Forum Moderators: werty
"Content is where I expect much of the real money will be made on the Internet, just as it was in broadcasting."
"For the Internet to thrive, content providers must be paid for their work. The long-term prospects are good, but I expect a lot of disappointment in the short-term as content companies struggle to make money through advertising or subscriptions. It isn't working yet, and it may not for some time."
The article:
[microsoft.com...]
So how do we define long term and short term? The short term has been ten years now!
What percentage of content providers are being paid for their work? Or are search engines, directories, scrapers, and MFA's King? Retailers are really paid for their products, not their content. Ebay is paid for it's services, not it's content.
Would a convenient, low cost, wireless, light weight, web reader (Formerly known as a book or newspaper) help make the content publisher king? They are on the way in the "short term". Is this when content will rule?
Which came first the chicken or the egg?
Which came first the content or the Search Engine?
Which came first the content or the Advertiser?
The second and third questions can be answered! Who's making the most income? The ones closest to the cash flow!
Adsense began in 2003 and the Pay per page has steadily declined. Some will say this is a quality or competition issue but perhaps Adsense should be considered a monopoly, AND, Google is pushing the pricing so low they are attempting to eliminate all competition. (Of course they are pushing prices up for poor quality ads, October 1st will be a big day for Adwords and Adsense.
See the Adword API changes, I think we'll see fewer Ebay ads, October 1st!
[google.com...]
[adwordsapi.blogspot.com...]
[adwordsapi.blogspot.com...]
It certainly would be interesting if content publishers could set the minimum price per click per page!
I'd set some of my pages at a penny a click, would you? Of course some pages could demand $0.50 to $1.00. A lot of work I know but then so is sitemap.xml
Just stirring the pot, to see what comes up!
2) A publisher-set minimum EPC wouldn't necessarily increase publisher earnings. If anything, it could decrease publisher earnings by causing PSAs to display instead of ads.
I think we'll see fewer Ebay ads, October 1st
What's your line of reasoning there? Are you assuming that orgs the size of eBay don't get special deals with AdWords?
2) A publisher-set minimum EPC wouldn't necessarily increase publisher earnings. If anything, it could decrease publisher earnings by causing PSAs to display instead of ads.
Wrong. Publishers will be able to display better paying ads from other networks when AS minimum EPC hasn't been met.
Don't bet on google providing you with this feature anytime soon though. Why would they when they can instead fill the gap with ridiculously low paying (pay per impression) ads.
Yes I know, It does not make sense at first, why would google fill ad space with low paying (pay per impression) ads?. Now ask yourself how many sites out there are running adsense, MILLIONS. Combine the number of total network daily impressions and you get gaziliaions of page impressions per day across the entire network, now multiple that by a couple of cents....billions of dollars that are being siphoned by Google under our Radars, while publishers are being left with poor/questionable "smart pricing" excuses and a couple of cents per 1000 impressions to brag about here.
[edited by: Web_speed at 1:14 am (utc) on Aug. 17, 2006]
Wrong. Publishers will be able to display better paying ads from other networks when AS minimum EPC hasn't been met.
Sure, if AdSense served the publisher's alternative ads or defaults if the minimum wasn't met, as is done with PSAs. That isn't likely to happen (as both of us agree).
Don't bet on google providing you with this feature anytime soon though. Why would they when they can instead fill the gap with ridiculously low paying (pay per impression) ads.
Well, they need to deliver inventory for low-bid ads, too--and to publishers whose clicks don't convert and are therefore "smart-priced." They'd be nuts to let every two-bit publisher with delusions of grandeur say "I won't serve AdSense ads unless I'm paid a quarter or fifty cents a click."
billions of dollars that are being siphoned by Google under our Radars, while publishers are being left with poor/questionable "smart pricing" excuses and a couple of cents per 1000 impressions to brag about here.
"Siphoned"? Can you supply evidence for that claim? It sounds to me like sour grapes (as does the reference to "poor/questionable 'smart pricing' excuses"). Also, if you don't like site-targeted CPM ads, or if they pay poorly on your site, you can opt out of them by e-mailing AdSense Support, as other publishers have done.
"Siphoned"? Can you supply evidence for that claim? It sounds to me like sour grapes (as does the reference to "poor/questionable 'smart pricing' excuses"). Also, if you don't like site-targeted CPM ads, or if they pay poorly on your site, you can opt out of them by e-mailing AdSense Support, as other publishers have done.
Pile of smoke screening carp. But we've been through this allready did'nt we EFV? a broken record at it's best....amuzing realy.
[edited by: Web_speed at 6:09 am (utc) on Aug. 17, 2006]
If you truly believe that you're being ripped off by a business, why on earth would you go on letting that business control your income?
If Google allowed you to set the price per page, then pretty much everybody would set it to some rediculous level, and then page impressions would drop to 0, as well as the VAST majority of advertisers leaving the platform because it's just not a good ROI.
The advertisers must be kept happy first and foremost, because without them, then neiter we, nor Google makes any money.
