4 ms·

I have a hard time seeing this type of monetization as at all a good thing. Things like Facebook and Google ads can be framed as a good thing for the user and f

by robryan 14y ago

I have a hard time seeing this type of monetization as at all a good thing. Things like Facebook and Google ads can be framed as a good thing for the user and for some users often are useful. I just don't see how this type of monetization is ever in the users interest unless it is bundling mutually useful software to the app being downloaded (which isn't usually the case). This isn't to say that these installers shouldn't be allowed to exist. Just that in general I hold YC to a higher standard. If they want to go that way, that is fine, just begins to change my opinion on the program.

OGinparadise 14y ago
"Things like Facebook and Google ads can be framed as a good thing for the user and for some users often are useful." Google ads are useful but almost always if you follow up you will end up paying a lot more vs scrolling down to skip the ads. Ads cost money and all and eventually someone has to pay that.
- robryan 14y ago
  I am not so sure about that, good organic results generally cost money as well. I have never seen my Google ads as a cost center that is forcing up prices, but positive ROI customer acquisition.
  - OGinparadise 14y ago
    Long story but they are two different things: when you are forced to buy ads because your traffic crashes due to algorithm and UI changes things aren't as peachy as "let's spend $50K acquiring new customers and see how it goes." The small Adwords fish will eventually be eaten by ebay, Macys Amazon and other big spenders. These days, searching for items and commercial topics, all I see is ads in the first page or two so for traffic ads are it. In fact, many times I click without realizing I clicked on an ad. Low and behold traffic to other sites from Google is collapsing (1) and while good organic may cost money they should cost a lot less than $x to $xx for each click. 1 (for the second year in the row users are doing less desktop searches on Google and Google's ad clicks have increased by a lot so it's simple math)

by robryan 14y ago

OGinparadise 14y ago

"Things like Facebook and Google ads can be framed as a good thing for the user and for some users often are useful." Google ads are useful but almost always if you follow up you will end up paying a lot more vs scrolling down to skip the ads. Ads cost money and all and eventually someone has to pay that.

robryan 14y ago
I am not so sure about that, good organic results generally cost money as well. I have never seen my Google ads as a cost center that is forcing up prices, but positive ROI customer acquisition.
- OGinparadise 14y ago
  Long story but they are two different things: when you are forced to buy ads because your traffic crashes due to algorithm and UI changes things aren't as peachy as "let's spend $50K acquiring new customers and see how it goes." The small Adwords fish will eventually be eaten by ebay, Macys Amazon and other big spenders. These days, searching for items and commercial topics, all I see is ads in the first page or two so for traffic ads are it. In fact, many times I click without realizing I clicked on an ad. Low and behold traffic to other sites from Google is collapsing (1) and while good organic may cost money they should cost a lot less than $x to $xx for each click. 1 (for the second year in the row users are doing less desktop searches on Google and Google's ad clicks have increased by a lot so it's simple math)