 egoldstein says: I often think about this and wonder why it has become so expected that services on the web are free. Offline, people don't question paying for things. Ring tones, iphone apps, caller ID all get paid for. But god forbid services like Twitter or Facebook decided to charge $5/month, it would be unacceptable. I don't get it and i think it hurts the web. Too many companies (including mine) that have compelling products can't figure out how to monetize them so they end up giving up enormous equity and control to venture capitalists because that's the only way to keep the lights on. Personally, i think we'd all enjoy the web a lot more if we paid a few more bucks each month for services we enjoy and it became much less about tracking user behavior and serving ads. It would also keep the innovators who create the services in charge instead of venture capitalists...wouldn't that be cool. You have a point about keeping the innovators who create the services in charge instead of venture capitalists but I don't think it's correct to say that everyone would have paid hundreds of dollars in the past for information the can now get with their $20 a month internet service. They would probably sit in the dark and say "Who's Johnny's guest tonight?". And who says we get all this for free? If you are serving ads, and the advertisers are paying you, then the advertisers are recouping their expenditures by charging me their advertising expense every time I buy a product. Same as T.V. is financed by advertising I guess huh? I pay to help alternative press to survive on the net and for games I want to download. I rarely download films though as there is so much to see on my digital t.v. (which I pay for) and my girls say that when they drop the cost of CD's they will start to buy music again but wouldn't be able to buy it because of the price even if it was not on Internet. I wouldn't mind paying to be a part of a sight say like this one. If you had a donation button on the front page, like so many other sights do, then you could recoup some of your losses. This would be a start at least and then go from there. This is a wonderful sight and I know many others feel the same. But I don't like the idea of someone trying to claim a legal right to things I have personally contributed if it turns out that I have an objection to them doing so. well to some people, they could not afford to pay so they would miss out on things. Don't we all pay enough in our lives? I understand how you have to cover your cost, but I feel so sad for the poor people that struggle and the computer is thier "window to the world" I pay for my computer by not buying newspapers. I have a choice between the computer and pay TV. I can't justify the money spent in any other way. It isn't there. I buy a CD once a month, rather than download music. I have to choose carefully and don't have many CDs I don't play often. I have to avoid sites that cost. I'm ok with that. There will always be sites which rely on advertising, or are trying an idea. They will be for me. You can't expect the best for nothing. I think the internet works as TV rather than other services. People paid for the TV and they got the signal for free. People paid for a computer and got the internet content for free. As such do what TV does, put an ad banner at the top of every clip to have revenue. You have huge traffic here so that should work for you. Don't forget you are getting content from the work of others though, that makes it more of a communal effort  For the consumer it's not entirely free. We pay for web access. Admittedly, this money goes to the service provider rather than to the innovators of the individual websites we access......but to be honest, with the wide range of websites I visit on a daily basis i'd be completely and utterly broke of each of them charged a fiver a month. Part of the beauty of the internet IS to spread information as widely as possible, and apart from physical access (i.e. access to a connected computer), to my understanding, what is on offer should indeed aim to reach out to the widest possible range of consumers, all over the globe and across the social spectrum rather than targeting a financially strong mi... There are two types of content on the internet, the original and the forwarded/copied one. I look at it this way, if I am using internet as a consumer for original content of mine (which would mostly be personal photographs, video, files etc) than I won't hesitate paying for it, either to backup or share (it would be mostly for backup and personal sharing). But based on the fact that big corporations like Google and MSN wants to retain users like myself by providing me lots of free space at the cost of Ads, I see no reason to pay anyone to keep my files online. The standard Mom and Pop sites looses out here against big companies. As an average user, I don't need gigs and gigs of space ... I'm one of the people shaor is talking about. My budget is so tight I couldn't afford it. I already pay for the internet service. I don't go to movies. I don't eat out even at fast food places like McDonalds. For me that would be only three or four pages a month. Would have to decide which matter the most -- since the access would be trial only or pay up before entering. That means if everything were to go "paid," entitled web users would be only the rich! Now calculate the number of pages on the internet "ok." The pages on the www are still growing number of pages. That model would leave out those in a disadvantage tuned out of the world into the stone age. Supression of information and such as everything is a paid model. That model also would in my view not be a great one for majority of webmasters. Unless they would like minus majority internet page audience. So in my view the model if ... That is even before the implementation of the www. My budget is so tight I couldn't afford it. I already pay for the internet service.I'm with you tanyamm. Think of all the voices they could silence, the financially challenged, seniors, handicapped -- oh what a wonderful world.. I hope you aren't going to start charging for Clipmarks. I own several websites and all of them are advertiser supported. I intend to keep them that way even for the ones that are losing money, because I know that my audience will go elsewhere if I don't. Very few sites offer a service for which no free equivalent alternative exists. hmmm. i personally have absolutely no money right now, and due to theft literally no possessions either. i'm on a borrowed pc. recovering from health issues, si i'm thankful for the free stuff, and some of it is teaching me to become a dev myself. i see what the clipper means about giving over control to money boys; and ads do make sites less enjoyable, but...does it ever occur to people that the earth--source of all wealth, of all anyone ever has--is free? i've been given, and have myself given, these things free: cars, trips to hawaii, clothes, shelter, guitars and other instruments, campers, garden veggies, sage advice, and more. really. given them free, given such things to others. and i... Ads do not always make a site less enjoyable. That is only a problem if the ads are obtrusive or obnoxious. I do not permit pop-up advertising on any of my sites. A single banner ad on a page doesn't affect the user experience much and it can be as small as 88x33 pixels. Text ads are also an option if banner ads ruin the overall aesthetics. I often think about this and wonder why it has become so expected that services on the web are free.Are you kidding? Think about who it is that expects such. People who think life owes them a free ride? Definitely not ever going to charge for clipmarks. Just looking for ways to start generating enough revenue so we can cover the cost of keeping things going without needing outside money. Appreciate the feedback!! Put a small banner ad on the page. It is also very easy to advertise via clips, but that would diminish the quality of the user experience. Mr. Goldstein, ads are probably the best bet between revenue and creative freedom. Money boys will only try to control & stifle to maximize profit. Do you really want that? Do you want Clips to become another clone of mainstream media? I do not mind seeing ads because I know websites don't run on air. Also as another user suggested be open to PayPal donations from people who use this site heavily and want to contribute. Small GIFs within each clip is a great way to show ads without becoming obnoxious and hogging users' bandwidth. Thanks for your innovation with this site. I know we may not agree on everything said but I know you are trying to adhere to the spirit of the old phrase: ... Amen to that, Darkdusky!!  The Donation button will fit right between "My Clips" and "HI". |
View the Top Clips from May 15, 2009
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
New from the makers of Clipmarks: Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!
|
|||||||||||||
