Re: Will They Pay? (was Salon.com and taller ads)

From: John Gaskill <jg_at_info-central-usa.com>
Date: Mon 04 Jun 2001 12:44:01 -0500

MICHAEL MARTINEZ <Michael_at_xenite.org> WROTE:

>To argue or imply that the majority of people are willing
>to pay for content when they clearly are not, and when the
>dot-com meltdown has proven conclusively that online
>content is not a self-sustaining business asset (for the
>vast majority of would-be providers), is a gross waste of
>the time of people subscribing to this list.

Nowhere in my responses to your messages have I
implied or stated directly that the majority of online users
are willing to pay for content.

In fact, I agreed with you that the majority does not want
to pay. BUT,

An individual site operator does not have to be concerned
with the MAJORITY of web surfers when planning or
converting to a paid subscription model. An individual
site operator needs only to find enough subscribers to
reach or exceed the break even point of operation to
remain in business.

>If 1 site can do it, great. But until you show that more
>than 1 site can do it, it's not a practical choice for the
>vast majority of commercial Web site operators. The money
>is not there and making broad generalizations such as "people
>will pay for compelling content" only shows you don't have
>any answers.

Perhaps the list can help you out in that regard.
If there are publishers who charge for content monitoring
this list or people who subscribe to this list paying for an
online subscription, please respond to this post with the
name of the site, service description and URL and a
line or two about how many paid subscribers you have
or why you were willing to pay for a subscription.

Thank you.

BTW, porn sites are categorically exempt since we already
know people pay for porn.

>Let's cut to the chase. If you think there is compelling
>content out there, point me to it. I'm just like 90 percent
>of the surfing marketplace. I don't pay for content. If you
>can find something that compells me to pay, you'll have shown
>you have a point. You're just waving your hands right now,
>saying, "Michael, you're wrong", and making obscure
>references to unnamed sites you say are raking in the big
>bucks.

What is compelling to me may be of little interest to you or
the MAJORITY of people subscribing to the list. That has
been my point throughout this thread and somewhere along
the line you missed it and repeated restatement of the
point don't seem to sink in. You are stuck on the negative
implication of the surveys.

To make a profit in business you do not need 90% of a
potential market (all web surfers in your statistical quotations)
to be your paid customers in order to make a profit. If you
do need 90% penetration, you are destined for failure before
you start 99 times out of 100.

I apologized to the list for any pain following this thread may
have caused you, but I claim responsibility for only half of
that pain.

Regards all,

John

John Gaskill
jg_at_info-central-usa.com
Beta Testers Wanted
Please sign on at: http://Info-Central-USA.com



Received on Mon Jun 04 2001 - 12:44:01 CDT