One way to look at this is that you're purchasing your own attention.
An ad supported site works like this:
1. They spend effort producing some content.
2. You want to give all of your attention to that content.
3. Advertisers also want your attention.
4. To support their efforts, the creator diverts a fraction of your attention away from the content to the ad and the advertiser pays them for it.
With this system, you basically bid and buy back that fraction of the attention diverted to advertising, and that money goes directly to the creator.
One really interesting aspect of this is determining what your own attention is "worth" on the open market. By building this on top of AdWords system, they can calculate that automatically. If advertisers decide your attention is worth more and want to keep those ads in front of your face, they have to pay more, which again goes to the content creator.
Brilliant? Is it brilliant to simply revert to how the free market is supposed to work, where consumers pay producers because they think the product is worth it?
Ad-supported sites fool consumers into thinking they're getting something for free, when in fact they're still paying, just indirectly . And not just the original straight-up price, but a host of additional costs[1]. Don't believe me? Where do you think the advertisers get the money to buy ad space? Of course it's baked into the products consumers buy from them. There is no free lunch.
What does it say about your product if users aren't willing to pay for it? What does it say about your business when you tell users its free but don't tell them you've hidden your charges in the prices of the products that are advertised? That it's actually costing them more?[1]
That's amazing. Google has taken over the web with ads. And now that everybody hates ads, it's suggesting you remove those ads with another Google product. It doesn't get any smarter than that.
(this is not sarcasm, I actually think this is amazing in terms of strategy)
Yeah, not only that but it's not easy for an org as big as Google to experiment with stuff like this when they have a huge advertising operation that's trying to sell more ads, not less. Moves like this have to be top down driven by a strong leader.
> And now that everybody hates ads, it's suggesting you remove those ads with another Google product. It doesn't get any smarter than that.
...but how will they grow revenue in ~5 years when everyone has paid to remove ads?
Won't they put themselves out of business because if nobody is looking at ads, nobody will be paying for ads, so then there won't be any ads to display, and everyone will stop paying to not see ads.
It's just weird because those are sites that people only go to because they are too cheap to pay for quality content. Why would they pay for these sites?
They're starting incredibly small with 10 publishers. Users have a bigger incentive to signup when ads will be removed from a large number of sites they visit. For example, if I just use Imgur, why don't I just upgrade to Imgur Pro for the same price, get the ads removed, and the extra Imgur perks? Now, if Google ads would be removed from a dozen of the most popular sites I visit, then yes, I'd consider it. I'm hoping this doesn't fail due to lack of publishers. Google has a tendency to lock everyone out for too long, so I'm worried it'll be another invite only flop.
so if I am reading this right this is a potential competitor to patreon?
Interesting concept. Let me pay some money that gets split between the sites I actually visit and get out of seeing ads - I wonder how many users of adblock today would use this instead. I guess the problem is that google isn't the only ad network.
Patreon has the key advantage of creating a direct emotional link with one person, or a small group of creators. Asking people to support a mostly faceless company is a much harder sell.
There's an enormous gap between Mashable and Jim Sterling, or Red Letter Media. Creating something people care about is doable, but being someone that people care about is far more difficult for any of the listed publishers.
I agree. When it comes down to it, I would pay 100$/m for the top 10 ad supported websites i use the most.
The thing to keep in mind is that the ad supported model is amazing for trying things out, so we really need both.
Having used gmail since I was in high school, I would not have been able to pay for it then, but nowadays its invaluable, and 10$/m is a drop in the bucket.
< how much would you pay?
$0.00 Zip. If I have to pay, I go away. Looking back to my pre HTML Labs days, I don't think I ever go to the same site(s) longer than a year or so. Nothing regularly.
I had an interesting self discovery. After I insulted a coworker for not being able to think for himself; always parroting Rush, he challenged me to listening to his radio show for one week. I did. I was surprised at what I learned.
I never, ever listen or watch commercials. It's subconscious. I could not change the radio during commercials as I had to listen to his show. It KILLED me. I NEVER listen to commercials.
Then I realized I flip if I watch TV. If I listen to radio, I change the station automatically when I hear a commercial. YouTube, turn down sound. Automatically. TV shows, watch after it starts so I can fast forward via Tivo.
Same goes for anything pay online. See a pay requirement? Go away. I realize I don't buy any online content; No site I have ever gone to is worth paying (directly).
By the way, I pay for internet access 4 ways each month; cable ($50); two phones ($100); library internet access ($~100 via property taxes used to fund town library). I pay enough.
How does this work for me as a user? If I pay Google contributor $1 a month, do I see any ads at all in participating sites? Or do I only get a limited number of impressions ad-free, to encourage me to increase my spending?
How does this work for publishers? Do they get paid a fixed amount per impression? Is it proportional to the time spent on the website? Does the website benefit from having higher spenders visit their website?
It is encouraging to see Google working on a new product to help publishers generate revenue, but it looks like it only disables Google advertising. Most publishers use multiple ad platforms. Unless those are disabled too, users may question the value of donating money if it's not creating a true ad-free experience.
In other words, you want free content. But content costs time and money to produce. And content is inevitably colored by the source of the money. When the source is advertising, the content you receive is optimized for advertising. Of course, this is not a problem if you're happy with the content you're getting now.
Because they had said they track me to show me those ads and now that I've paid them to remove those ads, I hope they can stop tracking me, shall they?
It looks like they keep an ad-shaped piece of the page to avoid breaking the layout of the page. Does the number of ad spots change the amount they get per page view?
10 sites the user visits daily (for argument's sake)
3 pages visited per site (for argument's sake)
30 days per month
=>
Each site: $3 * 1/10 * 1/30 => $0.01/day/user
Each page: $0.01/day/user over 3 sites/user/day => ~$3.33 CPM.
