In a message dated 11/7/2010 8:12:40 AM Pacific Standard Time, thomas.dalton@gmail.com writes:
They won't be people that want ads, though. They'll be people that want ad revenue for us. If they click, they'll be clicking to get us revenue and not actually buying, which advertisers stopped falling for years ago.
I'm also skeptical that any sort of tab that is just a click here to see ads will be very productive. I'm also skeptical that manually placed and manually monitored, internet advertising even pays for the wages of the worker.
This is why Google uses automagic. And why everyone else does as well.
W
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 3:07 AM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 11/7/2010 8:12:40 AM Pacific Standard Time, thomas.dalton@gmail.com writes:
They won't be people that want ads, though. They'll be people that want ad revenue for us. If they click, they'll be clicking to get us revenue and not actually buying, which advertisers stopped falling for years ago.
I'm also skeptical that any sort of tab that is just a click here to see ads will be very productive. I'm also skeptical that manually placed and manually monitored, internet advertising even pays for the wages of the worker.
This is why Google uses automagic. And why everyone else does as well.
Not everyone. There are still many websites that only have a few sponsors.
-- John Vandenberg
In a message dated 11/7/2010 8:12:40 AM Pacific Standard Time, thomas.dalton@gmail.com writes:
They won't be people that want ads, though. They'll be people that want ad revenue for us. If they click, they'll be clicking to get us revenue and not actually buying, which advertisers stopped falling for years ago.
I'm also skeptical that any sort of tab that is just a click here to see ads will be very productive. I'm also skeptical that manually placed and manually monitored, internet advertising even pays for the wages of the worker.
This is why Google uses automagic. And why everyone else does as well.
W
I envision ads being sold by salespeople on commission. Anyone who sells an ad would be responsible for selecting and monitoring the ads they sell. Commission guarantees our salespeople will go after ads that are relevant to the page they are linked from that marketers feel are worthwhile. Even without counting click throughs we could add information to the link on the ad page which showed the other end where the potential customer came from.
If automagic worked, I would see ads for stuff I might have at least a passing interest in; I seldom do. But if I'm looking at an article on a book or an author I might well take a look at an ad page linked from it. I buy lots of books. If nothing else it would save a step or two.
Fred
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 12:07 PM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
I'm also skeptical that manually placed and manually monitored, internet advertising even pays for the wages of the worker.
This is why Google uses automagic. And why everyone else does as well.
Doesn't Google lets the advertiser pick which searches they want to appear on? Is that "manual", or "automagic"? Would letting the advertiser pick which articles they want to appear on be "manual", or "automagic"?
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
If automagic worked, I would see ads for stuff I might have at least a passing interest in; I seldom do. But if I'm looking at an article on a book or an author I might well take a look at an ad page linked from it. I buy lots of books. If nothing else it would save a step or two.
With support for location targeting you could do even better. There are physicians who spend hundreds of thousands of dollars a year on location targeted Google adwords, and they do so because the revenue they're generating from it is more than the cost.
I think this is all pretty much a nonstarter, though. Between the lack of support for ads in the community and the difficult hurdles that would need to be navigated to not get in trouble with the IRS, I don't see ads ever coming to Wikimedia Foundation websites.
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 12:07 PM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
I'm also skeptical that manually placed and manually monitored, internet advertising even pays for the wages of the worker.
This is why Google uses automagic. And why everyone else does as well.
Doesn't Google lets the advertiser pick which searches they want to appear on? Is that "manual", or "automagic"? Would letting the advertiser pick which articles they want to appear on be "manual", or "automagic"?
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
If automagic worked, I would see ads for stuff I might have at least a passing interest in; I seldom do. But if I'm looking at an article on a book or an author I might well take a look at an ad page linked from it. I buy lots of books. If nothing else it would save a step or two.
With support for location targeting you could do even better. There are physicians who spend hundreds of thousands of dollars a year on location targeted Google adwords, and they do so because the revenue they're generating from it is more than the cost.
I think this is all pretty much a nonstarter, though. Between the lack of support for ads in the community and the difficult hurdles that would need to be navigated to not get in trouble with the IRS, I don't see ads ever coming to Wikimedia Foundation websites.
Yes, revenue would have to be used for nonprofit purposes, either ours or others, or else.
I am aware from experience here and elsewhere that even the most obvious initiatives can be futile. That is not a reason to not to advance them, repeatedly.
Fred
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 6:24 PM, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
Between the lack of support for ads in the community and the difficult hurdles that would need to be navigated to not get in trouble with the IRS, I don't see ads ever coming to Wikimedia Foundation websites.
Yes, revenue would have to be used for nonprofit purposes, either ours or others, or else.
No. It would likely require much more than that. More like the hurdles that had to be jumped through by the Mozilla Foundation/Corporation, only more difficult because Wikipedia is already well-established.
That or you could try to convince the IRS that the advertisements themselves are part and parcel of the mission to educate the public, which might actually be possible.
Either way it would take quite a bit of effort on the part of the WMF, and that combined with the pushback from the community, I just don't think it'll ever happen.
I am aware from experience here and elsewhere that even the most obvious initiatives can be futile. That is not a reason to not to advance them, repeatedly.
I'd argue against you on that one, but it'd probably be futile.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org