Free to Fee

Post by **BuckGB** » Tue Aug 13, 2002 5:13 pm

Yet another article about the internet's move from free content to subscription has hit the web. What I find interesting in this one is the following statistic:

Web surfers paid $675 million for online content and services in 2001, almost double what they spent the year before.

After seeing dozens of websites turn subscription this year alone, I'm betting that an astronomical amount of money gets spent during 2002. Where do you think the internet is heading for 2003 and beyond? Will a vast majority of all websites start charging subscription fees?

fable · Post by **fable** » Tue Aug 13, 2002 5:22 pm

Originally posted by Buck Satan
After seeing dozens of websites turn subscription this year alone, I'm betting that an astronomical amount of money gets spent during 2002. Where do you think the internet is heading for 2003 and beyond? Will a vast majority of all websites start charging subscription fees?

Without commenting about numbers, I do think it's a trend. More and more people are coming to see the Web as a necessity to their lives rather than a luxury, and are consequently willing (IMO) to pay for online services.

This is good news, too, for online advertisers--eventually. I think the Internet advertising bubble went bust because, like the online businesses, expectations far outweighted accomplishments early in the process. Gradual growth can be expected, and I assume we'll start seeing more banners again, and more results from them, within the next couple of years.

Weasel · Post by **Weasel** » Tue Aug 13, 2002 5:31 pm

In my view of the world, all websites (With a written product the public wants) will in the end be subscription. Now some will try to go free, but I believe they will be over come by people looking for a free ride and in the end cause the site to have to charge to pay for the bandwidth.

Site like "Janes Flower House" which sells flowers will not run into the problem. But sites like "Gamebanshee" will. The difference being one sells a product that can help cover the cost of the bandwidth.

Who is to blame? The ISP? The Site Owner? The Server seller? I see people saying the internet is free, but I cannot see it. From the ISP to the Site owner, money is spent to give the public what it wants. If the money for bandwidth is not spent, the public will not be seeing the content. If the Server is not paid for his equipment, will the public get the content? The internet is not free and not matter what some people say...it cannot never be free. Money will have to be spent by someone in the end and I believe it's only fair everyone who wants the content should pay.

HighLordDave · Post by **HighLordDave** » Tue Aug 13, 2002 5:38 pm

Like fable, I agree that subscription-based web content will become more widespread, and that the numbers in terms of both subscribers and dollar amounts will increase. At the same time, I think that there is a lot of web content that will continue to be free of charge.

A tie-in to a webpage is almost essential anymore to anything of commercial value, from movies to NASCAR to TV shows to video games. In fact, I can't think of a single movie that does not plug its webpage at some time during an advertisement. I think this kind of content will remain free of subscription fees; after all, who is going to pay to watch the Spider-Man 2 trailer or play all of the free kids games at Bobthebuilder.com?

I also believe that much of the web's content will remain free of subscription charges. Many webpages, particularly personal webpages provided through ISPs and colleges specifically prohibit a user from engaging in commercial activity through their homepage, so this kind of content will never carry a charge. However, I think with the bust of the dot-coms, companies are looking for any way possible to make money off of the internet, and subscription fees are the way to go.

On an interesting side note, subscription fees for peer-to-peer file sharing (as opposed to access to web content) are ridiculously unprofitable and while some people pay for these services, it is my experience that the vast majority of people who swap files over the internet do not pay for it, and not only don't feel bad about breaking the law, but think of it as one big "up yours!" to the people who would squelch this kind of activity.

EDIT-It's good to see you stopping by to hang out, Buck. Don't be a stranger.

Nightmare · Post by **Nightmare** » Tue Aug 13, 2002 7:01 pm

I, unfortunitly, think that the web will eventually become full of subscription services. But, its at least good to see that admins (like Buck) are finally getting some return for all the hours that they put into their site.

Tybaltus · Post by **Tybaltus** » Tue Aug 13, 2002 8:03 pm

Originally posted by Gaxx_Firkraag
I, unfortunitly, think that the web will eventually become full of subscription services. But, its at least good to see that admins (like Buck) are finally getting some return for all the hours that they put into their site.

Thats what I was thinking, too. It seems the only way to get ahead in society is to get money and lots of it. People will discover the internet is even more of a goldmine than they originally discovered. And when things get desperate for some companies, the price will go up, and when this succeeds, everyone else will do it. I certainly hope I am wrong, and I am a pessimist, afterall.

Good to see you here, Buck.

Phantom Lord · Post by **Phantom Lord** » Wed Aug 14, 2002 12:31 am

I think more and more websites with good content will become commercial. Like GS, many will divide their content into two sections, a free one with basic content and news and a commercial one with archives, detailed information etc.

