Aaron Nagler

[pbmax]

But you read stuff that people write based on tweets of others, no? Like When PBmax cuts and pastes tweets from reporters or people summaries reporter's tweets here (I've done this). So why not give the tweeters a fraction of a cent or so for every time someone uses their tweet. I think something like this will happen eventually.

It seems a very popular stance on this blog and elsewhere that Packer game broadcast and coverage should be 'free' but someone has to pay for the players' and journalists' salaries. If Ad revenue can't do it, it has to come from somewhere...

Wait until the next NFL TV/media contracts come up. People are in for a rude awakening.

I bet you could find a way to make Twitter or Facebook pay as you go. But I think the model they are pursuing is ad driven and sales of customer data. They want volume. I don't think they get the big IPO they want with subscribers alone. Not to mention the lack of freely provided content (if you go that model) means you need to pay for some content providers.

Which raises a great question: what is the largest subscriber base in the country? Probably cable if you put together an entire industry. Then cell phones? Formerly it might have been magazines or newspapers. But 2 of these 4 rely on at least a local monopoly to leverage subscriptions (cable has some competition but satellite doesn't reach everyone and is problematic in lots of locations).

Competition isn't a cure all. Here we have Charter and TDS providing TV and broadband over different wires and it hasn't dented the price. I am close to cutting the cord again.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Competition isn't a cure all. Here we have Charter and TDS providing TV and broadband over different wires and it hasn't dented the price. I am close to cutting the cord again.

I'm embarrassed to say how high my Charter bill is, and I get no extra services. Embarrassed because I feel like a sucker. It's basically a car loan payment.

Charter internet service is spectacularly good. I just replaced my old router and modem - holy christ, they really do offer enough bandwidth to watch 3-D porn holograms on 4 TVs. I actually only need about a 1/100 of what they deliver, but the newer equipment proves more reliable.

I did the cord cutting dance for half a year. I miss Turner Classic movies, certain winter sports. Cord cutting and buying subscriptions turns into no great bargain. But I saved some.

We're fucked with our first world problems.

[red]

But you read stuff that people write based on tweets of others, no? Like When PBmax cuts and pastes tweets from reporters or people summaries reporter's tweets here (I've done this). So why not give the tweeters a fraction of a cent or so for every time someone uses their tweet. I think something like this will happen eventually.

It seems a very popular stance on this blog and elsewhere that Packer game broadcast and coverage should be 'free' but someone has to pay for the players' and journalists' salaries. If Ad revenue can't do it, it has to come from somewhere...

Wait until the next NFL TV/media contracts come up. People are in for a rude awakening.

no no, i wasn't trying to take the stand that i am above all you because i don't use twitter.

i was just saying i have no clue at all how it works because i don't use it

the closest i come to twitter is reading the things others post on here from there

do they advertise on all the pages? i know its free to use, so i just don't get how they make any more,or can even stay in business (like mad and this place)

in your scenario, who pays the orinigal poster? does the reader, is it advertisers? the retweeters?

i think as soon as you make someone pay for something (facebook, twitter) the platform is gonna die. lets face it, ts popular because its free. lets face it, as a society we want everything free or cheap, so thats gonna screw over the guys doing the original work

maybe its the news guys themselves that are to blame for opening pandoras box in the first place for posting everything on twitter

[red]

I bet you could find a way to make Twitter or Facebook pay as you go. But I think the model they are pursuing is ad driven and sales of customer data. They want volume. I don't think they get the big IPO they want with subscribers alone. Not to mention the lack of freely provided content (if you go that model) means you need to pay for some content providers.

Which raises a great question: what is the largest subscriber base in the country? Probably cable if you put together an entire industry. Then cell phones? Formerly it might have been magazines or newspapers. But 2 of these 4 rely on at least a local monopoly to leverage subscriptions (cable has some competition but satellite doesn't reach everyone and is problematic in lots of locations).

Competition isn't a cure all. Here we have Charter and TDS providing TV and broadband over different wires and it hasn't dented the price. I am close to cutting the cord again.

i bet cell phones is bigger then cable. everyone even the unemployed have cell phones now, even little kids and the old and feeble

[pbmax]

i bet cell phones is bigger then cable. everyone even the unemployed have cell phones now, even little kids and the old and feeble

A good point. Cable covers a good number of people one household at a time.

[pbmax]

I'm embarrassed to say how high my Charter bill is, and I get no extra services. Embarrassed because I feel like a sucker. It's basically a car loan payment.

Charter internet service is spectacularly good. I just replaced my old router and modem - holy christ, they really do offer enough bandwidth to watch 3-D porn holograms on 4 TVs. I actually only need about a 1/100 of what they deliver, but the newer equipment proves more reliable.

