

What Amazon's Decision Means for Digital Media - nlow
http://www.thedailymuse.com/tech/cash-credit-or-eyeballs-how-we-pay-for-digital-media/

======
fragsworth
I'm sure they already know this, but here's something to think about:
Advertisers will pay far less for ads that can only be seen by users who
couldn't afford the $15 to hide them.

The users who saved their $15 can't afford (or won't pay for) as much stuff.

~~~
bromley
I'm not sure that's necessarily true. On the web, it's often the less savvy
users that convert best in response to advertising. For example, a lot of
money is made online selling payday loans, ringtone-related subscription-
billing junk, and 'magic' tooth-whitening and weight-loss formulas. Ignorant,
poor people are often the most easily monetized, and I'm guessing they're
often the least likely to value their time enough to pay $15 to avoid ads.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I don't think it's as straightforward as you
indicated.

------
mopoke
But a lot (most?) cable/satellite stations show ads. So I'm paying for the
content with my wallet AND paying by sitting through ads.

------
donaldc
The point the article makes, that you can't get things for free, seems more
appropriate to the online website examples it uses than to the Kindle Fire
about which the article is ostensibly written. Unless I'm mistaken, Amazon
isn't giving away the Kindle Fire for free even in the version that includes
ads.

------
tomjen3
All it means is that I won't buy a version of the kindle that comes with ads.
If I pay for something, I won't accept ads. I no longer watch broadcast or
cable tv for exactly this reason.

I am fine with ads for free services but death to you if want to be paid
twice.

~~~
AngryParsley
It's not getting paid twice. The reason there's no option for "free with ads"
is because ads have diminishing returns. Each extra ad you show makes
customers less likely to buy a given product. Advertisers won't pay as much if
they're part of a giant block of ads.

For the company to get the same amount of money, the trade-off curve looks
something like this:

Pay $x, see 0 ads.

Pay $0.75x, see 1 ad.

Pay $0.5x, see 4 ads.

Pay $0.25x, see 20 ads.

Pay $0, see 50 ads.

Some customers prefer to pay with their eyes instead of their wallets. You
don't like to do that. I don't like to do that. But it's fine that companies
give us the choice.

Also, you pay for broadcast TV?

------
KMinshew
Huh! I would pay $15 to get rid of ads in a hot second. I wish HuluPlus came
with this option

~~~
dromidas
Be careful what you wish for... They could start microtransactions where you
can 'Watch Hulu+ TV Episode with Ads for Free' or 'Watch this episode without
adds for an additional $0.50' :P Then again, it may not be such a bad thing.

------
bryanjclark
"it’s pretty cool that Amazon is joining companies like Pandora, Spotify, and
Zynga who give the power to choose back to their customers."

Zynga? Giving "choice" back to their customers? I'd say that's a stretch.

------
halayli
Except for NYT Digital. They want us to pay with our money & eye balls.

