|
I have a similar, although opposite, issue with ad-supported media.
I would like to have to option to subscribe to an ad-free version of ad-supported media.
For example, I would gladly drop a few bucks to subscribe to the L.A. Times (online), if I can get what I want without the attendant ads.
The question is, would the cost of an ad-free subscription be prohibitive? I don't think it should be, IF I am just paying for the production cost of the "content" (writers and editors salary) plus the distribution cost (online, nil). But I suspect that the L.A. Times would factor in the cost of its beaurocracy and infrastructure, most of which is devoted to the print product.
My fantasy is that, given the option to subscribe to an ad-free version at a reasonable cost, enough people would take it to become a significant customer base, worthy of service and further development.
discuss
|