The commercial content will probably offer strong search / research possibilities. Adds will become less, performance and site design will be better because people of course expect something for their money, this will lead to higher higher overall quality. Like in commercial TV we can expect more exclusive content in the sports, news and entertainment sector. Especially newspapers and TV stations will try to bring on commercial sites, because they own exclusive contents and because they are direct competitors of internet content providers.

There also will be a lot more legal discussion like if a commercial site can be sued if it's down, has broken links, gives wrong information etc because web sites actually become products that people pay for. This also means that web site providers will need professional editors, quality assurance, legal advisors and will grow into real corporations, making it impossible to go back and provide their contents for free.

frogus · Post by **frogus** » Wed Aug 14, 2002 4:09 am

I am almost sure that within 5(?) years, everyone will buy all their games, movies, music etc from Downloads from AOL/T/W etc, paying wth credit cards and downloading the service. This could well happen with books and magazines too in the slightly further future IMHO. This could all mean two things -
It could mean that paying for everything you see on the net becomes normal practice, and small or specialist sights will have subscriptions too, or, more likely, what Fable said:
The massive online purchasing infrastructure which I'm sure is being heaved into place even now, will make online advertising a viable concept, and then small sites, and places like GB will become just like independent TV channels....

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Wed Aug 14, 2002 5:27 am

I belive that the "pay 2 use" concept will stay for a significant amount of time.
Since the burst of the "new economy bubble" a couple of years ago, pay sites started comming forth an masse due to the sever drop in advetising revenue.

I think we will always see free sites, but these will be run purly as a leasure(sp?) time activity where they don't "care" much about its users.
If these free sites on the low budget severs ever become popular and the site wants to keep up with demand they will have to upgrade and thus making it more expensive - much like Gamebanshee. The other choice would be to not care about the users in a manner to get better bandwith and keep running it on a smaller scale.
That would be the dilemma for most small time site owners where popularity occurse.

For most other sites, the commercial aspect of the internet would proberly be a blessing, because they can start to earn money again from people using the sites, and thus, seen in the light of capitalism, have greater inticament to improve the quality of their sites.
This will help the consumer/user of the sites - the usual "statement" has for a long time been that people couldn't complain about a "free" sevice, now that you are being charged to use a site, the demands for better content is more importent then ever. Why pay for a site where you don't like the content (or
whatever), when you most often can find a other site instead.

The biggest joker in this game is the ISPs.
For years the consumers have been used to paying much money for using the internet with free content. If they are starting to pay for the content also, I know that the presure will be on the ISPs to compete on their prices as well as speed.

Ode to a Grasshopper · Wed Aug 14, 2002 7:31 am

Regrettably, the move to more fee-based content, though probably inevitable, means that the 'world-wide' web will become even more restricted to those who can afford it than it was before.

Nice to see you around, though, Buck.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Wed Aug 14, 2002 7:52 am

Originally posted by Ode to a Grasshopper
Regrettably, the move to more fee-based content, though probably inevitable, means that the 'world-wide' web will become even more restricted to those who can afford it than it was before.
<snip>

I don't quite agree with this.
As I've stated there will still be free sites and free content around, I fail to see this would change.

As it is now, you look up a site, get some infomation but have absolutly nothing to guarentee that the infomation is "right".
When paying for a site, you have somewhat more guarentee for this, because the site can't afford to loose customers.
I can make a website and post news (to take an example), and post wrong news, and if people would be annoyed by that - to bad for them.
I make a site with news and charge for it, if people stop comming there I loose much more money then the other scenario.

Okay - this is somewhat simplified but I think the scenario illustrate the point.

People will just have to "shop around" as they do with any other merchandise they purchase and buy what is best for them.
So my bet is there will be more quality "pay to use" sites around then there was quality "free to use" sites before.
Anybody with an editor could (and proberly everybody has) put up a website, but if they were planning on making money from it now, they better put up a better website then the next guy.
Therefore I think that while the acess to a widespread variety of websites might decrease, the content of the sites you use should get better - otherwise, take your buisness somewhere else that macthes your demands.

The reason such notions exists is that we are used to the internet being a "free content" area and this has certainly been a good thing, since I really doubt the internet would have been so wipespread as it is today, without the "new economy" and the "Dot-com. buisnees boom", but as everything else, it evolves (some will say for the worse).

HighLordDave · Post by **HighLordDave** » Wed Aug 14, 2002 8:46 am

There will always be free web content because companies/websites need a hook to draw you in to their premium content. For instance, CNN.com just recently made their streaming video available on a subscription-only basis. Are they going to restrict their entire website to paying customers only? No; they need to have a tie-in with their TV broadcasts and a way to get people to visit their other content that does not require a premium.