Yet another thread becomes the Paul Markham show. :2 cents:

Bye Paul CLICK

Any respect I may have had for you is gone. A walking talking example of a loser.
You are on a downward spiral.

Paul is officially a non-person as far as I am concerned.

You can say whatever you want but you are talking to the hand permanently -- waste of energy --- FUCK YOU EAT SIT AND >>>

People don't understand how "free" actually works. It's just there, like magic. It's, you know, FREE. How it got there, who put it there, how it stays there, etc - no one gives a fuck or even thinks about these issues. Business people do but not the average person. In fact, most people think Facebook IS "the Internet".

But when "free" suddenly disappears (or shrinks, or gets put behind a paywall, where it should be) THEN people will "get it". But by then there will be one helluva backlash from the Millenials.

Back to the subject, maybe the internet needs to be a smaller micro payment zone.

Is your content good enough that people will pay to see it?

If you had to pay a few cents to watch a Youtube vid would you pay the toll?
If you had to pay to see porn vids 10 cents a vid would you?

Which mainstream news (as an example) website would you micro pay to read articles on? An article for 5 cents from the Wall Street journal (a la carte) as an example. Internet micro payment may become a reality because of this adblocker phenomena ...


Advertising paid content is a double edged sword -- most of the content is crap for people that never pay - and the ads are less and less productive. The big shakeup will be in the internet advertising networks. As their buyers get a smaller and smaller return they will adjust accordingly.

Yes but this only works if you have VOLUME (heh, sorry couldn't resist).

If you run niche sites, or are a small-time player, you cannot generate enough volume to be profitable at $0.10 a video or whatever.

Circumvented, next.

:thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup

Especially in porn. Look at what people consume for free in huge amounts. Porn, film, TV, music, books, and social media. Which one of those would people not consume if they had to pay for it?

None and the proof is all those industries sold more than they do now.

Take out Ad-funded sites and the 99.9% of free surfers on Tubes would have to go back to buying or rely on a far inferior product. Did we sell a to a higher percentage of surfers in 2005 than 2016?

Barry is too lazy to earn more from consumers who pay for porn.

Tubes are superior to paysites. Chaturbate is superior to Xlovecam. He numbers prove it.

Also with 99.9% of consumers mnot paying, how do you create a better product? Xlovecam hits a wall trying to get better models, because better models earn more elsewhere.

You won't learn, but others might. To get traffic one has to have great samples or ads, to turn clicks into $$$$ one has to have a great product. No one has ever had enough traffic to sell shit. It's a moronic catchphrase used by morons.

When people think that those who don't want to see ads, will suddenly start clicking on them, forcing up the bill for paid ads, are going to start buying. You know their business is struggling. Those who don't want to see ads, don't buy. Considering the ratio from those without can be 1-5,000. Forcing people to see ads it can only lower the ROI on ads bought traffic.

Or are there people who think those with adblockers are an untapped goldmine of customers? :upsidedow :1orglaugh

Volume is no stranger in success.

You either have to be small and specialized or have scale to make money.

You only have to look at Walmart, Amazon and Department stores.
Supporting free porn or cams with ads has seen its day unless some new technology steps in to change the equation.

Adblocker may be the best thing that ever happened to the Internet as strategies monetizing content may become based more on merit.

adblokers are pure evil

You can't blame people for using them though.

When there are sites out there that will launch browser takeovers, six popups or pop under ads, interstitial ads and then load a page with banners those sites are forcing people to ad blockers.

Absolutely, and it's 100x worse in mainstream.

For Adult I think most of us (surfers included) just close that annoying LiveJasmin or Fuckbook pop-up and go about our business. Not really a huge annoyance. But mainstream? OMG I do not even want to click on some news story or Top Ten list of this or that because my computer gets bombarded with massive ads. Pop-ups, pop-unders, autoplay video ads....plus they all take FOREVER to fucking load. There's nothing more annoying than wanting to read a blog post or news story on say Huffington Post or Wall Street Journal and try to scroll down while you wait for the fucking page to load so you can finish reading a sentence.

There are effective ways to prevent ad blockers eating into your income though. However not going to discuss those on a public forum.

As a former journalist watching this John Oliver clip made me....happy someone is getting it, sad how far journalism has dropped and pissed off that I can now see both sides of the argument.

