Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Sites would love to find other ways to monetize their content, then they can add that revenue to that generated by their ads.


sort by: page size:

What are the other options? Surely, none if them is trivially feasible, otherwise we'd see sites using them instead of the current monetization model?

If people are not willing to pay for content and block ads, affiliate and content marketing schemes might be the future of these sites as well.

So would a lot of large content publishers. Apparently advertising revenue isn't satisfying their needs yet.

I believe you are referring to indirect ways of generating revenue, but recently, publishers seem to be heading more towards direct monetization models. Some examples: News Corp. is giving it a shot with The Daily, the television networks are working with Hulu Plus and the music labels have been selling through iTunes for a while.

Hope I've interpreted your comment correctly, but as far as I know, outside of direct advertisements and collecting data on users that can be sold, there is currently no proven/successful model for monetizing free content.

To speculate, some sort of Gillette model could have potential, but I think it's currently difficult to understand a consumers intent and the types of "add-ons" they would be willing to pay for. Perhaps hard copies of the content that contain something original &/or personalized would have value.


Maybe it could be like YouTube where the creators get part of the ad revenue?

I wish more sites would add a Web Monetization tag so that I can support them passively with my Coil subscription. They will earn more from the time I spend on their sites than from viewing the ads.

> Content has to be monetized in some way -- if not ads, then how?

Charge for it perhaps?


Yeah, we need a new way of monetizing content on the Internet.

Or micropayments :) I understand the aversion to ads but content creators(journalist, musicians, artists, programmers creating oss, etc) and the web as a whole produces useful stuff, it would be good to find a business model which supports them.

sure, feel free to use any of these alternative services that offer a large potential reach and allow easy monetization of user content:

So then find a way to monetise the website.

You can ask users to pay for it just like Netflix, New York Times etc do. Or have advertising.

But of course just like YouTube you then need to factor in their needs.


I think there would be better ways to monetize than that. You could drive massive traffic here if it was collaborative instead of host and customer.

However, Micropayments are not the only alternative to Advertising, subscriptions are another choice which only need to be done once rather than repeatedly.

I'd like to see more site offer an ad-free subscription, in the way that Ars Technica or reddit do, to allow for an alternative to using ads to support content I'm interested in.

Patreon has an interesting model for creative content and one which I think will work for content producers who already have a good fan base.


How sites would make money? I'm not really thinking about that too much right now, but I suppose sites could do all the usual things they do with the current web (advertising, accepting payments via credit card gateways, Bitcoin, Patreon, etc). It doesn't have to be an all-or-nothing proposition and it certainly isn't to me. Some functionality will still require a centralized service?, just not the entire thing.

I agree

Monetization of content is a business opportunity waiting to happen. Something like a network where you put, I dunno $10 per month and every article you read is charged for $0.10, as an example. Or unlimited during the month for $1

If news sites can allow us to Tweet or Fb an article it might be possible to 'coin' an article as well in a seamless manner


Google tried something like that called Google Contributor back in 2017. You could basically just put money in an account, and instead of advertisers buying ads for whatever site you were on, it just took that same money from you and gave it to that site. Honestly a pretty elegant system, but I can kind of picture why it wouldn't have worked out.

I wish I could just directly pay web content creators the equivalent ad revenue that my pageviews would generate.

That's an interesting point. We're working on some AdSense revenue sharing stuff at the moment, thanks for the link.

I think that could be done by adding video content, and monetizing that. The CPM rates for video are much higher.

There are other ways to fund content that doesn’t involve slapping a bunch of third party trackers and running retargetted display ads.

Some examples other than subscriptions would be sponsored content and creating a product such as an ebook or selling products that are related to your content.

next

Legal | privacy