Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   

   ZOMG CENSORED, Apr 5th, 2006 @ 4:56pm

   
   

   I run a free content site...

   ...A free art class, with free college level lessons (written by myself or another instructor). How to I sustain it? Charge for premium content (lessons assembled in books, video versions of lessons, etc.) Getting the same free stuff in another format. It allows the content to remain essentially free, while giving better stuff a small fee to support upkeep. I personally think it's worked out for the best.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   

   Ryan, Apr 5th, 2006 @ 5:32pm

   
   

   I agree

   I've seen many 'open source' projects where a product is made, and distributed freely open source. Then, there are books written to help use it, or cds or dvds burned of the product that are sold at a price to support the group, and it seems to work wonderfully. The books are made available online, but partially out of convenience and partially wanting to help keep a good resource like yours, or other open source projects going, people buy the books.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   

   Mark, Apr 5th, 2006 @ 7:28pm

   
   

   RE: I run a free content site...

   Yeah, a free art class site... but what about turning a profit. You say that they're willing to get premium content for a small fee. What you get in return is the upkeep of the site. However, if you're a newspaper I'm pretty sure you aren't just having 30 reporters, editors, etc. just for the upkeep... you want to turn a profit for the content you generate. Making a profit for how much you invest is incredibly hard on the internet. Ads? People avoid most of them like the plague. When someone advertises to you on Google and its in your search isn't your search more relevant? And not a paid ad? That's how google works.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   

   Daryl Meissner, Apr 5th, 2006 @ 9:11pm

   
   

   Charging for Content

   I assume we are not counting pornography content which has continued to make money charging for content since very early on in the internet era.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   

   Daniel.son, Apr 6th, 2006 @ 1:04am

   
   

   I try not to pay for things on the web...

   ...especially online content. Not to say that I am a pirate (not to say that I am not). What I mean is that I only subscribe to free services online and I use mainly free software.
   
   Btw... I read somewhere that google is getting into the online dating scene. Another free service to kill off the dying pay services, I suspect.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Apr 6th, 2006 @ 5:58am

   
   

   Nothing more than capatlism at work

   Isn't this the way our captalistic economy is suppossed to work? The value of a newspaper was fouded on the idea that they could deliver a service that someone could not easily get elsewhere. The internet has changed that by making news information easily accessible worldwide. The same holds true for virtually all business models that are founded on taking free content and creating value through distribution.
   
   Porn is an excellent example of how monetization via the web will thrive because the content in and of itself is deemed valuable. Please no slamming me on whetehr you think porn is rightor valuable since the stastics show this is a service many people will pay for. Sports, TV shows, movies, music are all other examples of valuable content that cant be had for free.
   
   Honestly I am not really sure why this shocks anyone since it is a fundamental tenant of the world we live in.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   

   Thomason, Apr 6th, 2006 @ 6:51am

   
   

   Pay for free - no.

   A really hard model to sell! If I go to the Financial Times site, they have a lot of "subscription" stories, as does the WSJ & NYT. So, I just copy the headline, paste it in a news search engine, and voila, I get the story for free elsewhere.
   Why then, would I have any reason to subscribe to or pay to see those other sites????

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Apr 6th, 2006 @ 8:29am

   
   

   RE: Nothing more than capatlism

   This guy is absolutely right! You cannot charge for distribution of content anymore since distribution is essentially free with the Internet. Therefore, distribution channels no longer provide any added value, and industry only pays for value added.
   
   Only content generation and advertisement have any value. To clarify, the RIAA does not generate content. It merely is a distribution channel, and as such adds to value to the music industry. Newspapers are similiar since they all report the exact same associated press stories and talking points.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

9.  

   

   anonymous coward, Apr 6th, 2006 @ 1:17pm

   
   

   How inciteful!

   In other inciteful news, salespeople say that actual selling is toughest part of their job while small business owners say that making enough money to show a small profit is a huge challenge to business survival. In other breaking news, water is still wet!

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment