Quote:
|
Originally Posted by skinnywussy
haha Making a pitch for the little guy... the market can support what it can support. If there is room to be paying more to the traffic providers and still make a healthy profit, then somebody will step in and fill the spot. Of course, I might be missing your point, and you're saying monopolies are being generated in the wrong areas... with actual competition difficult or impossible.
|
Funny thing is, the "traffic sender" is NOT the little guy -- not, in a scenario that is creating incentives to send his traffic somewhere else, to another monetization destination. so, the question is, would he
be able to capture the traffic that he brings to his own site with content acquired from someone
other than the host/sponsor -- ? -- this is a vital question, because in such a case the content he got would come WITHOUT THE LIMITATIONS on use imposed by the sponsor/host.
Let me be more concrete:
ANYTGP.com has a relationship with ANYADULTSPONSOR.com. I'm glad you said "...if there is room to be paying more to the traffic providers..." bcause that sets up the question "What determines how much room there is?" -- to which the only answer (given "Ideal"* Market Behavior -- in the *Economics sense of the word) can be -- what the customer is willing to pay. The way in which we transfer that variable upstream is in some measure that breaks down the number on a traffic-unit basis. Let's say the maximum amount a customer will pay for content XYZ is $1**/click -- just to keep the numbers easy **(LT, after full realization of re-bill revenue). In the usual affiliate/sponsor relationship, this means about $0.50 is going to the affiliate (and remember, we're talking about a maximum price point sustaining equal or greater demand). The operator of ANYTGP.com takes his 50 cents and puts into traffic and the site, with profit being whatever is left. The sponsor takes his 50 cents and has to cover his OV pay enough back to the content producer (usually through a content re-seller of some sort -- providing for a "living-wage" margin for each), and hopefully, have some profit left over.
What I'm saying is we have a couple of influences in place that are steering us towards trouble. 1) an in-place model (and "tradition") of use control belonging to the sponsor, which creates an artificial scarcity that is what keeps wholesale prices high -- now exacerbated by 2257), and 2) the proliferation of (non-adult) programs whose capacity to pay for traffic has no such self-imposed ceiling. What's going to happen is the savvy traffic people are going to send to better-paying offers, or become quasi-sponsors/pay-site operators themselves, because the economics favor cutting out the sponsor program because THEY ARE NOT ADDING ENOUGH VALUE TO THE CHAIN.
2HP