Interesting thread here:

https://adblockplus.org/blog/trampli...ou-re-facebook

Obviously some people do or else they wouldn't be advertising :2 cents:

More interesting here :0)

https://adblockplus.org/images/318t.png

^* Over the top monetization *^ seems to be the issue

Yeah Adblock Plus has a pay for white listing program but it only affects 10% of white listed sites. 90% of sites that comply with the acceptable ads standard are whitelisted for free.

However if you don't like Adblock Plus there's always uBlock

https://www.ublock.org

uBlock is free, open source, has more blacklists available and generally captures much more than Adblock Plus.

Imagine a conversion rate; of
1998-2000
2001-2008
2008 2012
2012-2016

Then compare the stats on free porn sites. We have seen a continual decline in stats along with a continual incline on surfers on free sites. We who sell content should be encouraging surfers to use adblockers, not bitching because we may have to go back to giving away less free porn.

Edited to make it right.

What I don't get is all the bitching from people buying ads. Don't they realise without ad-supported Tube Sites, there would be no Tube sites sucking up all the traffic?

That's the other side to this porn argument.

Why?

Because you can't sell traffic?
Because 99.9% of porn consumers no longer pay for porn on sites your ad sales pay for?
Because it might mean publishers can make more sales?
Because affiliates can create sites that more effective than squeezing 1-5,000 from Tube ad clicks?

Why are they evil?

I see them as the destruction or decrease of free porn. At least stopping the steady decline of surfers migrating to free porn sites. Maybe you want that to increase.

Well, I can see why some in this Industry are freaking out about adblockers. As a paysite owner I agree with you (shocking? LOL) that adblockers are good for business. But remember, a LOT of this Industry is based around the traffic circle jerk. I see this a lot at shows I've attended. The only people exhibiting are cams, dating (naturally), billers and ad companies.

So when the ROI of the circle jerk decreases by as much as 50% there go the margins (profits) of these ad companies and ad buyers. They are not interested in "content" per se, or providing the surfer with a good user experience. They are interested in pure, hard NUMBERS - and any way they can get to them. So that's why they are freaking out. It's understandable.

It makes it too easy -- order ads and pay the bill.

SEO and Landing Pages are a lot of work -- that costs investment money and time. When network ads no longer show the ROMI then advertisers will find new ways.

The Paul Markham Experience is on again folks.

Sorry Paul, but yet again, you're wrong.

I am running AdBlock Plus and uBlock side by side.

I went to PornHub and AdBlock Plus blocked 7 resources, uBlock blocked 15 however there are still ads.

Top of front page:

http://bbspics.com/images/2016/08/14...50.58AM.md.png

See the banner to the right, loaded fine and bypassed the two best ad blockers

Lower portion of front page:

http://bbspics.com/images/2016/08/14...54.09AM.md.png

3 ads one for Brazzers and the other two for dating, all bypassing the two best ad blockers.

Now while it's true I might have evaded a pop under, and maybe even some other tracking resources, I still see four ads before leaving the front page and delving further into the site.

Ad Blockers cannot and will not stop all ads. They will not harm companies like MindGeek to the extent you would wish them to. Rather than blabbering on in every thread about things that you do not understand, why don't you actually install some ad blockers and find out for yourself how effective they are.

https://ublock.org/

https://adblockplus.org/

I keep Flash disabled so only the player skin loaded.

look at the subdomain name LOL ://d1zqiu3u1zvqy8.cloudfront.net/x.swf"

No pop over/unders open but were they counted and charged the advertiser for the no view? Our abysmal click throughs (CTR) on all adult websites indicate this.

It's smart to enable it for specific domains only.

If you don't have Flash installed at all then you'll fall back to HTML5 on many sites.

This happens on XVideos and PornHub.

http://bbspics.com/images/2016/08/14...44.47AM.md.png

Any site that hasn't abandoned Flash yet is going to lose a lot of traffic as Flash support is removed from browsers entirely over time.

Who's still on Facebook besides my grandmother?

Paul Markham :1orglaugh

https://zephoria.com/top-15-valuable...ok-statistics/

I think it is a colossal time wasting trap personally. However, I am not the demographic they get :2 cents:

As of the second quarter of 2016, Facebook had 1.71 billion monthly active users. So, well, a lot of people are still actively using Facebook.

Those freaking out will have to adapt or die. The good thing is if adblockers can't fund free porn, they will be adapting in a far wealthier industry. Instead of making it poorer.