I did the cord cutting dance for half a year. I miss Turner Classic movies, certain winter sports. Cord cutting and buying subscriptions turns into no great bargain. But I saved some.

We're fucked with our first world problems.

We cut the cord when the kids started to watch TV. Much easier to control what is viewed with 4 stations, DVD and movies bought online. Lasted for almost a decade. Got it back with a deal from TDS for 100 Mbps fiber, which is now 600 Mbps fiber. Cable itself, despite peak TV is pretty much still a wasteland. There is basically one show a season (weather season, not TV season) I would have to buy on Apple TV.

But Monday Night Football, Badger basketball games and ESPN broadcast bowl games were missed. Nothing earth shattering. But you are right its expensive to replace those cable shows.

[mraynrand]

i think as soon as you make someone pay for something (facebook, twitter) the platform is gonna die. lets face it, ts popular because its free. lets face it, as a society we want everything free or cheap, so thats gonna screw over the guys doing the original work

maybe its the news guys themselves that are to blame for opening pandoras box in the first place for posting everything on twitter

I think if you had a sliding scale it would work. If you're new, you're free. Build a rep and maybe every time someone looks at a tweet you get from maybe 0.1 to 5 cents - depending on popularity. Let the market figure it out. Cleft Crusty would have to pay to tweet.

[denverYooper]

The aggregator is the missing piece. There are lots of blogs, former blogs and commentary sites that do that work, but very few of them produce enough new work to charge for what they do. And the most interesting stuff is often paywalled at the source. A well functioning aggregator that had original content from sources would do well, but that will require cooperation among legacy outfits. I pay for exactly one of these kind of sites.

In my head I picture a service like the wire services of old that pick up content from publishing sources and creators/writers and you pay them for access as they pay the source. Like AP, UPI, Reuters, Agence France or CBS/ABC/NBC/BBC/CNN in the olden days.

I too have heard that Ad revenues are tougher to come by and the recent "pivot to video" has been a disaster. Facebook and other ad services really wanted more video to publish and pushed the idea that advertisers would pay more for eyeballs that seemed to linger longer on video than text. But it was largely a dry hole. So entire editorial and writing staffs were decimated to hire video producers and heads to no avail. Now they have less content to offer overall no matter what the income stream.

Just look at the videos for PackersNews. They are terrible. But to professionalize them, you'd have to fire three writers and an editor to hire video production and a face made for video. But now you have less content for your slicker video. And the content of these videos is poor to begin with.

Google and Facebook as mediators of ad revenue is going to be the problem that finally gets the government to break up the oligopolies here. It might work if Google and Facebook worked independently of the ad services, but they own the largest ones.

I still like to read and generally don't care how professionally a video on a site is produced. If a link takes me to a page that auto-plays a video, I close it immediately and often choose not to return.

[pbmax]

I still like to read and generally don't care how professionally a video on a site is produced. If a link takes me to a page that auto-plays a video, I close it immediately and often choose not to return.

I often do the same. If you are working in an office its an active nightmare.

And its one reason I was stunned about the pivot to video. I'd like to think that being bombarded with audio and video when you expect the written word is the reason, but I expect people who are mobile and using headphones are less worried about the video playing.

[hoosier]

I too find video sports reporting unwatchable, and autoplay video of any sort drives me nuts. I read JSO during lunch hour, and for some reason I just cannot make myself sit there and listen to Aaron Nagler drone on while I eat my sandwich. Reading Pete Dougherty or Haudricort, on the other hand, that I can stomach.

[pbmax]

I too find video sports reporting unwatchable, and autoplay video of any sort drives me nuts. I read JSO during lunch hour, and for some reason I just cannot make myself sit there and listen to Aaron Nagler drone on while I eat my sandwich. Reading Pete Dougherty or Haudricort, on the other hand, that I can stomach.

Haudricourt is a gem. He doesn't get the attention of McGinn (probably because of the beat), but he's just the right amount of cranky old guy.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Nagler co-founded https://cheeseheadtv.com and is returning to that website. It's a free website, wonder how they earn enough $

[mraynrand]

Nagler co-founded https://cheeseheadtv.com and is returning to that website. It's a free website, wonder how they earn enough $

looks like email login required: selling your email, at least

[call_me_ishmael]

Nagler co-founded https://cheeseheadtv.com and is returning to that website. It's a free website, wonder how they earn enough $

Ad Revenue.

looks like email login required: selling your email, at least

I highly doubt it but you never know. Capturing emails is all about engagement. They want to be able to hit your inbox at any time to get you back on their site viewing (ignoring) ads.