if you look at "will pay" that is quite accurately those that are paying now and will pay in the future.
Suddenly, the chart looks incredibly accurate - about 10% will pay.
Man, Nielsen potentially snuck in something creative with that- not only that you have zero guarantee that people actually will pay for the product, but that those that are already paying - well, that's about it.
A country with no money will not be swayed by power. Think about it.
If they have the best journalistic protection, then it's even more assured that they will have significantly more power than a country with money, aka the US.
As an example, look at how sweden handles piracy issues irrespective of US sway/attempts to influence it.
it's a digital product. The cost of the game doesn't change whether it's free or otherwise. The cost of distribution is equally very minor.
I think you don't understand digital distribution, antimike.
What are they going to drain the market of? Their own product? If this is an online game they have other ways to make more money in the long run (if set up to do so), and if it's not an online game then the only cost is bandwidth, which is something they already pay/allocate for.
last mile is expensive from a consumer standpoint, but not as much from enterprise. Last I saw was in the realm of $2000-$20,000 for last mile per customer, depending on methods and regulations and whatnot. Customer service costs, I never understood. It sounds like companies have a hard time gauging what exactly are customer service costs/benefits in tangible form. I've worked CS in a ton of places and I can say that even the ones that do great CS get scorn from the rest of the company they work for.
I figured CS is just as important as investing in IT/technology, and just as misunderstood.
They aren't a new entrant, mike. They've been investing in dark fiber for more than 5 years. Nobody knows where, but I'm sure they have the groundwork well set. I mean it's already known that they get around tier 1 bandwidth costs by using their own lines (which still have a substantial cost although less), so it's merely that they snuck in that is surprising.
The search results for "google invests in dark fiber" provide plenty of info on that.
I was thinking about this and my thoughts were similar.
I thought: what if a lawyer explains something improperly, you look it up and actually understand it? That should be banned?
There are situations I can see on both sides of the equation, such as where it might be inappropriate to use tech to look up parts of the case but I don't think that the ability to gain research/understanding should be able to be violated by a protective court order.
Like what if someone implies that x technology = 100% illegal activity, and a simple wiki search would prove that it's not? Like what if they said breathing implied criminal intent and the judge didn't call the lawyer on it nor the opposing party?
what if we named firefox.exe to boxee.exe and had it open hulu.com? is there any significance? Answer is no. All they do is fullscreen the window for you.
66% of nothing that you can say with certainty is still 0% of reality.
"we think 2/3rds of people won't have an issue with $6...and that 10% of those might actually do it" means the numbers are still ridiculously optimistic.
All you have to do is the fix the decimal. Assume that they are saying that 2/3rds (.66) of 1 percent are likely to pay $6 per month (with 10% of that actually subscribing) and suddenly it seems much more like the other paywall experiment. Even at 100 thousand people that's 6600 subscribing for $6/mo. I guess 40 grand a month is significant for a paywall?
/I'm not sure if I got my math right either, though.
I had a similar convo the other day about this. I said that good journalists or good reporters don't really make up for the decisions of the NYT or otherwise. How do people not get that? The journalists can be awesome but behind a paywall nobody will know that or care.
Simplified: you may be the best at what you do for (company), but it doesn't save you from the ire of people for what (company) does.
replace company with all the things that drive people nuts: law enforcement, NYT, best buy, walmart, it's all the same. What you associate with, defines your business.
did you forget something? customers create money. If they are forced to cut off their own customers, there's no profit.
Also, bandwidth has a baseline cost. Whether you use 500GB a month or 5GB a month, that bandwidth cost is the same. Sure there are marginal incremental costs (electricity, servers, etc), but bandwidth? please.
If a customer to be for another 10 years generated $100/year, disconnecting that customer just cost them $1000. See how fast it can add up? Cost difference might be $1/year or so, but not even close as far as total cost.
every stupid business feels that taking advantage of our brain's weakness towards microtransactions is a good idea. In the short run, sure, but long run? Not even remotely.
at least they're living up to the "dick" parts of their names.
Maybe we'll be lucky and they'll all pass away instead.
This stuff is an embarrassment of our society and any big corporation or establishment with considerable money does it hoping for a payout, it's sickening.
they only want to support consoles, which are lock-in, and easier for licensing agreements. Thus, they make horrible support for PC games and then turn around and go "see? PC games aren't selling" to try to make excuses as to why PC isn't worth supporting.
On the post: Will People Pay For Content Online?
actually it's probably accurate
Suddenly, the chart looks incredibly accurate - about 10% will pay.
Man, Nielsen potentially snuck in something creative with that- not only that you have zero guarantee that people actually will pay for the product, but that those that are already paying - well, that's about it.
On the post: Iceland Wants To Become A Hub For Free Speech Journalism Protection
Re:
A country with no money will not be swayed by power. Think about it.
If they have the best journalistic protection, then it's even more assured that they will have significantly more power than a country with money, aka the US.
