181–190 of 247 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I remember your name (also from last.fm I believe!). Small world!
If you want to grab a cold or hot beverage in Berlin, I’m about to visit my wife in Berlin-Charlottenburg (she‘s there for a few months) soon
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have to assume they have considered this in the past and come to the conclusion it just doesn't work. I suspect tying a purchasing decision to every page visit just leads to people automatically backing out of the page with a very low conversion rate because it's just too annoying to decide whether to pay for something you're not sure the value of. Despite all the gnashing of teeth, nothing competes with ads on th…
Since most news publications are failing businesses I would not immediately assume they have considered all avenues of monetization. I agree that ads have historically made a lot of money...but I am thinking of the paywalled industry. I am probably in the minority but I would be interested if any of the major publications had data on this kind of strategy. I realize there have been products including Flattr that did…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sometimes i feel like people make too much of the "parasocial" buzzword, as if its new. Entertainers have been doing the pass the hat thing for hundreds of years. It is not a new phenomenom. Historically, it has generally worked for entertainers, and i guess religion. I don't think there are historical paralells to open source really. Maybe it just doesn't work for that sort of thing.
Yes but entertainers always remained on stage, they didn't enter your home (as smart phones allow) and talk to you 1 on 1.
And when there's 15 people watching, that does enable real conversations.
I frequently hear and read people not wanting to sponsor some youtube channel or podcast they consume for hours a week because it's "not that good". If you spent the time there, they deserve your money. I really feel for creators who produce popular material, but don't get as much remuneration as content that people are prouder of liking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't Twitch very much a net loss?
Twitch loses money because Amazon has decided to make Twitch lose money. Why? Because Amazon is charging themselves for the infrastructure Twitch uses (ie AWS). It does that to justify cutting revenue splits (of subscriptions and ads) and increasing ad density. The minimum ad density now is generally 4 minutes per hour. Example: say I'm Pottery Barn and I sell furniture in the US. I sell a table for $500. It costs $1…
You have it backwards: transfer pricing is legal, profit shifting is not.
Transfer pricing is the legal term used to refer to the establishment of prices between related entities pursuant to regulations. The transfer pricing regulations were created to cut down on profit shifting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Information_Exchange
As an experiment, I wrote a short article and offered it for ten cents.
And one person paid me that dime! Exciting times.
(The Wikipedia article says that $1 was the minimum price, but this must have been before that was set.)
Microsoft was paying me a dollar a word for my MSJ (Microsoft Systems Journal) articles, so that worked out better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pff, I love Patreon and I feel like that is basically "micropayments that actually work". If you look at Scott McCloud's original proposal for micropayments ([1], parts 5/6), the only thing that's really not viable is the idea that every reader paying 25¢/mo would work - in practice, transaction fees mean that about $2/mo is the minimum viable payment to actually mean something, especially when you factor in that you…
> in practice, transaction fees mean that about $2/mo is the minimum viable payment to actually mean something another person who doesn't know about PayPal's micropayment account fees. They save us (ardour.org) about 23c per US$1 transaction, and we get the majority of our income from US$1 transactions. Instead of the usual 3.5% + 49c fixed fee on the order of 30c, PayPal' structure for this is more like 9c fixed + 4…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> in practice, transaction fees mean that about $2/mo is the minimum viable payment to actually mean something another person who doesn't know about PayPal's micropayment account fees. They save us (ardour.org) about 23c per US$1 transaction, and we get the majority of our income from US$1 transactions. Instead of the usual 3.5% + 49c fixed fee on the order of 30c, PayPal' structure for this is more like 9c fixed + 4…
9c fixed + 4.99% is ~10.2 cents fee for the proposed 25 cents/mo micropayment in the post you're replying to. How is that good? It's better, sure, but that's still handing over 41% of your income to PayPal.
Yes, for 25c payments, especially one-off's, the systems are not there at this time.
[1]: https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/05/adblock-plus-acquires-flat...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sadly agree. I still wish when it came to news sites there was a micropayment option so I could read a single article for $0.10 or something along those lines.
> so I could read a single article for $0.10 or something along those lines. But there is "something along those lines"; it's called becoming a paid subscriber. When you amortize the expense across every article, you may even be getting a deal! The fact that the example expense you'd be willing to incur to read content you actually enjoy is ten cents speaks to why this model won't work.