Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Inside Medium's Meltdown

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 121 posts

Re: Inside Medium's Meltdown

#91

Post by BinaryIdiot »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #82
avocade wrote: post #72

The usual sensationalistic headline, but the gist of the story is crystal clear: ads and writing is an inherent and probably impossible-to-solve conflict of interest. The media that won't change their business model during the next couple of years will probably be extremely diminished in quality, and thus influence. Can't wait. (And no, the latest fad of "native advertising", with ads disguising as articles, is not t…

Ads + Writing worked just fine for most of the last century when print was the only option. The dead elephant in the room is the fact that the online ad experience is the most irritating and least useful ad experience in all of history. I use Google to search for A Certain Thing to buy, I buy it, and BAM - I spend the next month getting ads for the same Certain Thing. The ads are completely useless to me, because I'm…

> I use Google to search for A Certain Thing to buy, I buy it, and BAM - I spend the next month getting ads for the same Certain Thing.

Yeah Google ads are awful now. The best bang for your bank, ads wise? Facebook and Super Bowl commercials.

> Print ads, especially in the glossy predecessors of what Medium would like to be, were often professional, creative, and at least potentially interesting.

When was the last time you purchased a product with print ads? I used to subscribe to a ton of magazines a little over a decade ago but cancelled them all because for every 1-2 articles of content there were 3-4 ads. It got to the point where I could finish a magazine, cover to cover, in minutes because of how many ads were in there.

Re: Inside Medium's Meltdown

#92

Post by jackgolding »

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #91
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ads + Writing worked just fine for most of the last century when print was the only option. The dead elephant in the room is the fact that the online ad experience is the most irritating and least useful ad experience in all of history. I use Google to search for A Certain Thing to buy, I buy it, and BAM - I spend the next month getting ads for the same Certain Thing. The ads are completely useless to me, because I'm…

> I use Google to search for A Certain Thing to buy, I buy it, and BAM - I spend the next month getting ads for the same Certain Thing. Yeah Google ads are awful now. The best bang for your bank, ads wise? Facebook and Super Bowl commercials. > Print ads, especially in the glossy predecessors of what Medium would like to be, were often professional, creative, and at least potentially interesting. When was the last ti…

Lots of people on /r/juststart think Facebook ads are no good. On firms with lots of brand equity I've foudn both FB and Google to be good. Display ads - not so much

Re: Inside Medium's Meltdown

#93

Post by coldtea »

idiot_stick wrote: post #83
coldtea wrote: post #2

> They were shocked. Their adored boss, billionaire CEO Ev Williams, best known as the cofounder of Twitter, seemed to care so deeply for each of them. LOL, as if CEOs (with the exception of some outliers in small businesses) ever care for their employees at the personal level. As soon as the company is in danger, it's off they go. And when the company does well, they aren't going to share the loot that much either.

> billionaire CEO Ev Williams The fact that you can become a billionaire after founding two money losing enterprises is so confusing.

If you build a restaurant, fail to get customers, and sell it to somebody else who wants to run it for more money than you paid to create it, would you say the same?

It's not money losing as far as Williams is concerned -- somebody paid him mucho dinero for it.

Re: Inside Medium's Meltdown

#95

Post by ThomPete »

dilemma wrote: post #85
ThomPete wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, its not the quality of the content which makes it a business, this is exactly the misunderstanding of the whole mission to save journalism. Its never been a business to begin with.

I never mentioned quality. Prominent writers.

Medium have that. Didn't help them.

Re: Inside Medium's Meltdown

#96

Post by ThomPete »

dilemma wrote: post #84
dpweb wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No sharing. Prominent people's opinions in Medium articles would make news and drive people to Medium content. "Colin Powell calls Trumps immigration policy misguided". That's a global headline. Traffic rules. Everyone tries to think like a VC. Medium will never be the biggest money. What they can do is be the next '60 Minutes', not the biggest, but prestigous and elevating.

Having Powells weekly column is more valuable and provides something you can plan around and build a business model around. You can't do that with social media snippets.

Valuable in what sense though?

You seem to be equating prominent writers with more revenue. But the real question is how do you get enough revenue even with prominent writers. It just' doesn't scale.

Re: Inside Medium's Meltdown

#97

Post by criddell »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #36
madebysquares wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they did turn into a subscription model... what would you be willing to pay per month? 7.99-9.99,maybe 19.99?

Seriously? No. Maybe about the price of a print magazine, though.

Have you ever paid for a print magazine that doesn't have ads? They are usually at least $10.

For some reason, I've started receiving a few magazines at my house that I never asked for: Popular Science, Wired, and Cosmopolitan. They show up for six months, then stop coming. A year later they start again.

Re: Inside Medium's Meltdown

#98

Post by lightedman »

Obi_Juan_Kenobi wrote: post #66
pryelluw wrote: post #48

I feel medium would have a chance if they allowed video and audio content to be published there. They already have the users that produce such content. Imagine it like a youtube/soundcloud for adults (I don't mean pornographic content). They could then sell many products and services around it.

First, I'd love for Youtube to see more competition. But, honestly what Youtube are you using? Despite the glut of kid-oriented content on the site, I see almost none of it. The hobby scene alone is a huge segment of the site and caters more to the 30-60 bracket than any other.

"But, honestly what Youtube are you using? Despite the glut of kid-oriented content on the site, I see almost none of it."

Try being a geologist or gemologist and using Youtube. 95% of searches turn up this crap show called Stephen Universe.

Re: Inside Medium's Meltdown

#99

Post by bambax »

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #91
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ads + Writing worked just fine for most of the last century when print was the only option. The dead elephant in the room is the fact that the online ad experience is the most irritating and least useful ad experience in all of history. I use Google to search for A Certain Thing to buy, I buy it, and BAM - I spend the next month getting ads for the same Certain Thing. The ads are completely useless to me, because I'm…

> I use Google to search for A Certain Thing to buy, I buy it, and BAM - I spend the next month getting ads for the same Certain Thing. Yeah Google ads are awful now. The best bang for your bank, ads wise? Facebook and Super Bowl commercials. > Print ads, especially in the glossy predecessors of what Medium would like to be, were often professional, creative, and at least potentially interesting. When was the last ti…

Amazon ads are no better, and for the exact same reason. I'm old enough to remember when Amazon first appeared, everyone was talking about how they were going to be able to make magic suggestions. Turns out, all the magic is just telling you to buy again what you JUST BOUGHT.

Netflix recommendation engine isn't amazing either -- except that, in the case of Netflix, I often like to watch a show a second time.

Re: Inside Medium's Meltdown

#100

Post by dboreham »

sah2ed wrote: post #86
dboreham wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jim Barksdale : "I'm not your Daddy and this isn't a family"

Mind providing a source for that quote? Both Google and Bing link to your comment as the canonical source for that quote from Barksdale.

Well, I was there so it came from my memory.

Some googling did drag up this interview, so presumably I did not dream it: http://articles.latimes.com/1996-03-17/business/fi-47920_1_n...

Post reply on HN