3 ms·

Is this pg giving more hints at a possible implementation of RFS 1? (http://ycombinator.com/rfs1.html http://ycombinator.com/rfs1.html) That would imply that n

by mrshoe 17y ago

Is this pg giving more hints at a possible implementation of RFS 1? (http://ycombinator.com/rfs1.html http://ycombinator.com/rfs1.html) That would imply that no one has approached him with a satisfactory solution. This article seems to indicate that the solution is to simply give content away and figure out a better way to make money off advertising. That's a little more boring than I was hoping for, but sometimes boring ideas work. I'm going to keep my mind churning on something more creative... just in case.

ph0rque 17y ago
Actually I was thinking this was an indication that someone has approached PG with a promising solution; so now he is giving away his thoughts on the problem but not any suggestions of a solution.
- thunk 17y ago
  I thought he made his take on making money with information pretty clear: You make money off information others can make money off :) Now just think about types of information with which people can make money. Hint: It ain't just stock tips.
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
thaumaturgy 17y ago
But people still buy magazines and newspapers all the time. pg, and many others, might not personally find value in that, but enough people do that it's still propping up a rather large industry. Why not sell content to those people? Making money from advertising is fine, too. I mean, someone out there probably has an idea for advertising that can actually give more value back to the advertisers. But, I don't see any reason not to make money off of as many different revenue streams as possible: make money off the content from people that are willing to pay for it; make money from the people willing to pay for tools which will give them free access to content; make money from people that want to aggregate content (and help them to do it); and make money from people that don't mind seeing an ad once in a while.
emfle 17y ago
Here is what I think he might be getting at: Advertisement is not a very effective form of marcomm because people tune it out, and if they don't, they don't believe what the ads say anyway. PR is much more effective. Part of the reason is that if you can make your piece look like a regular article, that in itself makes it more believable. But the other part is that sometimes PR pieces are genuinely useful for the recipient. If I were in the market for a new x, I think I'd want to read the reviews of xs, even if some of them are paid for by manufacturers of xs. Fake Steve often makes fun of the Apple "flaks" and the "hacks" that print the "flaks"s output, but I think many people in the market for Apple products actually like reading the gushing stories about Apple. If PR is the new advertising, then an obvious way to fix the newspapers is to make the relationship with PR companies explicit and charge for it. It's not deceptive if the readers want it and you don't try to hide what you are doing. Charging to make product reviews is one possibility. Offering to write stories about any topic for payment is another, which would make you a direct competitor to PR companies. There is a balance between making high-quality, independent content and making for-pay content that must be carefully managed, but this is not really all that different from today's print media that range from all-ads newspapers with minimal and very crappy journalistic content, to media with high quality journalistic content and almost no ads. A company doing this should probably never offer a positive review for cash, and never offer a positive spin on a topic. Only ever offer a review or a story, with payment due regardless of whether the customer likes it or not. In the end, this would be in the interest of the customers anyway, even though they might not believe that at first.
- pg 17y ago
  Very interesting idea, but not at all what I had in mind.

by mrshoe 17y ago

ph0rque 17y ago

Actually I was thinking this was an indication that someone has approached PG with a promising solution; so now he is giving away his thoughts on the problem but not any suggestions of a solution.

thunk 17y ago
I thought he made his take on making money with information pretty clear: You make money off information others can make money off :) Now just think about types of information with which people can make money. Hint: It ain't just stock tips.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]

thaumaturgy 17y ago

But people still buy magazines and newspapers all the time. pg, and many others, might not personally find value in that, but enough people do that it's still propping up a rather large industry. Why not sell content to those people? Making money from advertising is fine, too. I mean, someone out there probably has an idea for advertising that can actually give more value back to the advertisers. But, I don't see any reason not to make money off of as many different revenue streams as possible: make money off the content from people that are willing to pay for it; make money from the people willing to pay for tools which will give them free access to content; make money from people that want to aggregate content (and help them to do it); and make money from people that don't mind seeing an ad once in a while.

emfle 17y ago

Here is what I think he might be getting at: Advertisement is not a very effective form of marcomm because people tune it out, and if they don't, they don't believe what the ads say anyway. PR is much more effective. Part of the reason is that if you can make your piece look like a regular article, that in itself makes it more believable. But the other part is that sometimes PR pieces are genuinely useful for the recipient. If I were in the market for a new x, I think I'd want to read the reviews of xs, even if some of them are paid for by manufacturers of xs. Fake Steve often makes fun of the Apple "flaks" and the "hacks" that print the "flaks"s output, but I think many people in the market for Apple products actually like reading the gushing stories about Apple. If PR is the new advertising, then an obvious way to fix the newspapers is to make the relationship with PR companies explicit and charge for it. It's not deceptive if the readers want it and you don't try to hide what you are doing. Charging to make product reviews is one possibility. Offering to write stories about any topic for payment is another, which would make you a direct competitor to PR companies. There is a balance between making high-quality, independent content and making for-pay content that must be carefully managed, but this is not really all that different from today's print media that range from all-ads newspapers with minimal and very crappy journalistic content, to media with high quality journalistic content and almost no ads. A company doing this should probably never offer a positive review for cash, and never offer a positive spin on a topic. Only ever offer a review or a story, with payment due regardless of whether the customer likes it or not. In the end, this would be in the interest of the customers anyway, even though they might not believe that at first.

pg 17y ago
Very interesting idea, but not at all what I had in mind.