4 ms·

For what it's worth, the early internet was like this too. The early Google made a killing when they realized they could provide a useful service with contextua

For what it's worth, the early internet was like this too. The early Google made a killing when they realized they could provide a useful service with contextually relevant and well placed, but not annoying ads. I don't know what they do nowadays, but back then they were extremely strict about google ad placement on other websites and required that shitty ads were not placed alongside theirs. I have a feeling the companies that figure out how to do this will be successful. There's a difference this time though, Google acted as a portal while apps are destinations. I think this might be important, but I'm not sure.

smoe 12y ago
Yes it already improved a lot. I don't really have insides in the financial aspects of advertising and don't know what would be possible with mobile ads alone. Unlike other startups, the big disadvantage news companies have is, that they need a comparably huge staff and spend a lot on licensing just to get a basic product. But, what makes me angry is that newspapers are probably the industry with the longest experience in how to mix content and advertising into a single product people want. Yet, they ignored the internet for a decade until the money flow from print started to run dry and mobile users started – completely unexpected – to read the products, the news companies considered worthless themselves. Of course it's not all their own fault. But they could have been better prepared.
dougabug 12y ago
Early Google didn't sell search result placement, they focused on superior organic results. It was later that they copied the idea from Overture, a company with much smaller search volume, but which had figured out a successful monetization model for search. Google's organic search results weren't mauled by SEO in the early days. Likewise, in the early days conspicuously avoided ads ("Ads aren't cool" - "The Social Network"). Does anyone want ads on their phone? Or having their smartphone data stream continuously mined by advertising spyware networks? $100/mo, tiny data transfer caps, tiny screen, expensive hw, and an industry salivating at the opportunity to take a bigger chunk of the mobile users' experience. Joy. I kinda thought that phones were a personal communication device, and that for almost a grand for the phone (unsubsidized, thanks Verizon, Steve Jobs RIP), and $100 a month, my phone would serve myself, rather than act as a personal data conduit to data brokers.

smoe 12y ago

Yes it already improved a lot. I don't really have insides in the financial aspects of advertising and don't know what would be possible with mobile ads alone. Unlike other startups, the big disadvantage news companies have is, that they need a comparably huge staff and spend a lot on licensing just to get a basic product. But, what makes me angry is that newspapers are probably the industry with the longest experience in how to mix content and advertising into a single product people want. Yet, they ignored the internet for a decade until the money flow from print started to run dry and mobile users started – completely unexpected – to read the products, the news companies considered worthless themselves. Of course it's not all their own fault. But they could have been better prepared.

dougabug 12y ago

Early Google didn't sell search result placement, they focused on superior organic results. It was later that they copied the idea from Overture, a company with much smaller search volume, but which had figured out a successful monetization model for search. Google's organic search results weren't mauled by SEO in the early days. Likewise, in the early days conspicuously avoided ads ("Ads aren't cool" - "The Social Network"). Does anyone want ads on their phone? Or having their smartphone data stream continuously mined by advertising spyware networks? $100/mo, tiny data transfer caps, tiny screen, expensive hw, and an industry salivating at the opportunity to take a bigger chunk of the mobile users' experience. Joy. I kinda thought that phones were a personal communication device, and that for almost a grand for the phone (unsubsidized, thanks Verizon, Steve Jobs RIP), and $100 a month, my phone would serve myself, rather than act as a personal data conduit to data brokers.