> The Premium fee is basically about $7 per year, which is less than what a free user generates in ad revenue. Thus leagues that pay for Premium and use an ad-blocker are generating less revenue than free users.
They charge about $20 per user per year to remove ads. I pay for that, so I'm not sure what kind of ads they have, but I'd love to see what they're advertising and what the click through + conversion rates look like.
What you said makes sense to me. I wonder if advertisers are paying a fortune to acquire users with a lot of disposable income.
1. https://www.fantrax.com/forums/general/messages/public/l72mh...
IIRC for Facebook American users the average revenue was 50+ dollars per year. Furthermore, if you're the type of person for whom saving a few dollars doesn't matter, you're likely worth more than that average; and for FB to break even on your ads an appropriate price is likely to be closer to $100 per year.
It's easy to imagine a future where the infrastructure is something analogous to a public good, like clean water. The infrastructure is agnostic to the content.
The content, on the other hand, is a product of a massive, churning, never-ending process of intellectual work. Ads, for the most part, provide the underlying economic incentive for that work.
And the dirty little secret of all that ad-supported creative content? Its value is minimal. Truly minimal. Often low quality, incoherent. If it all went away tomorrow, I would hardly notice.
That it is nevertheless so popular is something of a paradox. I know I sound ridiculous, but at the core, I'm beginning to believe that the fact that advertising is as powerful an economic force as it is, is a reflection of the fact that people's lives are more boring and devoid of meaning than we often admit.
Maybe a tax on ISPs? I think I'd happily pay $10 extra per month for access to an ad-free interrnet. Maybe $20. But how many of the people that are already happy with the ads and poor google results would do so? Would it be sustainable?