5 ms·

Google makes $21 on average per US user per month [1], almost all of which comes from advertising. Would you pay $21/mo for your Google services? [1] https://

Google makes $21 on average per US user per month [1], almost all of which comes from advertising. Would you pay $21/mo for your Google services? [1] https://mondaynote.com/the-arpus-of-the-big-four-dwarf-everybody-else-e5b02a579ed3 https://mondaynote.com/the-arpus-of-the-big-four-dwarf-every...

danielscrubs 7y ago
I’ve bought zero products via google ads, except the case when I search for a company name and their official homepage is the top sponsored result. Which is insane. And yet, my eyeballs looking at text with less text than a tweet is worth 21 USD. It feels like Google disrupted, but it’s far away from being optimal for companies.
- ferzul 7y ago
  well, I don't see Google ads so I don't know what the content is, but no-one knows that I bought a coke after seeing an ad for a coke at the train station. but it still works. the effectiveness of advertising is an empirical question.
- Someone 7y ago
  $21 per user per month, on average, doesn’t imply $21 on you, every single month. Other users react differently to that advertiser and/or you may click once every few years to bring in $1,000 advertising revenue for them on a very high-margin item.
- joosters 7y ago
  Just because you've not bought something by clicking on an ad doesn't mean that the advertising has changed your purchasing habits. ...unless you are magically immune from advertising?
  - danielscrubs 7y ago
    I saw a coke sign three hours ago outside. I’ve been surfing the net for one hour and don’t remember a single ad. I don’t use adblockers. I’m not saying ads don’t work. I’m saying Google Ads are ready to in turn be disrupted. Especially with bots running amok...
  - feanaro 7y ago
    And now we get into magical, unprovable territory. You can't prove the ads don't work so we better continue the status quo!
Doctor_Fegg 7y ago
I’d love to pay £20 a month for a search engine that had results as good as Google, didn’t track me, and behaved responsibly in encouraging a plural web.
millstone 7y ago
Google optimized to help me instead of manipulate me, that would be worth probably $1k a year for me.

danielscrubs 7y ago

I’ve bought zero products via google ads, except the case when I search for a company name and their official homepage is the top sponsored result. Which is insane. And yet, my eyeballs looking at text with less text than a tweet is worth 21 USD. It feels like Google disrupted, but it’s far away from being optimal for companies.

ferzul 7y ago
well, I don't see Google ads so I don't know what the content is, but no-one knows that I bought a coke after seeing an ad for a coke at the train station. but it still works. the effectiveness of advertising is an empirical question.
Someone 7y ago
$21 per user per month, on average, doesn’t imply $21 on you, every single month. Other users react differently to that advertiser and/or you may click once every few years to bring in $1,000 advertising revenue for them on a very high-margin item.
joosters 7y ago
Just because you've not bought something by clicking on an ad doesn't mean that the advertising has changed your purchasing habits. ...unless you are magically immune from advertising?
- danielscrubs 7y ago
  I saw a coke sign three hours ago outside. I’ve been surfing the net for one hour and don’t remember a single ad. I don’t use adblockers. I’m not saying ads don’t work. I’m saying Google Ads are ready to in turn be disrupted. Especially with bots running amok...
- feanaro 7y ago
  And now we get into magical, unprovable territory. You can't prove the ads don't work so we better continue the status quo!

Doctor_Fegg 7y ago

I’d love to pay £20 a month for a search engine that had results as good as Google, didn’t track me, and behaved responsibly in encouraging a plural web.

millstone 7y ago

Google optimized to help me instead of manipulate me, that would be worth probably $1k a year for me.