top | item 45483099

(no title)

arrosenberg | 4 months ago

We need to (once again) define “free” pricing models as predatory and broadly outlaw them. They distort the idea of a free and fair marketplace by poisoning consumer expectations of what things should cost.

discuss

order

JumpCrisscross|4 months ago

> We need to (once again) define “free” pricing models as predatory and broadly outlaw them

Free services funded by ads have been a boon for the poor.

ben_w|4 months ago

That rips off the advertisers and/or leaves the poor poorer.

For any given ad supported service, one of two things must be true:

(1) the ad spend was more than or equal to the cost of the service for those users

(2) the ad spend was less than the cost of the service for those users

From fork (2), it follows that the service isn't sustainable anyway.

From fork (1), it follows that the buyers of the ad slots in turn only make a profit if those ads led to sales higher than the ad spend.

But for any given poor person, buying that which was advertised on the ad supported service necessarily means spending more than they would have on a non-ad-supported version of the same ad supported services.

arrosenberg|4 months ago

I fail to see how. Having ad-subsidized access to Facebook and YouTube has not reduced poverty, hunger or made housing and healthcare more affordable for them. The overwhelming majority have not used it to up-skill or improve their income prospects. Predatory "free" pricing appears to have simply made the poor more easily targeted by propaganda and advertising.

anonymars|4 months ago

Have they though? Have you seen the scammy, misleading, trash ads that litter most sites and wondered, "who falls for this crap and gives these people money?"