RE: Will They Pay? Part II

From: John Gaskill <jg_at_info-central-usa.com>
Date: Mon 04 Jun 2001 12:57:35 -0500

ROB FRANKEL <rob_at_robfrankel.com> WROTE:

>Yeah, I don't get what all the fuss is about.

TO WHICH MICHAEL MARTINEZ <michael_at_xenite.org> REPLIED:

>The fuss is about the fact that most commercial sites
>won't be able to charge for content, but some people
>don't seem willing to accept that.

ROB FRANKEL THEN RESPONDED:

>My experience proves you can do it. Easily. Here's
>what I did:

MICHAEL MARTINEZ THEN COMMENTED:

>Sorry, but your experience only proves that you were
>able to do this. FrankelTips may be doing well for you,
>but then, cosmetics did well for Mary Kay, vitamins did
>well for Shaklee, and soap did well for the owners
>of Amway.

>A few people climbed to the top of each sales
>organization, but most people either only made
>modest incomes or lost a lot of money.

There are literally hundreds of different companies
successfully and profitably selling cosmetics, vitamins
and soap in the offline marketplace. If you don't
believe that walk down the aisle in a supermarket
and read some of the labels. Then go to a different
supermarket or health food store and look at some
more. That a few companies dominate a category
is the result of products, service and advertising.

>The fact one person succeeds in any type of revenue-
>generating model doesn't mean it will work for others,
>let alone everyone. No one has ever been able to prove
>that can happen. No one ever will. Basic economics
>teaches us that only a few providers for any goods and
>services are ever needed.

Basic Economics teaches that the number of providers
will increase to satisfy all perceived demand and will
reach equilibrium when demand after demand has been
satisfied. Those providers without customers or profits
disappear from the marketplace or evolve into other
businesses.

According to your statement only a few advertising
agencies are needed, yet there are thousands, both
great and small, many of which are or have been
profitable for years.

> And in the online world, when you're competing with free
> content, charging for content and staying in business
> through content fees is a very rare accomplishment.

Rare but becoming more commonplace.

>Most people really do NOT pay for content, and the
>reason is simple: they are already paying for access to
>a system that was created for the free dissemination of
>information (content). The fundamental purpose of the
>Internet is not changing.

The system (the internet) was created for the purpose
of reducing travel expenses in the U.S. Department of
Defense Budget and to provide a link among defense
installations which would not be severed or destroyed
by the destruction of any single communications hub.

That the world wide web evolved from the internet
neither implied nor guaranteed that the laws of Nature
or Economics are suspended because web surfers
want or believe they are entitled to free content.


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 - 12:57:35 CDT