ATRL Senior Member
Member Since: 9/26/2001
Posts: 22,475
|
I can see this guy's logic, actually. Some sites already make you pay for the "good stuff" (IGN, ESPN). Of course, the problem is that their "good stuff" is just stuff that other sites can give to you for free. The idea would be for people to pay either a one time or monthly/yearly subscription to visit your favorite sites. Assuming that there would actually be "good stuff" to pay for, it does make some sense. Now, that being said, I don't see how it would pay off, at least not immediately. I think that a lot of people would have the same mindset many of you have right now: "If we're paying just to access the internet, in the first place, then why should we pay MORE money just to access our favorite sites?" It would be tough to sway them from that logic, and forcing them to accept change will just cause way more harm than good. The whole idea to make people pay to access web sites is between a rock and a hard place, and it's finding it quite hard to escape.
By the way, they will never, EVER charge you 99 cents per click or per search. It would be completely stupid and would drive away precious revenue and customers. Even moreso than subscribing to every site for a fee, charging you a dollar for every search would put some people (such as myself) into a big time financial hole. It would be technological and financial suicide to consider such a move.
|
|
|
|
*wakes up*