Comments on: Free is great, but who’s going to pay for it?

By: DarrenS

DarrenS — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 00:17:41 +0000

There is no such thing as free. Do not be deceived. Attention, respect, confidence and the promise of eventual business are the currency that we pay with.

Bloggers who do not receive attention, respect, confidence and eventual business are blogging for what Bill Gates called “an audience of one.”

By: edward boches

edward boches — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 23:22:55 +0000

Lucy:
Good point. Thought it’s not always the content creator who’s getting the money. Unlike HBO which collects a huge percentage of your cable bill via Comcast or whoever, the NY Times is not getting paid by the same company’s Internet services. So you may be paying for broadband, but the broadband supplier, while paying HBO is not paying the news services. Will that become a new model? Probably not. For sure there will have to be some means of generating revenue for the likes of the Times, or it will be impossible to continue to provide the same level of quality. But I’m not sure if it will be the HBO model. Don’t forgot, HBO, in the early days, was the reason for getting cable. You’d have broadband with or without the NY Times. Yes?

By: Lucy Steinert

Lucy Steinert — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 21:00:25 +0000

I am not sure that we aren’t paying for this. Frankly if you look at media spend per person, include TV licenses, cable fees, laptops, broadband,mobile phone bills, etc, each of us is spending a great deal more on media than we have historically. Gone are the days of a 25 cent newspaper that would keep a family informed. Now we have a phone or 2 per person + computers + TV… each of which cost more than a newspaper.

I think we may find that media providers start to create content, the same way we have with the cable channels. Think HBO (HBO which used to be a pipe found itself producing made for TV movies and then the hit TV shows, Sex and the City anyone?) and Sky and….

By: edward boches

edward boches — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 00:57:31 +0000

George:
Great reminder exactly how new all of this is. East to forget when we’re all so used to it. From all the comments one thing is clear: there is no consensus. So I guess we’ll have to see how it all plays out.

By: George F. Snell III

George F. Snell III — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:45:46 +0000

Good encapsulation Edward. Interesting to note, however, that what you recieved for free was the conversation around free. And haven’t we always given those away? With the web, however, we are privy to a lot great conversations.

There’s no doubt that the web and the “free” content is disrupting the business models of traditional media. But it’s silly to think that free is what the future is going to be. We’re at the very beginning of web communications and at the stage were it is all very chaotic – and there are no rules set in stone.

It’s great that Facebook, Twitter and YouTube provide their services for free – but so far they are unprofitable. Will they start charging fees at some point? Maybe. Can the New York Timess and other newspapers continue to give away all their content? Who knows? All of this is fluid and moving so quickly.

In 2-3 years, we might all be paying for content for each post and article read. Or we might not. At least it is going to be fascinating to watch.
.-= George F. Snell III´s last blog ..How the Pitch Has Changed =-.

By: Seth Hosko

Seth Hosko — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:46:45 +0000

Information always wants to be free.

@Brandon. Yeah, I do expect people to give away their knowledge for free. Not all of it of course, but its already happening. Take this blog and this discussion for example. No one is going to start charging for this.

Information is only as valuable as what it leads you to. The application of that information is where the money needs to be made. Of course, alternate delivery models of information (like Anderson’s hard copy is not free, but its on Scribd) is a good area to explore where people find value.

A very good and difficult question, but trying to harness information and make us pay for it, I don’t think is sustainable.

By: edward boches

edward boches — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 16:40:34 +0000

John:
Thanks. Had heard via Anderson that this would happen. Based on his theory this is a strategy to sell more hard books. He’s hoping the buzz will generate more attention and make the book more desirable. Otherwise there would be no real book. Just the digital version, right?

By: John Bardos

John Bardos — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 14:59:51 +0000

I just found out the that entire version of Chris Anderson’s book Free, is available for free on scibd.com. How’s that for putting your money where your mouth is?
http://www.scribd.com/doc/17135767/FREE-full-book-by-Chris-Anderson
.-= John Bardos´s last blog ..Travel, Lifestyle Design and Personal Development Links =-.

By: Eric Andrade

Eric Andrade — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 14:51:07 +0000

I take Seth’s points, but I’m not sure Lonely Planet will go belly up with this strategy. It’s only going to help them sell more guidebooks.

And to your point: with all of the channels now available to us as consumers because of the explosion of the digital medium, it encourages us all to be more entrepreneurial, no?

I’m no Chris Anderson disciple, but I think that he’s on to something. I just don’t think that the model has fully emerged yet, and so trial and error (and entrepreneurial ventures) are encouraged.

There will likely be very few who emerge as the leaders, but some are likely to be upstarts who will take the place of the current establishment.

It will be fun to watch.

By: edward boches

edward boches — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 14:39:47 +0000

Eric:
Good luck with it. What it’s really doing is asking all writers and journalists to become entrepreneurs. Business Week’s John A. Byrnes pushes for a little bit of entrepreneurialism with his writers, asking that they build relationships with readers. Don’t know if he’s weighed in on “free” yet. Will watch your idea play out. Though I tend to agree with Seth Simonds as to who will and won’t play along.