@andrewchen

New here? Check out my list of featured essays · Blogging roadmap · Ask me anything

Not everything can be free!

Will people pay for anything on the internet?
A recent article on GigaOm:  O2 Offers Napster For Free! Big Question – What will people pay for in the future? with the quote:

It is our contention that in the future, we will only pay for broadband access. Voice, Video or whatever is going to become part of the “access” offering.

There’s been a similar discussion revolving around PlentyOfFish.com, which is turning online dating from a paid subscription model, to a free ads-supported model.

However, a colleague of mine Basem Nayfeh once remarked, "It doesn’t make sense for everything on the internet to be free and ad-supported – SOMEONE has to pay the bills!" (And note that Basem is the CTO of one of the largest and most well-funded ad startups in the world right now)

Let’s dive into why he says that…

Are you a free site? Or not?
One of the key drivers of Web 2.0 is that the sites you are building are likely free, and ad-supported. This is great in theory, since customers like things that are free. However, imagine a world where EVERY internet site is free and has advertising revenues. In that world, every site would be buying traffic from every other site, and because it’s not a frictionless exchange, money would be lost from the system and revenues would eventually go to zero.

As a result, the only way to prop up a system where it’s just ad-supported companies buying from ad-supported companies, you need a bunch of external money like venture capital. But then you’d just end up with the Facebook installs ecosystem (haha! Just kidding Mark!)

So it’s pretty clear that you need some amount of external money flowing into the ad buying, and thus, let’s look at what an old guy thinks: Newton’s Third Law, which relates to online advertising (I swear!):

To every action force there is an equal, but opposite, reaction force

I cite this because the same holds true in online advertising – Newton did not say this by the way:

For every online advertisement, there is a publisher and there’s a buyer

and thus its corollary:

For every free ad-supported site, there’s some number of transactional sites that support it

And in fact, this statement probably goes even deeper down into the "type" of advertising inventory that’s growing on a site. For example, even if there’s a lot of advertisers willing to buy car/truck/bus ads, if there’s not enough ad inventory being produced by online publishers that fits into that, then that creates an imbalance as well.

The big question
So as a web entrepreneur, you have to ask yourself a Big Question. In the long run, are you a:

  • Free, ad-supported site (an "Ad publisher")
  • Or a paid site that buys to get clicks (an "Ad buyer")

Do you know the answer to that? Sometimes it’s not immediately obvious.

Here are some signs you might be better off as an ad buyer:

  • It’s hard to get traffic :)
  • People don’t use your site every day
  • People use it only when they are "in-market" for some number of weeks
    • (Dating, shopping, researching homes, researching schools, etc.)
  • It’s hard to get people to come back for multiple sessions
  • People spend a lot of money in your category
  • It’s unlikely people want to tell their friends about your site, or that their friends are unlikely to be "in-market" at the same time

Similarly, these are signs that you are better off as an Ad publisher:

  • It’s easy to get lots of viral traffic
  • People use your site all the time, all year around
  • People don’t spend much money in your category, or there are lots of competitors
  • There’s no "point" in using the site – sometimes it’s time-wasting activity like entertainment

Where’s the gray area?
Obviously there’s a lot of gray area for this – in many ways, I’m sure that PlentyOfFish is as much a communications site as a dating site. Or the same as MySpace. Similarly, for shopping or music or photos, a lot of these sites are as much social entertainment experiences as much as they are transactional experiences. That’s why you have transactional sites like Shutterfly, but also ad-supported sites like Flickr.

So for each entrepreneur’s business, it’s worthwhile to evaluate it in different ways – but please keep in mind, just because your competitors charge money, it doesn’t mean you can go free and succeed. Because not everything on the internet can be free :)

Like this post?
If you liked this post, please subscribe or follow me on Twitter. You can also find more essays here.

Written by Andrew Chen
January 17th, 2008 at 8:51 am
  • Gopi

    >> you need a bunch of external money like venture capital

    Isn’t that what happened in the late 90′s, VC’s were the only outside money entering the internet ecosystem and when it stopped the bubble bursted!

  • http://www.i-boy.com/weblog/ George

    People will pay for porn and gambling/gaming online, at least for now. Not sure about all the rest. ;-)

  • Terry

    See Chris Anderson’s Free video. Storage, processing and bandwidth are approaching free, as is software and development.
    plentyoffish.com showed me a staples.com ad, staples showed me post-it-notes. Everything seems to be in order.
    In yahoo personals the only thing you are paying for is for a human to approve or deny your profile. So long, expensive lame service, it’s been good to know ya.
    When cars and office supplies become free then we can all panic over the fate of the dwindling internet.

  • http://www.bookbook.com.au Charlie

    You don’t really mention the cost of producing these web technologies. I’m not really an expert but it seems to me that these costs must be coming down. This of course has been offset by people demanding more complexity. The cost however of providing old web 1.0 technologies like email and web sites seems to be fast approaching zero. I can’t imagine that I’d ever have to pay for an email account again. The technology’s invented. All Gmail is providing me is server space and a bit of ongoing R&D. It’s hard to charge people a fee for something which is costing you very little at that particular time but which cost you a lot 5 years ago.

  • http://www.pointsincase.com/blog/court.htm Court

    Movies are another example of an endless type of source for transactions behind online ads.

    When we can effectively tie online advertising to increased offline consumption in more categories (and when more offline companies make their products/services available online), then there could be a lot more free models supported.

  • http://www.etelos.com/adserve Eric Berto

    The net result doesn’t always have to be zero. Consider advertising business goods and services in a business application (CRM, content management etc…). If you advertise those goods and services, you’re adding something of value to the application users and are adding money to the pot and not taking it away. The goal of Etelos Ad Serve is to provide application users and developers a way to add this value.

  • http://blog.lookery.com Scott Rafer

    PlentyofFish, OKcupid, and WooMe are completely predictable and don’t have a lot do to with “will everything be ad-supported?”

    Any service valuable enough to be subscription-based will drop in value over time to the point where it can be ad-supported. Match.com and its peers have not radically improved in the past ten years. Web technology has gotten cheap enough to offer essentially the same service for free.

    New subscription services will emerge from Web2. Flickr is good example so far. They’ll either make Flickr Pro much, much better over the next 6 or 7 years or we’ll have this discussion again about PlentyofPhotos, OKPix, and ShootMe in 2015.

Recent posts

Want more? Featured essays and book recommendations