--
Publishers right now average higher (~$5, up to $15) CPM, so this sounds like something that will lose them money for a non-biased set of users. Of course, maybe this selects for folks who otherwise wouldn't click on ads... I guess we will find out. It could also just select for publishers that are not able to monetize their content effectively.
[+] [-] munificent|11 years ago|reply
An ad supported site works like this:
1. They spend effort producing some content. 2. You want to give all of your attention to that content. 3. Advertisers also want your attention. 4. To support their efforts, the creator diverts a fraction of your attention away from the content to the ad and the advertiser pays them for it.
With this system, you basically bid and buy back that fraction of the attention diverted to advertising, and that money goes directly to the creator.
One really interesting aspect of this is determining what your own attention is "worth" on the open market. By building this on top of AdWords system, they can calculate that automatically. If advertisers decide your attention is worth more and want to keep those ads in front of your face, they have to pay more, which again goes to the content creator.
I think it's brilliant.
[+] [-] eevilspock|11 years ago|reply
Ad-supported sites fool consumers into thinking they're getting something for free, when in fact they're still paying, just indirectly . And not just the original straight-up price, but a host of additional costs[1]. Don't believe me? Where do you think the advertisers get the money to buy ad space? Of course it's baked into the products consumers buy from them. There is no free lunch.
What does it say about your product if users aren't willing to pay for it? What does it say about your business when you tell users its free but don't tell them you've hidden your charges in the prices of the products that are advertised? That it's actually costing them more?[1]
-
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8585237
[+] [-] conradk|11 years ago|reply
(this is not sarcasm, I actually think this is amazing in terms of strategy)
[+] [-] peloton|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] grecy|11 years ago|reply
...but how will they grow revenue in ~5 years when everyone has paid to remove ads?
Won't they put themselves out of business because if nobody is looking at ads, nobody will be paying for ads, so then there won't be any ads to display, and everyone will stop paying to not see ads.
(genuine question)
[+] [-] minimaxir|11 years ago|reply
Er, aren't most of the listed parters known for reposting unoriginal content from other parts of the web?
I'm a fan of Patreon because it helps facilitate good original content which the internet needs. This doesn't.
[+] [-] Filligree|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] judk|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Throwaway12928|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bsimpson|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] netcraft|11 years ago|reply
Interesting concept. Let me pay some money that gets split between the sites I actually visit and get out of seeing ads - I wonder how many users of adblock today would use this instead. I guess the problem is that google isn't the only ad network.
[+] [-] Filligree|11 years ago|reply
I bet this'll be a powerful incentive for publishers who don't want to annoy their users to switch to adsense.
[+] [-] TillE|11 years ago|reply
There's an enormous gap between Mashable and Jim Sterling, or Red Letter Media. Creating something people care about is doable, but being someone that people care about is far more difficult for any of the listed publishers.
[+] [-] rgovind|11 years ago|reply
For me, it comes to $100+ per month but that seems like a steep price to pay.
[+] [-] hayksaakian|11 years ago|reply
The thing to keep in mind is that the ad supported model is amazing for trying things out, so we really need both.
Having used gmail since I was in high school, I would not have been able to pay for it then, but nowadays its invaluable, and 10$/m is a drop in the bucket.
[+] [-] Filligree|11 years ago|reply
How do you compute that number?
[+] [-] lettercarrier|11 years ago|reply
I had an interesting self discovery. After I insulted a coworker for not being able to think for himself; always parroting Rush, he challenged me to listening to his radio show for one week. I did. I was surprised at what I learned.
I never, ever listen or watch commercials. It's subconscious. I could not change the radio during commercials as I had to listen to his show. It KILLED me. I NEVER listen to commercials.
Then I realized I flip if I watch TV. If I listen to radio, I change the station automatically when I hear a commercial. YouTube, turn down sound. Automatically. TV shows, watch after it starts so I can fast forward via Tivo.
Same goes for anything pay online. See a pay requirement? Go away. I realize I don't buy any online content; No site I have ever gone to is worth paying (directly).
By the way, I pay for internet access 4 ways each month; cable ($50); two phones ($100); library internet access ($~100 via property taxes used to fund town library). I pay enough.
[+] [-] Flimm|11 years ago|reply
How does this work for publishers? Do they get paid a fixed amount per impression? Is it proportional to the time spent on the website? Does the website benefit from having higher spenders visit their website?
[+] [-] ealize|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ilamont|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tonydiv|11 years ago|reply
I really can't even use the Internet without Adblock. I install it on every computer I use.
I don't think this will succeed. I am not willing to pay when I have other options available.
[+] [-] dalek_cannes|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jacques_chester|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Nogwater|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ismavis|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|11 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] rgovind|11 years ago|reply
Also, this ties in with Google's efforts in payment space.
[+] [-] kissickas|11 years ago|reply
https://www.google.com/contributor/welcome/
[+] [-] balladeer|11 years ago|reply
Because they had said they track me to show me those ads and now that I've paid them to remove those ads, I hope they can stop tracking me, shall they?
[+] [-] sp332|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] schmrz|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] opinali|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chris_va|11 years ago|reply
--
$3/month/user
10 sites the user visits daily (for argument's sake)
3 pages visited per site (for argument's sake)
30 days per month
=>
Each site: $3 * 1/10 * 1/30 => $0.01/day/user
Each page: $0.01/day/user over 3 sites/user/day => ~$3.33 CPM.
--
Publishers right now average higher (~$5, up to $15) CPM, so this sounds like something that will lose them money for a non-biased set of users. Of course, maybe this selects for folks who otherwise wouldn't click on ads... I guess we will find out. It could also just select for publishers that are not able to monetize their content effectively.
[+] [-] hayksaakian|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Throwaway12928|11 years ago|reply