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

Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads

mattcutts.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 472 posts

Re: Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads

#41

Post by herojan »

bkanber wrote: post #16

This is fascinating. Business model: annoy people so much that they pay you to stop annoying them. Everybody's been talking about the death of display ads, and it looks like Google's paying attention and trying to figure out how to marginalize the ad itself, but still take money on the transaction. Eventually, Google could probably marginalize the ad so much that there are only a rare few display ads left online, and…

The ads aren't there purely to annoy people, they're there to support the content you'd otherwise pay for. The idea of paying them instead of getting ads is also a way to support that content.

Re: Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads

#42

Post by ksk »

skj wrote: post #8
ksk wrote: post #5

> This is cool for several reasons: 4. Google gets paid, rather than all the money going to the actual website.

This is just you buying the ad slot instead of the advertiser. Why should it be any different for the website's income? If anything, more entities bidding for the ad means the prices can go higher and the website gets more money (though I imagine any difference here would be undetectable).

> Why should it be any different for the website's income?

Because the point is that a lot of people who block ads, don't actually like advertising. I would hazard a guess that they want to support websites, but they don't want to support advertising companies, and validate their business.

Re: Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads

#43

Post by malchow »

johnward wrote: post #30
devit wrote: post #12

The biggest problem of this is that it only works on Google's ads, but there are far more obnoxious ads that will result in the user wanting and installing an adblocker anyway, and then why bother with Contributor?

Most users tend to complain about flying, pop ups, auto playing audio/video. Google does none of that. So is there a real benefit here?

Some would say that there are a number of auto-playing audio and app store redirect ads on Doubleclick AdExchange.

Re: Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads

#46

Post by austenallred »

I've been a contributor member for several months now, because I firmly believe in two things:

1. Content creators have to be paid, or much of the web I know and love will cease to exist. 2. Life without ads is much better.

So here's what people need to know about Google contributor:

1. I pay for the highest level available.

2. I love not seeing ads.

3. This only works for Google-based ads, which are certainly common, but are neither the majority of advertising online, nor are they among the more annoying.

4. Contributor doesn't work like an ad blocker, which makes ads just "disappear." Instead, you see a big empty block (that is apparently customizable in some way) that says "Thank you for being a contributor. The ad space is still there, it's just blank. So if half of your page used to be covered in ads, now half your page is covered in little blocks that say, "Thank you for being a contributor."

For example, here's a screenshot of iMore (the site that was used to compare ios9's ad blockers): https://austen-screenshots.s3.amazonaws.com/iMore__The_1_sit... I'd almost prefer ads.

5. This doesn't stop most of your pages from taking forever to load because of JavaScript from other ad networks.

6. I don't care about the tracking/privacy as much as some people, but it doesn't solve that problem either.

So, do I think this is a good idea? Absolutely. I hope Google can expand it, and I will pay. I have no idea how expensive it would be to pay for the disappearance of all ads, but I'd likely do it. (I recognize I'm not the "average" Internet user as far as what I'm willing to pay).

That being said, it does not yet come close to competing with the convenience that an ad-blocker provides (which I don't use out of principle).

It's still early, so I give some leeway, and I like the idea, but as of yet this won't be a game changer. I truly hope it can become one.

Re: Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads

#47

Post by wlesieutre »

malchow wrote: post #43
johnward wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most users tend to complain about flying, pop ups, auto playing audio/video. Google does none of that. So is there a real benefit here?

Some would say that there are a number of auto-playing audio and app store redirect ads on Doubleclick AdExchange.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word#/media/File:Weasel...

Either they do or they don't. A quick google didn't turn anything up, but does someone have a reputable source?

Re: Give Google Contributor a try: Pay to remove ads

#50

Post by Reedx »

hartator wrote: post #21

Has someone tried out to give his own view? It feels it doesn't address the other reasons people use ad blocking: - Fewer HTTP requests (Still have to do all the ad network requests) - Less tracking - Less CPU/RAM usage (Even if there is no render of ads, still have to process the JS from ad networks)

I've been using it for about 6 months. I don't use ad blocking, so it certainly helps. When it happens to replace all ads on a site it feels good, but that's unfortunately rare. :/

I like the idea, but because it's so random it falls into an unsatisfying place most of the time. Really I'd rather it work for most other ad networks instead, since AdSense is among the least offensive. If Google manages to get other networks into the system, it could be really nice.

Post reply on HN