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

Adfree Cities

adfreecities.org.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 278 posts

Re: Adfree Cities

#131

Post by celestialcheese »

Y_Y wrote: post #125
celestialcheese wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So the possibility that the space remains ad-free doesn't exist? It does exist, but then the cost of the bike sharing would have be borne by a) users of the bike system - this would impact ridership and equity of access. b) local govt - budget would have to come from somewhere. considering b) would likely mean that the project wouldn't get past planning, really a) is the only alternative. Everything is a tradeoff.…

This is shitty equity too though, I can't ride bikes but I still have to look at your ads and make do with worse economies of scale for public transportation that's accesible to the disabled. If bike share is a public good. It should be paid for out of public funds, if the city decides to sell advertising rights in public spaces then it can. Those two ideas need not be linked, money is fungible!

If public funds pay for it, you personally (assuming you pay taxes) are also paying for the program, but this time with real dollars instead of attention.

> money is fungible

What?

Re: Adfree Cities

#132

Post by marssaxman »

Y_Y wrote: post #122
tylervigen wrote: post #6

I have personally gotten very aggressive at removing as many ads from my life as I can. I pay for the "premium" version of everything I can to remove ads (Spotify, YouTube, podcast subscriptions) and use adblocker aggressively. It's so much nicer than the alternative. There are two places where ads remain: 1) Social media where the ads are integrated and not blocked (Facebook, YouTube in-video promos) 2) Billboards i…

There used to be a widget you could get from the likes of ThinkGeek that would spam the "off" IR signal for lots of tvs and commercial displays. I remember seeing it as a neat trick twenty years ago, but more and more.I wish I really had one. Lots of storefronts have absurdly bright screens on all night now, project moving shit onto the sidewalk and just generally bombard your vision with distraction. I imagine you c…

You are likely thinking of the Tv-B-Gone:

https://www.tvbgone.com/

Re: Adfree Cities

#133

Post by karaterobot »

bluGill wrote: post #86
karaterobot wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be speaking about Big Tech as though they were the ones who are buying physical advertisements, rather than selling them. I think Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. mostly place digital ads for businesses, which would not be affected by a ban on physical ads in cities. The parties affected by a ban on physical ads like billboards in large cities would mostly be the large companies who buy them. Small busines…

You picked small business that wouldn't buy billboard ads. I see local restaurants and hotels on billboards all the time: they are targeting non-locals who might use that business if they only new how close it was.

I don't remember seeing too many of those billboards, but I'll take your word that they're out there. Most of the billboards I recall seeing are telling me all my dreams will come true if I go to a tribal casino. I still think most people just look up local restaurants on their phones. I can't imagine the lack of billboards would hurt too many small, local restaurants.

Re: Adfree Cities

#134

Post by amadeuspagel »

ponector wrote: post #20
amadeuspagel wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a good trade, there shouldn't be a monopoly on public ads, local businesses should be able to reach consumers without having to go through a monopolist that captures all of the value.

The alternative is to not have a cheap popular bikeshare system. Also with monopolist it is really easy to keep some standards, quality of the ads.

I don't know what to say here anymore. Is this city not capable of collecting taxes? Is this how they pay for any sort of public infrastructure? What monopoly did they exchange to have some private company build and maintain roads, pipes and cables?

Re: Adfree Cities

#135

Post by codexb »

amadeuspagel wrote: post #9

The fact that you can advertise in cities is the reason that big tech doesn't capture 100% of profits in every single market. Advertising in cities, from billboards to flyers to stickers is the only way to reach people directly, without going through an intermediary big tech monopoly. I have a sense that the people most likely to support this thing also whine a lot about big tech, so this is just another bullet point…

Eh, most small to medium size towns in the US have ordinances and zoning restrictions that effectively outlaw this type of fixed advertising. Many outlaw billboards and Businesses can only have a single sign and it has to be within a certain size.

You can still advertise in those areas, you just have to do it through mediums like bulletins, mailers, sponsorships, media and print -- things that are generally easier to avoid and opt-out of.

Re: Adfree Cities

#136

Post by amadeuspagel »

JambalayaJim wrote: post #24
amadeuspagel wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a good trade, there shouldn't be a monopoly on public ads, local businesses should be able to reach consumers without having to go through a monopolist that captures all of the value.

Local businesses would benefit substantially from the bikeshare service though.

Not if that bikeshare service captures all their profits by having a monopoly on ads.

Re: Adfree Cities

#137

Post by [deleted] »

tylervigen wrote: post #6

I have personally gotten very aggressive at removing as many ads from my life as I can. I pay for the "premium" version of everything I can to remove ads (Spotify, YouTube, podcast subscriptions) and use adblocker aggressively. It's so much nicer than the alternative. There are two places where ads remain: 1) Social media where the ads are integrated and not blocked (Facebook, YouTube in-video promos) 2) Billboards i…

[deleted]

Re: Adfree Cities

#139

Post by [deleted] »

amadeuspagel wrote: post #9

The fact that you can advertise in cities is the reason that big tech doesn't capture 100% of profits in every single market. Advertising in cities, from billboards to flyers to stickers is the only way to reach people directly, without going through an intermediary big tech monopoly. I have a sense that the people most likely to support this thing also whine a lot about big tech, so this is just another bullet point…

[deleted]

Re: Adfree Cities

#140

Post by celestialcheese »

digging wrote: post #115
celestialcheese wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > Advertising in cities, from billboards to flyers to stickers is the only way to reach people directly > Most billboards are from [inter]national corporations. Local businesses usually rely on the most effective form of advertising, word-of-mouth. Some of the most successful local businesses in my city have literally never paid for advertising. Are they? From my experience, at least on roads here in the US, the ma…

I could be wrong. Maybe the majority are those sorts of local businesses. What I never seem to see is local businesses I actually want to visit. The cool vintage stores, the goth stores, the retro game shops, the hole-in-the-wall Filipino restaurants, the local craft supply stores, the cat cafes, the weird toy stores, the artisan candy stores, the dubious bone and bone decor shops, the gay book stores, the Japanese i…

> vintage ... retro ... hole in the wall .. weird ... artisan .. dubios

The adjectives you used are the opposite of mass market. Thus mass-market advertising doesn't work, so those businesses don't spend money in those channels.

The ads that work on billboards are very high dollar services businesses, or multi-nationals who need to spend through budgets everywhere for neilsen scores.

For example: insurance, lawyers and RE agents - they need to build "trust" through name recognition so when you do decide to make that purchase/call, you call them first.

A retro game store billboard would be awesome - but how many people driving the interstate are interested in vintage games vs how many people will be buying a home in their lifetime?

There's nothing stopping any business from buying billboards, but the economics just don't make sense apart from the whole "getting your face on a billboard" schtick that's fun.

On the flip side, if you've ever been to a local sporting event like farm league baseball or local race track, you'll see all sorts of billboards for funky little local shops and services. That's cause the ads cost a couple hundred bucks and come with perks like tickets for your employees, and you're supporting your local community, so the ROI doesn't really matter.

Roadside billboards cost thousands per month and typically come with pretty high minimums.

Post reply on HN