Quote:
Originally Posted by jayeff
Instead we will be selling live video, dating, etc: not on separate sites but as premium content behind portals offering lots of free pics and movies and basic interactivity. We are going to see more named models appearing live on sites and reacting (or at least appearing to react) with members.
|
Creating events (like shows by stars) works - except that without all the other content, the girls (and guys) wouldn't be stars to start with. Porn's star making system (DVDs in particular with the large idstribution studios) are what creates porn's stars. For television and the movie industry, DVDs are just a way to stretch out the income potential for their already made (and paid for) content. For porn, it is primary - for TV and movies, it is far down their long tail of revenue streams.
The more they get into that market, the more they take away value for our content. Doubly so because they have little reason to "sell high", because almost every penny of revenue for them is profit - the show or movie was already paid for when it ran in prime time or in theaters. For Porn, this is the primary distribution channel.
Same thing happens when they hit online: Except for bandwidth and encoding, they have few true expenses because they are pushing content hat is already paid up. Further, end users are more likely to tolerate actual video commercials in the stream, which porn cannot do. So they can ticket price stuff for free.
Without a star making and star maintaining system, there is no way to pay to make the product - so all the "interactive" in the world will mean little because the people doing it will be effect nobodies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayeff
We will also finally get the message that online porn is best suited to being marketed as a high-volume, low-margin product: the opposite to what most of us have done so far.
|
I can't say that I agree on this one either. Porn isn't something you need 24 hours per day. Once a guy has "finished up" for the day, he is done and isn't coming back to porn. Give him enough free content to yank the crank, and you won't sell him much of anything (which is one of the reasons why massive free content sites have the traffic but not always the sales).
Yes,pushing them off to related sites works to a point, but again: once the dude has done his thing (average 6 minutes, apparently) he is GONE to look at sports scores and read jokes. Pussy ain't all that entertaining when you just blew your nut 5 minutes ago.
The only place this has been working even marginally is torrent sites. But there again, they only pull it off because they have (a) little in the way of expenses past hosting, they certainly aren't paying for content, and (b) someone else foots all the bills for the transfer of information. Low dollar high volume low margin. Start paying to use content and start paying bandwidth to deliver it in huge volumes, and suddenly it isn't as profitable a business as you might think. By comparision, junk TGP traffic is a better market... sad.
WEB 2.0 suggests all kinds of interactivity - but without methods in place for the content providers to extract income, Web 2.0 actually KILLS content. Most of the examples I have seen of interactive desktops and what not look like giant websize fuskers, sucking down everyone else's work and putting their own ads on top of it. A great business model if you don't have to pay for content.