Do Ads Still Pay Well? Investigating Online Advertising's Viability

[pa5tabear]

I never click ads, I use adblock plus, and I assume that most other people also rarely click ads. I know that ads can still be valuable by increasing my awareness of a brand/idea though.

My question is: Do ads still pay well? I've read that online advertising is becoming less viable as companies realize the ads are largely ignored. I'm just curious to what extent this is true.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

In general, science is not a good advertising market, especially physics and homework help. However what we do get from ads, along with gold members, currently pays for all of PF's expenses.

I don't think online ads are becoming less viable. Thousands of new people are connecting to the internet each day. You don't have that growth in TV or print. Companies just need to keep being creative and find optimal ways to reach their target audience.

 

[pa5tabear]

In general, science is not a good advertising market, especially physics and homework help. However what we do get from ads, along with gold members, currently pays for all of PF's expenses.

I don't think online ads are becoming less viable. Thousands of new people are connecting to the internet each day. You don't have that growth in TV or print. Companies just need to keep being creative and find optimal ways to reach their target audience.

Do you think it's a bad advertising market because the audience is more "immune" to advertisement compared to a more general audience?

And when mentioned online ads becoming less viable, I was more thinking in terms of revenue. Do ad clicks pay less today than they did 5 or 10 years ago? I assume yes, because I assume online advertising in general is not very effective, and that the advertisers are becoming more aware of this. Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm just guessing this because I know digg/reddit/facebook all have major issues monetizing, and digg at least was once thought to be very valuable (though now it's near worthless due to lack of community as well).

Maybe the growth can counter everything, but I still assume that compared to print/TV, online advertising is less effective, since you have far more control over what you view.

 

[rorix_bw]

Sorry, I think I misread, did you actually say Facebook have trouble monetarising? I am shocked to hear this.

Reddit, I don't know, but they're a huge website.

Digg had an outdated business model, I suspected they were headed for the clapper. They tried to create a controlled social network based around traditional media techniques and of course that's doomed to fail.

[STRIKE]If online advertising is a poor earner why is google richer than tv networks?[/STRIKE] Sory i misread what you wrote.

Online advertising is different from TV and you can't really comapre the two. I think TVs might be gone soon, in any case. I don't know anyone younger than 30 that has TV set. We all go online if we want a video.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Do you think it's a bad advertising market because the audience is more "immune" to advertisement compared to a more general audience?

That is a factor yes, but more in that ads are targeted and advertisers are matched with content. Consider what kinds of ads could be matched with the following thread: "force on dielectric in parallel plate capacitor". Think of products and services. Now think about what kinds of ads could be matched with a thread about luxury cars, pharmaceutical, jewelry, real estate, bankruptcy. Those are high market ads. The former thread can't be matched with anything of value, so the ads will be off little value. Most of PF threads are like that.

 

[pa5tabear]

Sorry, I think I misread, did you actually say Facebook have trouble monetarising? I am shocked to hear this.

Reddit, I don't know, but they're a huge website.

Digg had an outdated business model, I suspected they were headed for the clapper. They tried to create a controlled social network based around traditional media techniques and of course that's doomed to fail.

[STRIKE]If online advertising is a poor earner why is google richer than tv networks?[/STRIKE] Sory i misread what you wrote.

Online advertising is different from TV and you can't really comapre the two. I think TVs might be gone soon, in any case. I don't know anyone younger than 30 that has TV set. We all go online if we want a video.

Yes, facebook has community, but do you ever actually pay them? I don't know anyone who does. And I'm guessing 98% of users also don't click ads.

Monetizing is a big issue for both facebook and reddit because the users do not want ads, and do everything they can to ignore them. Advertisers are realizing this, and I assume the rates they pay are decreasing.

Yes, Digg dug their own grave to some extent, but they faced the same problem even before.

And I disagree. Both TV and online advertising are not wanted. The difference is that TV users cannot skip/block (assuming no DVR, which is still the majority of viewing). Online, however, there are endless ways of not viewing/ignoring advertisements.

 

[pa5tabear]

That is a factor yes, but more in that ads are targeted and advertisers are matched with content. Consider what kinds of ads could be matched with the following thread: "force on dielectric in parallel plate capacitor". Think of products and services. Now think about what kinds of ads could be matched with a thread about luxury cars, pharmaceutical, jewelry, real estate, bankruptcy. Those are high market ads. The former thread can't be matched with anything of value, so the ads will be off little value. Most of PF threads are like that.

That makes sense. I'm looking at the ads I'm getting right now, and they're mostly generic. I'd consider myself to be nearly advertising "immune", as are most users, I assume, but I wouldn't ever click these.

Do you mind me asking your opinion on adblockers? And are you allowed to share numbers (viewers, click throughs, and payoff) on the advertising? I don't plan on publicising, competing, or anything like that. I'm just curious about the viability of internet advertising, and how it has changed over the years.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Do you mind me asking your opinion on adblockers?

I'm not hostile towards them, but PF survives off ad revenue. If it drys up, so does PF.

 

[Evo]

Do you mind me asking your opinion on adblockers? And are you allowed to share numbers (viewers, click throughs, and payoff) on the advertising? I don't plan on publicising, competing, or anything like that. I'm just curious about the viability of internet advertising, and how it has changed over the years.

This isn't appropriate for forum feedback then.

 

[phinds]

I have a niche market hobby website (woodworking) and I've noticed that my ad revenue now is about 40% of what it was 2 years ago, and from what I've gathered, that's because Google now pays less than it used to for website ads because the ad market is being diluted by social media advertising which, whether it works or not, is causing website ads to pay less.

