3 ms·

The paradox is resolved if you consider yourself an advertiser. When you pay for "ad free", it's equivalent to bidding on yourself and then showing yourself n

The paradox is resolved if you consider yourself an advertiser. When you pay for "ad free", it's equivalent to bidding on yourself and then showing yourself nothing. A serious bidder could bid higher than you on your own self.

steve19 8y ago
Good point. And they do with native advertising. As a YouTube premium subscriber I still have to sit through (or fast forward through) sponser messages or put up with obviously paid for videos.
nothrabannosir 8y ago
I like this idea, although I do want to note: > A serious bidder could bid higher than you on your own self. At least I'd get my money back :( But it's a great mental model.
- londons_explore 8y ago
  The mental model gets better when you realise online ad auctions have bids multiplied by the predicted click-through-rate (pCTR). That means someone can outbid you easily if it is predicted the ad will be clicked, and they have to pay a load of money if it's predicted the ad is very unlikely to be clicked. Which in turn means, you'll effectively only be shown ads you're interested in, since the predictor thinks it's very likley you'll click (or watch the whole thing for a preroll ad). Turns out, that predictor is mostly right - it did a good job of showing me ads that were funny enough to watch to the end, and correctly realised I would never watch an ad twice, so never showed me the same ad twice.
gibolt 8y ago
I can predict or skip those ads. The ones that I can't skip otherwise (especially on mobile) are why I'm a subscriber. Side thing no one ever mentions about ads, they always play at 1x. I watch between 2-4x and ads seem so slow when they happen
manigandham 8y ago
That's exactly what it is, and is espoused by Google's Contributor program: https://contributor.google.com/v/beta https://contributor.google.com/v/beta
- throwaway2048 8y ago
  The concept of paying for ad free, but getting ads anyways because they REALLY want you to see them is hopelessly myopic. It was the original concept behind google contributor, but it has since changed.

steve19 8y ago

Good point. And they do with native advertising. As a YouTube premium subscriber I still have to sit through (or fast forward through) sponser messages or put up with obviously paid for videos.

nothrabannosir 8y ago

I like this idea, although I do want to note: > A serious bidder could bid higher than you on your own self. At least I'd get my money back :( But it's a great mental model.

londons_explore 8y ago
The mental model gets better when you realise online ad auctions have bids multiplied by the predicted click-through-rate (pCTR). That means someone can outbid you easily if it is predicted the ad will be clicked, and they have to pay a load of money if it's predicted the ad is very unlikely to be clicked. Which in turn means, you'll effectively only be shown ads you're interested in, since the predictor thinks it's very likley you'll click (or watch the whole thing for a preroll ad). Turns out, that predictor is mostly right - it did a good job of showing me ads that were funny enough to watch to the end, and correctly realised I would never watch an ad twice, so never showed me the same ad twice.

gibolt 8y ago

I can predict or skip those ads. The ones that I can't skip otherwise (especially on mobile) are why I'm a subscriber. Side thing no one ever mentions about ads, they always play at 1x. I watch between 2-4x and ads seem so slow when they happen

manigandham 8y ago

That's exactly what it is, and is espoused by Google's Contributor program: https://contributor.google.com/v/beta https://contributor.google.com/v/beta

throwaway2048 8y ago
The concept of paying for ad free, but getting ads anyways because they REALLY want you to see them is hopelessly myopic. It was the original concept behind google contributor, but it has since changed.