Slashdot Mirror


Making the "Free" Business Model Work In a Tough Economy

Randy Savage writes "With venture capital on hold and advertising revenue down, the WSJ discusses where online business models might go. 'Over the past decade, we have built a country-sized economy online where the default price is zero — nothing, nada, zip. Digital goods — from music and video to Wikipedia — can be produced and distributed at virtually no marginal cost, and so, by the laws of economics, price has gone the same way, to $0.00. For the Google Generation, the Internet is the land of the free. '"

17 of 188 comments (clear)

  1. Volume by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The business model is very simple: Give the product away and make it up in volume!

    Joking aside, there has never been a better time for free products. As the strength of McDonalds and Walmart demonstrates, consumers are looking for the cheapest prices to help reduce their costs. Even consumers who are financially okay at the moment are reducing costs to prepare for any eventuality.

    If you look at the market, you see a lot of giveaways that used to be unthinkable. McDonalds is doing "free latte mondays" to draw business away from Starbucks while Denny's is giving away a free Grand Slam breakfast to each visitor tomorrow in an attempt to push coupon books out to customers. (Thus encouraging them to think about the large and inexpensive breakfast they can get there.)

    The key is that these businesses have solid revenue models that their giveaways promote. Web-based businesses are in a slightly tighter pickel. With advertising budgets getting slashed across the board, ad-supported websites are feeling the same pinch as print and broadcast media. Now is the time to find alternative revenue streams such as premium content to back their free services. Things like selling larger downloadable versions of free web games or state tax filings to go with free Federal filings.

    These are potentially sustainable models in the Internet age. They preserve the free service concept and allow consumers to evaluate the product(s). Customers then have a difficult time not paying for Premium features or content with real value. The "real value" is the key, of course. Which is something the internet has been missing with its premium features. (Video Game DLC is particularly bad in this area.)

    1. Re:Volume by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Informative

      None of my forums require or even offer paid membership, nor does Facebook. Steam's services are free, Slashdot is free, Wikipedia is free.

      I think you're missing the point. I can't speak to Facebook, but Steam makes their money off of the games hosted. When you purchase a game through Steam, you indirectly support it. Slashdot has a subscription service if you're interested. The key advantage is being able to see stories before they go live. (Which lets you compose your thoughts and post them in a well-formed manner before the comments are open.) Wikipedia is not a for-profit organization. You can make a donation if you like as that is the only way to support their services.

    2. Re:Volume by jollyreaper · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you look at the market, you see a lot of giveaways that used to be unthinkable. McDonalds is doing "free latte mondays" to draw business away from Starbucks while Denny's is giving away a free Grand Slam breakfast [dennys.com] to each visitor tomorrow in an attempt to push coupon books out to customers. (Thus encouraging them to think about the large and inexpensive breakfast they can get there.)

      The key is that these businesses have solid revenue models that their giveaways promote. Web-based businesses are in a slightly tighter pickel. With advertising budgets getting slashed across the board, ad-supported websites are feeling the same pinch as print and broadcast media. Now is the time to find alternative revenue streams such as premium content to back their free services. Things like selling larger downloadable versions of free web games or state tax filings [taxact.com] to go with free Federal filings.

      I think there's a difference between McDonalds giving away free hamburgers and Wikipedia. The summary makes a good point "an be produced and distributed at virtually no marginal cost, and so, by the laws of economics, price has gone the same way, to $0.00." but misses the totality of it. What the net does is remove intermediaries, the middle-men. If I write a book the cost of production is my own time, plus my editor's time. If I want to make $50k a year off of that, I need to sell some ungodly millions of dollars worth of that book because I'm paying for printing, warehousing, distribution, space on bookshelves, not to mention all of the inflated salaries and bonuses sucked up by the bloatworms in this whole process.

      I'll move far less copies selling direct but I don't have to sell as many to earn a living. Will it be a tough gig? Hell, yeah, but it wasn't exactly easy to be a professional musician or writer back in the 60's, either.

      I think what will really help move digital product is a greater feeling of connection with the creators. I wouldn't see the need to give any more money to the rapper running around with multi-million dollar contract, assuming I liked rap, but I'd want to support the little guy who's just starting out, I want to see more work from him.

      The patronage model seems too altruistic to work in the real world but we're seeing signs that it really is possible.

      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    3. Re:Volume by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The key is VOLUME and DIVERSITY.

      I self publish several DVD's and Coffee Table books. My books and DVD's sell very slowly, each book or DVD sells maybe 1 copy a month. But I have 4 DVD's and 8 books out there. so I am shipping 12 items a month all the time. as I add in the next 2 DVD's that I have finished and the next book I will sell 15 items a month all the time month after month.

      Unlike Traditional marketing and distribution I get about $20.00 per DVD sold and $10.00 per book sold. When I used to sell through a publisher I got $1.00 to $2.00 per book or DVD sold.

      I can sell 10X less and make the same money. Plus I dont have to spend Thousands to woo publishers to carry my product, I can tell the publishers to suck it and do it myself. My profits are 10X from when I had a formal publisher and agent. I control costs, I control every aspect about my product and I reap the profits.

      Do I sit in my villa drinking martinis all day? no. I order supplies, support the website and webstore, and place book and DVD replication orders. I "WORK" 1 hour a day doing that. The rest of the time I do my day job and then do my photography and Videography. I made enough money off it to upgrade my cameras and other gear yearly plus each year the profits increase as I add 2 DVD's and 2 Books to the pile of items that sell every month without fail.

