3 ms·
I mean, he's not making a prediction on revenue. Gwern is making a statement about traffic. Did your traffic increase ~10%? From the Pandora paper, (which show
by civilian 8y ago
I mean, he's not making a prediction on revenue. Gwern is making a statement about traffic. Did your traffic increase ~10%?
From the Pandora paper, (which showed that as more ads were played during pandora sessions, subscriptions were boosted but free users left) it sounds like there's an "optimal advertisement" rate for revenue. Enough to not push away users, but not too much to deter users altogether.
- Reedx 8y ago> Did your traffic increase ~10%? It followed the same pattern as I've seen for years. > Enough to not push away users, but not too much to deter users altogether. That could be. I might've had a goldilocks amount.
- rdiddly 8y agoInstituting advertising is guaranteed to reach your existing user base right away; those who hate ads will see them right away and quit right away. Removing advertising doesn't have the same kind of immediate effect because the "audience" for it is people who haven't even heard of your app yet, and have no idea whether you're ad-free or not. (Here I'm discounting the possibility that there's a bunch of people waiting, hoping you eliminate ads so they can finally join.) So the effects of removing ads probably have a much longer lag-time, governed to a significant degree by the usual mechanisms and rates of user acquisition. Edit: you can also argue that the pre-existing users of an ad-free app have to some degree self-selected based on a hatred of ads, and that in a more general sample, the proportion for whom ads are a deal-breaker might be lower than 1 in 10.
- JohnFen 8y agoWell said. Plus, there are us diehards who simply gave up on all mobile gaming entirely, because the vast majority have ads. That makes it hard enough to find acceptable games that it's just not worth looking for games.