Still, my Google income WAY more than pays for the site. That's perhaps a bit misleading however since even though it is just a niche hobby site, it is a hugely popular site within that hobby.

 

[pa5tabear]

I have a niche market hobby website (woodworking) and I've noticed that my ad revenue now is about 40% of what it was 2 years ago, and from what I've gathered, that's because Google now pays less than it used to for website ads because the ad market is being diluted by social media advertising which, whether it works or not, is causing website ads to pay less.

Still, my Google income WAY more than pays for the site. That's perhaps a bit misleading however since even though it is just a niche hobby site, it is a hugely popular site within that hobby.

Is that 40% less per viewer? I'd assume your userbase would have grown over that period.

 

[phinds]

Is that 40% less per viewer? I'd assume your userbase would have grown over that period.

Yes, the per-click $ amount dropped by about that much, although the number of clicks did also drop off a bit.

 

[dlgoff]

... PF survives off ad revenue. If it drys up, so does PF.

 

[Monique]

That is a factor yes, but more in that ads are targeted and advertisers are matched with content. Consider what kinds of ads could be matched with the following thread: "force on dielectric in parallel plate capacitor". Think of products and services.

I can think of a whole list of advertisers, but I've never seen them here.

One would be educational, there are often people asking for books and documentaries, another would be the science industry.

If I go to a conference it's fully being sponsored by life science companies, if I watch an online broadcast it's being sponsored by such companies as well. The other day I watched a very informative broadcast, not long after that I received an e-mail of a company offering reagents for performing such experiments. That's targeted advertising, why are companies not approaching this website?

Think of how many black boards and chalks could be sold with advertising in the math forum.. Or how many vegetable and hot pepper plants could be sold in the garden thread, or the number of cook books in the food thread I wouldn't mind such advertising, it beats going out and looking for the products myself.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I can think of a whole list of advertisers, but I've never seen them here.

One would be educational, there are often people asking for books and documentaries, another would be the science industry.

Think of how many black boards and chalks could be sold with advertising in the math forum.. Or how many vegetable and hot pepper plants could be sold in the garden thread, or the number of cook books in the food thread I wouldn't mind such advertising, it beats going out and looking for the products myself.

I'm not saying there is a lack of advertisers, I'm saying there is a lack of high paying advertisers. How much money do you think ads for chalk, vegetables and cook books go for?

 

[Monique]

Ah, those were just examples 10 cents on the low end? Point being that with the right ads people will be interested in clicking them, thus generating money. Volumes count.

To the OP: I know people who earn a living with doing nothing (enough to support a family), the only requirement was setting up a website with ads (nothing luxurious). The website needs to generate enough traffic though, if it were so easy everyone would be doing it (including me, but I'm not) But why discuss this in the feedback thread?

 

[jtbell]

PF survives off ad revenue.

About what fraction of PF's revenue comes from ads versus subscriptions?

 

[pa5tabear]

Ah, those were just examples 10 cents on the low end? Point being that with the right ads people will be interested in clicking them, thus generating money. Volumes count.

To the OP: I know people who earn a living with doing nothing (enough to support a family), the only requirement was setting up a website with ads (nothing luxurious). The website needs to generate enough traffic though, if it were so easy everyone would be doing it (including me, but I'm not) But why discuss this in the feedback thread?

I started this in the general discussion section but it got moved.

And yeah, I've heard of people making a lot of money on advertising alone, but my impression is that it's a dieing business model, which seems to be true. I've been contemplating starting a website for a while, but I think if I were to do so, I should really be doing it primarily for something other than money.

The internet is becoming more and more saturated, advertisers paying less, and it also seems like the larger sites are eating up the smaller sites more and more. For example, with reddit giving anyone the ability to create a subreddit on any topic, is there any benefit to dedicated forums? Technially no, but the community quality here is still much better.

 

[Evo]

I started this in the general discussion section but it got moved.

It was moved because you asked specifically about PF. Now you've changed the topic.

 

[Zarqon]

I run with an adblock, but because I realize that some of my favorite sites are funded to a large extent by things like ads I manually make exceptions for a few sites that I really like. The important thing here though is that the particular ads on the site is not too attention grabbing. When the ads are colorful flashy and blinking you just have to shut it off no matter how much you want to support the site. A good thing the ads of PF are usually pretty moderate ^^ which leads me to a question, is the flashyness, or lack thereof, of the ads something that can be chosen or how does this work?

 

[Alesak]

IMHO more effective way to raise money for PF would be donations rather than gold membership, since the feeling "I contributed to something useful" that stems from donating would be stronger motivation.

Look at wikipedia, it doesn't even have ads and right now they sit on crapton of cash.Also, are the mods paid?

 

[lisab]

IMHO more effective way to raise money for PF would be donations rather than gold membership, since the feeling "I contributed to something useful" that stems from donating would be stronger motivation.

Look at wikipedia, it doesn't even have ads and right now they sit on crapton of cash.


Also, are the mods paid?

No, we're all volunteers.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

which leads me to a question, is the flashyness, or lack thereof, of the ads something that can be chosen or how does this work?

It's something I have considered heavily. Members will see almost nothing but text-ads which are easy on the eyes. Visitors receive a combination of text and graphic ads. The graphic ads are from a reputable company and any annoying ads I can and will ban.

IMHO more effective way to raise money for PF would be donations rather than gold membership, since the feeling "I contributed to something useful" that stems from donating would be stronger motivation.

Gold membership is essentially a donation with a few thank you perks.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Also, are the mods paid?

The loving feedback we regularly get delivered to our inboxes is enough