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

The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

tilvids.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 856 posts

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#221

Post by alistairSH »

garciasn wrote: post #209
alistairSH wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

we end up paying more overall A basic Fios TV package is $75/month today. Most streaming services are around $20-$30/month and allow month-to-month plans. You can fairly easily rotate among 4-5 services, using 2-3 at a time, to keep costs lower than with traditional cable. This works pretty well if you have non-specific TV interests. Where they really get you is with sports - that market is super fragmented and getti…

FIOS is only available in limited areas of 9 states. It's not exactly widely available and should not be used as evidence to the contrary of this. If we're using anecdotal evidence, the only Internet I have available to me at my summer home is $110/month 25/2 DSL, without TV. That said, you are spot on, because we are no longer tied into long contracts you can absolutely swap in and out. The problem is that they carr…

Cox Cable is $56/month. Pick whatever TV provider you want, they're all in the $50-$100 range for a basic package in most parts of the US.

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#222

Post by MSFT_Edging »

convolvatron wrote: post #53
brewdad wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your coworker is wise. Economic theory holds that in a truly efficient market, profits approach 0.

does that mean that investment is fundamentally beholden to market inefficiency?

We ship fruit from Argentina where it is grown, to Thailand to be packaged, to the United States to be consumed.

While it may be efficient from the perspective of a spreadsheet, its inefficient due to the external costs, ie pollution from shipping, the delicate nature of just-in-time shipments, etc.

Your fruit cup might cost a bit more if it was to be done all in one place, but I would call that a cost for a less fragile system.

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#223

Post by SoftTalker »

AltruisticGapHN wrote: post #188

I agree with recent TWiT discussion on this : we've had it good for a while - the promise of free internet but all those services cost money to keep running. I don't have an issue with paying Youtube Premium Lite. Where I have an issue with the subs model is you're pay subs to so many services, YT Netflix Twitch, etc. It adds up pretty quickly, and costs way more than traditional TV used to cost. Then there's the iss…

A problem with many paid services is that they still have ads.

Was watching something with my wife the other day (I think it was on HBO streaming) and there were ads? I'm like "hang on we're paying for this, and still have to watch ads?"

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#225

Post by SoftTalker »

garciasn wrote: post #192
AltruisticGapHN wrote: post #188

I agree with recent TWiT discussion on this : we've had it good for a while - the promise of free internet but all those services cost money to keep running. I don't have an issue with paying Youtube Premium Lite. Where I have an issue with the subs model is you're pay subs to so many services, YT Netflix Twitch, etc. It adds up pretty quickly, and costs way more than traditional TV used to cost. Then there's the iss…

This is EXACTLY what cable companies predicted would happen when we went a la carte. They were using their monopoly power to drive down the overall price of packaged TV and by de-bundling, we end up paying more overall. For once they were correct and I apologize for questioning it 15 years ago. That said, I am ok with SOME advertisements to keep the web running. There are two big problems with this: 1. Market investo…

If you're paying more you're probably getting more.

Old cable TV had about 5 channels that I ever watched and 50 that I did not care about.

A sports network + Netflix is not more than cable. If you subscribe to much more than that, you're probably getting more than a bundled cable deal used to provide.

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#226

Post by Aardwolf »

SoftTalker wrote: post #223
AltruisticGapHN wrote: post #188

I agree with recent TWiT discussion on this : we've had it good for a while - the promise of free internet but all those services cost money to keep running. I don't have an issue with paying Youtube Premium Lite. Where I have an issue with the subs model is you're pay subs to so many services, YT Netflix Twitch, etc. It adds up pretty quickly, and costs way more than traditional TV used to cost. Then there's the iss…

A problem with many paid services is that they still have ads. Was watching something with my wife the other day (I think it was on HBO streaming) and there were ads? I'm like "hang on we're paying for this, and still have to watch ads?"

People who pay for stuff are more valuable targets for ads

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#227

Post by makeitdouble »

agnosticmantis wrote: post #51
makeitdouble wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What examples of ad based rising companies do you see ? My first thought was Google, and it's started to plateau in the recent years: https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/GOOGL/alphabet/rev... . Meta also took a dive, and while it was from a sharp turn of the business focus, I'd argue it comes from an attempt to avoid staying on a stagnating market.

