4 ms·

Because 10 million times $15 is $150 million, or tiny chump change in the grand scheme of their industry. If you could ensure that only Usenet converts could u

Because 10 million times $15 is $150 million, or tiny chump change in the grand scheme of their industry. If you could ensure that only Usenet converts could use it, or pirate converts, that might be one thing. But chances are, their average revenue per traditional customer is >$20/mo, and thus this kind of service would cannibalize their traditional business. Reminds me of Windows discs. I never felt that Microsoft took fighting non-business-based piracy seriously, just did their due diligence because the problem was small enough to be nearly irrelevant and the solution would disrupt their normal business.

manualz 14y ago
> and thus this kind of service would cannibalize their traditional business. Which makes you wonder. Since such a service would largely kill piracy over night, do they not do it because the profit margin lost is actually greater than what they loose to piracy? Evidence they're really not loosing as much as they lead us to believe.
peterwwillis 14y ago
10 million is the amount of Giganews subscribers. There's probably double that in users of alternative Usenet providers (including ISPs). Then consider that there's at least 10 times as many people who don't know about Usenet that would use it if they knew. So the potential global amount they could be making is 200 million times $15. Three billion dollars. Think the grand scheme might be interested now?
- msellout 14y ago
  How about $150 per month from only 20 million people? And then $50 per month from another 20 million people and leave the rest out in the cold?
- DSix 14y ago
  HBO (a single content creator) is looking to pocket ~4 billion by itself (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118042241 http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118042241) why would the entire industry be interested in splitting 3 billion
  - WiseWeasel 14y ago
    $4B is the yearly revenue for HBO (or at least it was), while the $15 per usenet user is monthly.
- tedunangst 14y ago
  They'd make even more money with five billion people paying $1.

manualz 14y ago

> and thus this kind of service would cannibalize their traditional business. Which makes you wonder. Since such a service would largely kill piracy over night, do they not do it because the profit margin lost is actually greater than what they loose to piracy? Evidence they're really not loosing as much as they lead us to believe.

peterwwillis 14y ago

10 million is the amount of Giganews subscribers. There's probably double that in users of alternative Usenet providers (including ISPs). Then consider that there's at least 10 times as many people who don't know about Usenet that would use it if they knew. So the potential global amount they could be making is 200 million times $15. Three billion dollars. Think the grand scheme might be interested now?

msellout 14y ago
How about $150 per month from only 20 million people? And then $50 per month from another 20 million people and leave the rest out in the cold?
DSix 14y ago
HBO (a single content creator) is looking to pocket ~4 billion by itself (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118042241 http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118042241) why would the entire industry be interested in splitting 3 billion
- WiseWeasel 14y ago
  $4B is the yearly revenue for HBO (or at least it was), while the $15 per usenet user is monthly.
tedunangst 14y ago
They'd make even more money with five billion people paying $1.