As an example, look at how sweden handles piracy issues irrespective of US sway/attempts to influence it.
On the post: Online Gaming Store Lowers Prices 75%, Sees Sales Shoot Up 5500%
Re:
I think you don't understand digital distribution, antimike.
What are they going to drain the market of? Their own product? If this is an online game they have other ways to make more money in the long run (if set up to do so), and if it's not an online game then the only cost is bandwidth, which is something they already pay/allocate for.
On the post: Warner Music Shoots Self In Head; Says No More Free Streaming
imeem
On the post: Or Will Broadband Competition Look Like.... Google?
Re: Re: new entrant
I figured CS is just as important as investing in IT/technology, and just as misunderstood.
On the post: Or Will Broadband Competition Look Like.... Google?
new entrant
The search results for "google invests in dark fiber" provide plenty of info on that.
On the post: Why Shouldn't Jurors Be Able To Use Technology To Do More Research?
yeah, my thoughts too
I thought: what if a lawyer explains something improperly, you look it up and actually understand it? That should be banned?
There are situations I can see on both sides of the equation, such as where it might be inappropriate to use tech to look up parts of the case but I don't think that the ability to gain research/understanding should be able to be violated by a protective court order.
Like what if someone implies that x technology = 100% illegal activity, and a simple wiki search would prove that it's not? Like what if they said breathing implied criminal intent and the judge didn't call the lawyer on it nor the opposing party?
On the post: USTR Insists Gov't Isn't Keeping ACTA Secret
FOIA?
I tried once and got idiotic responses, and dropped it because it was early in the process and I was afraid to be on record for FOIA'ing it.
On the post: NBC Universal Boss Jeff Zucker Lies To Congress About Boxee
Re:
On the post: Massive Disconnect: Paywall Analysis Claims It's Reasonable To Expect 66% Of Readers To Pay
Re: His assumptions are not quite that bad
"we think 2/3rds of people won't have an issue with $6...and that 10% of those might actually do it" means the numbers are still ridiculously optimistic.
All you have to do is the fix the decimal. Assume that they are saying that 2/3rds (.66) of 1 percent are likely to pay $6 per month (with 10% of that actually subscribing) and suddenly it seems much more like the other paywall experiment. Even at 100 thousand people that's 6600 subscribing for $6/mo. I guess 40 grand a month is significant for a paywall?
/I'm not sure if I got my math right either, though.
On the post: Massive Disconnect: Paywall Analysis Claims It's Reasonable To Expect 66% Of Readers To Pay
so 35 people = 66 percent?
On the post: Reporter, TV Execs (Maybe?) Confused Over Lost Fans Choosing Not To Watch Leaked Episode
Re:
On the post: Billboard Gets Snarky; Not A Believer In CwF + RtB
of course he was polite
You should have expected that on some level, Mike. When they listen to you up on stage and when you talk in person are totally different things.
On the post: Obama Quietly Issues Ruling Saying It's Legal For The FBI To Break The Law On Accessing Phone Records
sheeshs
I hope they realize how significant and overstepping such a concept is.
On the post: The Value Of The Link vs. The Value Of The Content
had this exact convo on twitter
Simplified: you may be the best at what you do for (company), but it doesn't save you from the ire of people for what (company) does.
replace company with all the things that drive people nuts: law enforcement, NYT, best buy, walmart, it's all the same. What you associate with, defines your business.
On the post: BPI Insists UK ISPs Overstating The Cost Of Three Strikes; So Will BPI Pay The Difference If Wrong?
Re:
Also, bandwidth has a baseline cost. Whether you use 500GB a month or 5GB a month, that bandwidth cost is the same. Sure there are marginal incremental costs (electricity, servers, etc), but bandwidth? please.
If a customer to be for another 10 years generated $100/year, disconnecting that customer just cost them $1000. See how fast it can add up? Cost difference might be $1/year or so, but not even close as far as total cost.
On the post: App Store Overload? Kindle Gets An App Store
microtransactions
I think it was from http://www.cracked.com/article_17142_5-ways-common-sense-lies-to-you-everyday.html article, if I remember correctly. The $5 vs 5x 1$ bills thing.
It just shows that amazon is not above taking advantage of people to make a buck. Yay for capitalism.
On the post: CBS Would Rather Kill Off Classic Jack Benny Video Footage Than Let Fans Rescue And Digitize It
wow
On the post: Philip K. Dick Estate Sends Google Cease And Desist Over Nexus One Name
welp
Maybe we'll be lucky and they'll all pass away instead.
This stuff is an embarrassment of our society and any big corporation or establishment with considerable money does it hoping for a payout, it's sickening.
On the post: Game Marketer Insists That Every Downloaded Copy Of Modern Warfare 2 Is Stolen By Immoral Thieves
Re: PC Platform
they only want to support consoles, which are lock-in, and easier for licensing agreements. Thus, they make horrible support for PC games and then turn around and go "see? PC games aren't selling" to try to make excuses as to why PC isn't worth supporting.
Next >>