6 ms·
TFA's point is that the model is horrible for creators: a revenue sharing model is only viable as long as the number of creators being shared is comparatively s
by okennedy 3y ago
TFA's point is that the model is horrible for creators: a revenue sharing model is only viable as long as the number of creators being shared is comparatively small. $5, $10, $20 from a few hundred or thousand viewers is a decent haul when compared to a few fractional pennies per view.
It makes sense that creators focus their efforts on cultivating personal relationships with a small, but loyal base. You're not their target demographic.
- ghaff 3y agoPeople say they will pay for news. The translation is that will be dragged kicking and screaming into paying $100 per year for all they can eat news rather than the thousands it would actually cost.
- Waterluvian 3y agoExactly. People are willing to pay for news if it’s sensibly priced. It’s not a charity. If it really costs thousands, then the model is broken and they should all be out of a job. But let’s be honest, it doesn’t cost thousands.
- ghaff 3y agoJournalists have never been especially highly paid though. Software should be cheaper too. Let's stop paying software developers 6 figures.