A Quote by Craig Mundie
The Internet was full of sites producing content for free, in the hope that somehow they'd generate revenue from sources that never materialized, whether it was advertising, subscriptions, or a wing and a prayer.
Related Quotes
The business model for content is to be paid for it. You can be paid for it either though advertising or subscriptions or some new invention, but right now what we've got is advertising revenue and subscription revenue as the only way to be paid for content.
Never stop testing, and your advertising will never stop improving. Testing was used in advertising decades ago. The internet has made testing so easy that every online marketer can use it to improve advertising results. Google content experiment is a free tool for you to do split testing.
In the Internet economy, information is everything: The more a company knows about a consumer, the more carefully it can tailor its advertising to that customer, and the more revenue it can generate in return.
LinkedIn and Flickr, among other sites, have already proven freemium can generate revenue in the social media context.
We have this fanatical fan base that wants to see us succeed, and so they get it. They get that to get the free content and all of the things we're doing - whether it be the blog, the podcasts, whatever - we need money. We need advertising. If you want us to go hire Michael Rapaport, well guess what, we need revenue to do that.
Advertising is fundamental to the accessibility, affordability and dynamism of the internet, helping to pay for much of the content and services we all enjoy and use for free.
I also don't think all of the revenue will come from digital subscriptions. We have in the New York Times a mix of revenue sources and it will continue to be a mix for quite a while. What makes me more nervous is that we built this newsroom on a really high profit margin that has eroded significantly over the last years. I'm nervous that we won't continue to have the profit margins that allow us to have a big, robust newsroom.
At Verizon, we've been strategically investing in emerging technology, including Verizon Digital Media Services and OTT, that taps into the market shift to digital content and advertising. AOL's advertising model aligns with this approach, and the advertising platform provides a key tool for us to develop future revenue streams.
Why pay a fee for Internet content when a million free sites are just a click away? There's no incentive until people are too addicted to the Net to turn off their computers, yet are bored with what's available.
If you look at firms like General Electric or other large companies, they don't just do one thing; they do many different things to generate sources of revenue.
When you think about advertising, it's understanding that whether it's newspaper, radio, or television, you have to know how to advertise, how to market, because ultimately, everything comes down to ratings and revenue or ratings and subscribers and revenue, whether it's newspapers or radio or television.
Whether it's Baidu or Chinese versions of YouTube or Sina or Sohu, Chinese Internet sites are getting daily directives from the government telling them what kinds of content they cannot allow on their site and what they need to delete.
If you have an internet service provider that's capable of slowing down other sites, or putting other sites out of business, or favoring their own friends and affiliates and customers who can pay for fast lanes, that's a horrible infringement on free speech. It's censorship by media monopolies. It's tragic: here we have a technology, the internet, that's capable really of being the town square of democracy, paved with broadband bricks, and we are letting it be taken over by a few gatekeepers. This is a first amendment issue; it's free speech versus corporate censorship.
Today, we see some "file sharing" sites that rely on fans uploading cracked copies of ebooks, and which then make money off those books by charging for downloads (via cash subscriptions or advertising). Again: I take a dim view of this. They're making money off the back of my work without paying me.
Newspapers are not free and they never have been. They can appear to be so, but someone, somewhere is covering the costs whether that is through advertising, a patron's largesse or a license fee. Advertising is no longer subsidising the industry and so the cost must fall somewhere - why not on the people who use it?
Users want relevant content as advertising. As a result, the distinction between advertising and content is going away. All that matters to a user is relevancy.
