbers weren't really the point. The point was that you can do quick math, just as you did, to get an idea of the potential income from putting ads on your blog before you actually implement them.
- mseebach 16y ago
  > how is a restauranteur going to know whether their new restaurant will make $50k its first year, or take a $100k loss He won't, which is the suggested limit is on revenue, not actual profit. $10,000 revenue is what an average restaurant burns through in a few days (back-of-an-envelope number) in rent, staff and supplies.

by credo 16y ago

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

JangoSteve 16y ago

Likewise, how is a restauranteur going to know whether their new restaurant will make $50k its first year, or take a $100k loss, before building the restaurant and paying the $300 fee? I'll go ahead and answer both questions. Just as an entrepreneur can create a business plan and analyze the market, a blogger can do the same. Except with a blogger, it's much easier; if your blog only gets a few hundred visits a day, you know you're in the $10/year range without having to turn on ads or pay the licensing fee. Not exempting low-revenue blogs from the $300 fee is also absurd. I agree.

chmike 16y ago
I guess the 300$ is to be considered part of the investment. It won't make a big difference to the 100K$ investment. It looks like the law didn't consider very low revenues and hobby activity like blogging.
skinnymuch 16y ago
Did you mean to say a few hundred visits a year? If you did or you just meant something else...then I'm sorry for the rest of my post. A few hundred visits a day is respectable. Though not easy or common, it is possible to do $10+/day with a few hundred visits/day. Quick math: let's assume few hundred = 300 visits/day. Also have to assume the blog is self hosted so all revenue is kept in-house (unlike the bloggers in the article). So 300 visits x 5 page views = 1500 pageviews/day. That equals $7 CPM and a bit over $10/day or ~$3,750/year. Not messing with revenue from the feed or anything since this is just hypothetical numbers anyway. The change above the $10 will be enough to pay for hosting + domain costs. Alternatively, if you meant a few hundred views/day then dividing $3,750 by 5 still yields $750. Ah...I'm rambling and I doubt anyone cares too much so I'll stop. Regarding the actual post, I don't agree with the fee either. This reminds me of a homeless SF guy trying to get back on his feet by shining shoes - SF came up to him and demanded he get a license and some other stuff too. Thankfully there was a small uproar and the city didn't end up screwing him over.
- JangoSteve 16y ago
  Um sure. The exact numbers weren't really the point. The point was that you can do quick math, just as you did, to get an idea of the potential income from putting ads on your blog before you actually implement them.
mseebach 16y ago
> how is a restauranteur going to know whether their new restaurant will make $50k its first year, or take a $100k loss He won't, which is the suggested limit is on revenue, not actual profit. $10,000 revenue is what an average restaurant burns through in a few days (back-of-an-envelope number) in rent, staff and supplies.