posted on May, 7 2009 @ 03:04 PM
Internet advertising has been suffering for years. The tracking of ads and such leads to 100% knowledge of your ROI. You can know exactly how
much money an ad is making you, or if it is costing you money, based on how many "orders" or how much money you make off the traffic. If an ad
doesn't work, or doesn't make profit, then you turn it off.
In TV, magazines and radio these things are not possible. You can't track them down like this, and so what you really get in them is "branding".
And branding you can't really track, and it doesn't get paid for very often on the internet. Only the larger companies care about branding
themselves usually. The small business guy just wants to get buyers and make some cash.
So the amount internet advertising brings in has already dropped tons over the past 10 years. Especially so back when there was the "dot com"
crash. Internet advertising went from PPM, which is a branding type payrate, where you get paid based on the number of times the ad shows(ideal for
the site), to PPC, which is where you get paid, and the advertiser only pays for unique clicks on an ad. To PPA, which is price per action. Where
you only get paid for how many sales you generate. This would be like infomercials on TV, and is the worse way generally for the site, but best for
the advertiser. But it kills the revenue of a website. Unless the website is specifically designed in order to produce sales for such a produce.
And information sites don't generally do that. They would flop on a site like ATS for example. That is why they have such long commercials for
those on TV, because it requires that much of a specialization.
So paying for content is nothing new. Many have tried it, but I don't see many succeeding at it. But local newspapers and things which sell their
content in other ways, like subscriptions are best equipped and have had the most success at doing this. Because they have other sources of income
and can build their users that way. IE: If you have a subscription to your local paper, you are allowed online access for free. But someone else
might have to pay for a subscription.
Personally I don't think it's that big of a deal. Most companies have already found ways of dealing with these things, it seems to be mostly big
companies with inflated costs who have trouble. Don't really care if these places charge a subscription fee.
Btw, I am against net neutrality. By adding the regulation you are saying it's ok to add regulations, even if the regulation itself seems to be
good. Seems fine today without net neutrality, so why do we need it? Just the start of regulating things is all that is.