[Foundation-l] No, even a couple of Google ads on each page would be a fatally bad idea

[Fred Bauder]

> On 7 November 2010 16:21, Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org> wrote:
>> 1) Why the huge assumption of bad faith? Â I don't think you're correct
>> that people would sign up for ads who don't want ads. Â As you
>> correctly point out, there would actually be no long-term benefit to
>> anyone for doing so.
>> 2) If the payment isn't per click, why would people click through "to
>> get us revenue"?
>
> This has nothing to do with good or bad faith. If people are only
> opting in because they want ads, then there are going to be a very
> small number of people opting in. Why have ads on Wikipedia pages when
> you can just google for things you want to buy? If payment *were* by
> click, then people would abuse it, which is why payment wouldn't be by
> click and we wouldn't get much money. That was the point I was trying
> to make.
>
> Can you give an example of a site with opt-in advertising that
> actually gets significant revenue from it (for the number of page
> views they get)?

Why have advertising anywhere when "you can just google for things you
want to buy?" The reason Wikipedia ads will work is because we have
thousands of articles which relate to something someone is likely to want
to buy. For example let's suppose there is an article about a movie; it's
a no-brainer that it makes sense to advertise the film or a dvd or a
soundtrack on a Wikipedia page linked to the article on the movie. Also,
once people can depend on good offers being made on our ad pages they'll
go there to get deals, good service; convenient, easy, profitable...

Fred