4 ms·

I feel like these anti-consumer practices by BigCorp can open the door for new companies to emerge on the market: build an ad-free tv, ad-free smartphones etc.

by s1k3s 4y ago

I feel like these anti-consumer practices by BigCorp can open the door for new companies to emerge on the market: build an ad-free tv, ad-free smartphones etc. Or is it just the effect of me living in a bubble while 99.9% of the customers don't care about this?

scarface74 4y ago
Yes because consumers have history of paying more for quality in aggregate… There is a reason that two of the five most valuable companies in the US are adTech - Google and Facebook. How many consumers are going to choose to pay $300 more for an ad free privacy first TV? How many consumers right now are willing to pay for an AppleTV over a $30 Roku stick?
- prasadjoglekar 4y ago
  You need a surprisingly small number of HN crowd like folks to ruin the market. Most ad targeting - regardless of actual product - goes after people with high discretionary income. If a chunk of those folks self selected out of the video ad market, it ruins the overall economics. This is an idea I've toyed with - corner the >200K income TV market with privacy features. Make it as easy as Roku to block all this.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    Hardware needs scale and distribution to be successful. The HN crowd can’t keep geek ventures like the Firefox phone and various Linux phones afloat.
justaman 4y ago
Non-tech people I talk to hate ads too. Boomers have been talking about how facebook is all ads now too.
atty 4y ago
I think there are two reasons. First, most people might be mildly annoyed by the ads at most, and certainly wouldn’t make a buying decision based on them. Second, it’s almost impossible for new companies to compete on both quality and price at the same time, unless they’re subsidizing the product somehow (ads, perhaps? :) or as an unsustainable VC funded business I guess). How often is it that we see a new company that can make a smartphone that has the fit and finish, camera quality, and specs of an equivalently priced iPhone/Samsung/Pixel phone?
pbronez 4y ago
I guess this comes down to the balance between the marginal cost of offering an additional product line with a different firmware and the marginal revenue of winning the privacy first market. Then there’s the constant problem with pay-to-avoid ads… the people who have the spare cash to pay are the ones the advertisers want most. Removing them from the target population lowers the overall value of the targetable group and reduces revenue for your ad-supported products.
asdff 4y ago
Bigcorp has their hands in many cookie jars and don't care if they take a loss on selling the panel in the smart tv if it means they gain in licensing deals from having "Netflix" printed on the remote. You can come in, your offering will just be costlier than the subsidized smart tv and you will be driven out of business before long. Or, no suppliers even want to work for you because they are busy fulfilling orders from bigcorps who will gladly buy up all their capacity to keep people like you from having an easy time starting a small business.

by s1k3s 4y ago

scarface74 4y ago

Yes because consumers have history of paying more for quality in aggregate… There is a reason that two of the five most valuable companies in the US are adTech - Google and Facebook. How many consumers are going to choose to pay $300 more for an ad free privacy first TV? How many consumers right now are willing to pay for an AppleTV over a $30 Roku stick?

prasadjoglekar 4y ago
You need a surprisingly small number of HN crowd like folks to ruin the market. Most ad targeting - regardless of actual product - goes after people with high discretionary income. If a chunk of those folks self selected out of the video ad market, it ruins the overall economics. This is an idea I've toyed with - corner the >200K income TV market with privacy features. Make it as easy as Roku to block all this.
- scarface74 4y ago
  Hardware needs scale and distribution to be successful. The HN crowd can’t keep geek ventures like the Firefox phone and various Linux phones afloat.

justaman 4y ago

Non-tech people I talk to hate ads too. Boomers have been talking about how facebook is all ads now too.

atty 4y ago

I think there are two reasons. First, most people might be mildly annoyed by the ads at most, and certainly wouldn’t make a buying decision based on them. Second, it’s almost impossible for new companies to compete on both quality and price at the same time, unless they’re subsidizing the product somehow (ads, perhaps? :) or as an unsustainable VC funded business I guess). How often is it that we see a new company that can make a smartphone that has the fit and finish, camera quality, and specs of an equivalently priced iPhone/Samsung/Pixel phone?

pbronez 4y ago

I guess this comes down to the balance between the marginal cost of offering an additional product line with a different firmware and the marginal revenue of winning the privacy first market. Then there’s the constant problem with pay-to-avoid ads… the people who have the spare cash to pay are the ones the advertisers want most. Removing them from the target population lowers the overall value of the targetable group and reduces revenue for your ad-supported products.

asdff 4y ago

Bigcorp has their hands in many cookie jars and don't care if they take a loss on selling the panel in the smart tv if it means they gain in licensing deals from having "Netflix" printed on the remote. You can come in, your offering will just be costlier than the subsidized smart tv and you will be driven out of business before long. Or, no suppliers even want to work for you because they are busy fulfilling orders from bigcorps who will gladly buy up all their capacity to keep people like you from having an easy time starting a small business.