At the scale of Google/Meta plateauing could just mean market saturation, not that ads aren’t working anymore. I’d be interested to see data showing that RoI has also been decreasing for advertisers or that advertisers have started to pay less because they don’t find ads worthwhile.

I think the two biggest players plateauing is in itself an interesting indicator.

For instance sister comments are mentionning TikTok growing in revenue, but if Google/Meta were already saturating the market, it means that growth is eating from the other less successful players (Twitter/Reddit ?), and at some point Google and Meta will also see dramatic decreases or TikTok's growth will stop.

That also

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#228

Post by lastofthemojito »

SoftTalker wrote: post #223
AltruisticGapHN wrote: post #188

I agree with recent TWiT discussion on this : we've had it good for a while - the promise of free internet but all those services cost money to keep running. I don't have an issue with paying Youtube Premium Lite. Where I have an issue with the subs model is you're pay subs to so many services, YT Netflix Twitch, etc. It adds up pretty quickly, and costs way more than traditional TV used to cost. Then there's the iss…

A problem with many paid services is that they still have ads. Was watching something with my wife the other day (I think it was on HBO streaming) and there were ads? I'm like "hang on we're paying for this, and still have to watch ads?"

Infuriatingly, Hulu sometimes shows ads even with their more expensive "No Ads" plans: https://help.hulu.com/s/article/ads-no-commercials

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#229

Post by MSFT_Edging »

lettergram wrote: post #84
gleenn wrote: post #5

His two examples are Twitter and Reddit whose ad revenue is dying because those two companies have made huge blunders. Elon seems to almost actively be killing Twitter (which the poster even states). Reddit screwed Apollo and then many of the most popular subreddits protested and did things like show porn on otherwise usually SFW content to prevent Reddit from showing ads and thus killing their profits. Those are big…

I keep asking this because I don’t understand - how is Elon “killing” twitter? I’ve frankly not seen any difference, at all. If anything there’s slightly more activity

Some differences that I've noticed:

1) fake/shell drop shipping companies dominate the ads with nonsense names and computer generated logos. An endless stream of low quality ads as opposed to real companies that used to advertise there.

2) Low effort facebook style posts have began to dominate any reply section, as users who typically had bad posts that saw no engagement, now pay to force people to look at their low effort/hateful/uneducated opinions. (still not gaining many followers but users are now forced to see it over higher quality users).

3) Bot issues are still very much there, every time I make a post with more than a dozen likes, I get 2-3 bot follows that are always a vaguely feminine name and a single post, following hundreds of accounts.

4) API cost increases have hurt positive bot accounts(ie OpossumEveryHour, various "every lot in x" accounts) while tons of crypto scam accounts, tshirt bots, etc have taken over.

5) The general changes to the checkmark system has destroyed the meaning behind the check, it used to serve to ensure accounts were not imposters. Now its simply every guy who watches self help entrepreneur videos has a check.

Just a handful of aspects of the overall degraded experience. Every day the site becomes more hateful and zenophobic, looking more and more like low effort boomer facebook groups every day. Regardless of opinion, the site used to be a place that you could get news from verified sources, follow public figures, and not be inundated literal Nazis. If you own a bar and a couple Nazis are made to feel welcome, you now have a Nazi bar.

Re: The ad-based internet is dying, and it's getting worse in the process [video]

#230

Post by themitigating »

midoridensha wrote: post #91
themitigating wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

15 years ago I worked at Radio Shack in a mall. A woman and her daughter were looking for a cell phone. We sold Verizon cell phone them with a 2 year contract which got you around 400 off the price. The cheapest phone with a contract was $29.00 In the mall were kiosks that sold a slight lower model phone with a tmobile contract but it was free. She asked me if we had any free phones, I said no, and she made a noise a…

Verizon coverage isn't important to everyone: if you don't go to rural areas, it won't be that useful to you.

My example, a real story, was to illustrate that money often drives purchase decisions even if the amount is low and the benefits better.

She didn't ask about what service we had, the benefits, etc

Post reply on HN