Adblock Countermeasures

[WhimsyTheFae]

Well, I prefer the sure money that the ad brings in to a fire-drill fund raiser. Even with the inconvenient layout...

EDIT: I hate sites that have ads in between every X number of posts and actually prefer the sidebar add to that idea.

 

[Thanee]

What is the main cost factor for this site, anyways?

Bandwidth?
Dedicated server cost?
Something else?

Bye
Thanee

 

[Morrus]

For many people, myself included, it is not that we don't want any ads. The issue that seems to have come up was rather the placement of the ad on the page and how it interfers with the layout of the rest of the page.

Perhaps what needs to be explained better is not why we need ads or how adblockers work, but rather why a vertical ad was added to the layout.

That's the most simple question of all:

WotC: We'll pay you $X for a side banner.
Me: OK. I ain't getting that money from anywhere else.

 

[Morrus]

Incidentally, folks, we won't be having java blocking thingies (whatever it is Mike was describing - I'm not familiar with the technical terms) on the site.

 

[Nifft]

Me: OK. I ain't getting that money from anywhere else.

Is the site in trouble?

Thanks, -- N

 

[Thanee]

I think he meant that the other way...

Bye
Thanee

 

[WhatGravitas]

I find it a little surprising that you need to ask that one.

Consider: We've had the top ad for ages. No advertiser with a brain will buy the bottom ad banner (that one is done by Goggle, so it isn't directly sold to someone with a brain, but also will yield less money).

Given those ads, we still have had to have fire-drill funding drives in the past. So, clearly the current ads plus the Community Supporter accounts wasn't reliably cutting it.

Then, when the single largest potential advertising customer, the one with the deepest ad pockets - WotC - has a desire for a type of ad... what else do you expect a responsible website owner to do?

By the way (I know that wouldn't be employable in the short-term), I think the biggest problem with the side add is the empty space below the add. If you'd add more ads and/or stuff (like current polls) or ANYTHING there, it would look so squashed and much more acceptable. An interesting side effect would be: Adblockers would then mess up the layout a bit. If that's good or bad... well, there are different takes on it.

Just my thoughts.

Cheers, LT.

 

[LightPhoenix]

Actually I would have preferred another fire-drill funding drive to messing up the layout of the site. At least let the community know that revenues were running short and that more intrusive advertising was being considered unless more community supporters signed up.

The problem is that a fund-raiser isn't a solution - it's a stop gap. It's all well and good if once a year, the site has a fund raiser (I think it's a good idea, in fact). However, that means the site is still losing money on a daily basis. In fact, as time passes and the site grows, that rate of money bleeding increases, so that once a year may not be enough. Having a fund-raiser every three months wouldn't work - people get donation fatigue.

The optimum is that the site makes money. Actually, realistically it's that the site at least breaks even. That way there's no need to worry about having emergency fund-raisers. Additionally, it could mean that fund-raiser money could go to upgrading the site rather than maintaining it. Ads by impression (versus click-through) are the way to go in this case - as more people use the site, there are more impressions, and thus in theory more revenue from selling ads.

 

[Greylock]

Incidentally, folks, we won't be having java blocking thingies (whatever it is Mike was describing - I'm not familiar with the technical terms) on the site.

Thank you, Russ.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

Something I thought of in reading some of the threads about buying the core books online versus in a FLGS: Since I don't have a FLGS I wish to support and so pre-ordered the books from amazon.com, I will use the money I saved to renew my CS account.