Sad day for Powerboat magazine
03-23-2011, 07:03 PM
#61
Registered
As many of you know, including Matt <g>, I have not been a fan of PBM for a while. I think they need to think out side the box to compete with the internet and I hope they do so. However I shre as hell don't think they owe me or anyone else a tee shirt! Thet are in the publishing bussiness not clothing.
03-31-2011, 05:18 AM
#62
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Originally Posted by Padraig
I think they need to think out side the box to compete with the internet and I hope they do so....
But, PB magazine might have better web appeal if you could read the blog from their excellent writers on an IPad... Can they catch up with the times?
03-31-2011, 09:07 AM
#63
Registered
That calls for a different economic model, better technology - etc. but that's the way things are going. The information is the commodity - you just have to be able to deliver it in forms people want....at a cost that makes sense. Modern publishers don't look at web and ipad content as "cannibalizing" print - it's all just the same. You have to figure how to make it pay for itself across all the platforms.
More and more - it's the advertisers who are doing most of the paying.
03-31-2011, 09:27 AM
#64
Correspondent
Correspondent
I have to agree with this. Publishers keep treating content like it's different on print/web/ipad - etc. To an extent, that is true - but you have to make your content available in all forms, so the reader can choose and conveniently access it wherever they want. Maybe even just parts of it at a time.
That calls for a different economic model, better technology - etc. but that's the way things are going. The information is the commodity - you just have to be able to deliver it in forms people want....at a cost that makes sense. Modern publishers don't look at web and ipad content as "cannibalizing" print - it's all just the same. You have to figure how to make it pay for itself across all the platforms.
More and more - it's the advertisers who are doing most of the paying.
That calls for a different economic model, better technology - etc. but that's the way things are going. The information is the commodity - you just have to be able to deliver it in forms people want....at a cost that makes sense. Modern publishers don't look at web and ipad content as "cannibalizing" print - it's all just the same. You have to figure how to make it pay for itself across all the platforms.
More and more - it's the advertisers who are doing most of the paying.
Beyond that, I agree with everything you and Padraig (other than his opinion of Powerboat) have said.
03-31-2011, 09:48 AM
#65
Registered
03-31-2011, 10:22 AM
#66
Correspondent
Correspondent
But here's the thing I find fascinating: Click-through rates for online ads are, generally speaking, abysmal. If you doubt that, try to recall the last time you clicked on an ad. So not only does the content world have to do a much, much better job (as Padraig points out of) of rethinking and presenting content, the advertising world needs to create online ads that people will actually open. Otherwise, frankly, those ad dollars, which by the way don't come from the ad companies agencies but companies paying them to create compelling ads, are being wasted.
Today's online ads, most of them anyway, seem to be digital versions of print ads. And that isn't cutting it.
At the very least, online ads needs to be entertaining and maybe even ... interactive.
03-31-2011, 10:50 AM
#67
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Indiana/Lake Cumberland
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you know part of the problem with are economy today is peoples lack of biusness education. and they just think from there wallet and not from there head. they have never been in a owners shoes only drew a paycheck never had to worry about covering checks. just give me more pay that attitude has got to change the honey moon is over soorry guys and gals thats the truth forgive the spelling you get the point
03-31-2011, 12:20 PM
#68
Registered
The online ad question is a fascinating one, to be sure. The money is being spent online because advertisers know [today] that's where the eyeballs are. But that's pretty much all they know. 
IF and WHEN anyone ever really figures it out, it will be interesting. Actually, I think the only value current display ads have is for pure impressions - to increase top-of-mind awareness in the most general sense. No one clicks on them, and expecting them to "sell" is, I think, asking too much. In the end, I think the environment of the web and the interaction it provides will change our perception and definition of "what advertising is" anyway... We're using a 20th century yardstick to measure, judge and analyze somthing that will end up being completely different....
IF and WHEN anyone ever really figures it out, it will be interesting. Actually, I think the only value current display ads have is for pure impressions - to increase top-of-mind awareness in the most general sense. No one clicks on them, and expecting them to "sell" is, I think, asking too much. In the end, I think the environment of the web and the interaction it provides will change our perception and definition of "what advertising is" anyway... We're using a 20th century yardstick to measure, judge and analyze somthing that will end up being completely different....
03-31-2011, 12:24 PM
#69
Agree completely. The "pay for membership" model for web sites, probably with the exception of porn, has been less than successful. Advertising will carry the load online, and right now that means $27 billion in online advertising revenues. For the first time in history, online ad revenues have surpassed newspaper ad revenues. (How they compare to magazine ad revenues, I have no idea.)
But here's the thing I find fascinating: Click-through rates for online ads are, generally speaking, abysmal. If you doubt that, try to recall the last time you clicked on an ad. So not only does the content world have to do a much, much better job (as Padraig points out of) of rethinking and presenting content, the advertising world needs to create online ads that people will actually open. Otherwise, frankly, those ad dollars, which by the way don't come from the ad companies agencies but companies paying them to create compelling ads, are being wasted.
Today's online ads, most of them anyway, seem to be digital versions of print ads. And that isn't cutting it.
At the very least, online ads needs to be entertaining and maybe even ... interactive.
But here's the thing I find fascinating: Click-through rates for online ads are, generally speaking, abysmal. If you doubt that, try to recall the last time you clicked on an ad. So not only does the content world have to do a much, much better job (as Padraig points out of) of rethinking and presenting content, the advertising world needs to create online ads that people will actually open. Otherwise, frankly, those ad dollars, which by the way don't come from the ad companies agencies but companies paying them to create compelling ads, are being wasted.
Today's online ads, most of them anyway, seem to be digital versions of print ads. And that isn't cutting it.
At the very least, online ads needs to be entertaining and maybe even ... interactive.