      New DVD's get a surge of 200 sales initially, and they taper off to the 1 a month unless I get a mention in a trade magazine, then they spike again.

      I had an article about one of my products in Creative COW a year ago and my sales spiked hard, same as when I get a mention off a popular blog or podcast.

      If I marketed myself and my product better , sales would be far more brisk.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:Volume by iamthelaw · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A friend pointed out to me once that one way to think of this whole thing, to make it make a little more sense, is to put the business model on its side.

      A company like Google, for example -- most people would say that you and I, as searchers, are Google's customers. Instead, let's say that Google's "customers" are the advertisers, and their "product" is users (or, more concretely, the users' attention). By delivering "products" to "customers", they make money.

      So a site that makes no money -- an early-stage dot-com that doesn't advertise yet, what are they doing? They're building up a warehouse of product, in the hope that once they have enough products, they can sell them to customers at a good price.

  2. Fix that by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    from TFA:
    > It's a consumer's paradise: The Web has become the biggest store in history...

    Telecom companies implementing tiered service models, destroying Net Neutrality will fix that temporary glitch. While they are at it, lets hand-out to them some public bail out tax^H^H^H printed money for the privilege.

  3. The point? by Thanshin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is no "free" business model.

    There are forms of benefit that don't come from giving objects in exchange for money.

  4. micropayments by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is exactly why the net needs a viable model for micropayments. And yes, I know, the abundance fan's response is that "money is obsolete, we don't need it any more"... People still want SOMETHING for their work, and while there have been all sorts of proposals, ranging from whuffie to all sorts of other trust metrics, micropayments would work just as well and would allow a tie-in to the remains of the real world economy.

    1. Re:micropayments by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The short story on micropayments: The first one that tries to use it, dies. Why is wikipedia beating the crap out of britannica? Because if you want a general link you can post to that everyone can use, it must be an open site. How often does slashdot link to paid subscription articles? Never. I rememer there were a few NYT articles in the past that required free subscription, and it was always plenty bitching. I'm not sure what is or was competing with YouTube but the premise is simple, if you want to share a video you post it there and everyone can see. The result is that anyone that tries have their google rankings go to hell and toil away in obscurity. This will not work unless there's a really, really broad coalition that makes sure that the vast majority of the Internet population has a micropayment account. I put the odds of that happening at slightly below me winning the lottery three times in a row.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  5. Earth to businesses by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yes, free can beat not free. Can't argue with that.

    You have to realise, however, that sometimes it's not the fact that it's free, it's the fact that's it's available at all.

    Pirates don't care about international borders, different launch dates for different countries, how old the content is, etc, etc.

    If you want to sell your content, don't build artificial borders that prevents us from buying it.

    As an example: how long has the iTunes store been running? Why can't the labels tear sell their content to everyone on the planet? It's your own mess of contracts and licenses, figure it out for yourselves and leave us out of it.

  6. Wait by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Didn't I hear this once before, when the dotcom era ended and all the "free" businesses had to start making money? Realisticly all the "techy" parts like servers and bandwidth should keep getting cheaper, so that helps. And in a hostile market, marketing goes first as it's an "expense", then you lose your customers, then the marketing budget comes back. When else are you going to fight for your customers than when they're scarce? The alledged death of ad revenue is heavily overhyped.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  7. Free reduces infrastructure costs by Gizzmonic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The real appeal of free software is in reducing infrastructure costs. Just like roads, they don't normally generate money themselves, but they make it easier for businesses to interact and generate wealth!

    --
    (-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
  8. free? by thermian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, all those datacentres buying hardware and using electricity, are they free too?

    Sooner or later there is a cost, and free services have one big problem for long term survivability, where's the profit?

    A great free service may be fun, might even be useful, but sooner or later down the chain someone needs to be paid.

    Or are all web developers working for no pay these days?

    --
    A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
    1. Re:free? by ternarybit · · Score: 5, Insightful

      not free, just zero obligatory cost to user. Google isn't truly free because you get AdSense on the right of every search, which are paid for by advertisers. Wikipedia is free but gets millions in donations from many sources.

      Nothing of use is truly free to produce, (see parent) but since the cost of disseminating digital services divides to almost nothing per client, only a few of those customers need to support the provider to keep everyone in "free" service.

      When I can try a fully-functional product/service before investing a dime, I am much more likely to pay/donate than if I am required to pay even nominal cost upfront. That is why I've spent much more on FOSS in the last 10 years than I have commercial software.

  9. Re:Probably have to subscribe to slashdot after al by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not me, I don't care about Karma.

    Posting anonymously to protect my Karma.

  10. Re:Bullshit by SSpade · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You don't know what "marginal cost" means, do you?

    It means the cost to create one extra item of something, once you're already making a bunch of them. In the case of software it's the distribution cost.

    That tends to be extremely low for any software product (which is why we seldom get manuals in the box now, as they add a lot to the marginal cost) and is close to zero for online distribution. Even if you're paying through the nose for bandwidth your incremental cost for a CD size .iso is a few pennies. If you use something like bittorrent, to leach off your users bandwidth (I'm looking at you, Blizzard), your incremental cost is likely an order of magnitude or two less than that.

  11. When did "production" become cost-free? by westlake · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The geek is never honest when he conflates production and distribution.

    The P2P rip doesn't generate the $150 million dollars needed to produce "Monsters vs. Aliens" or the $40 million needed for the low budget "Serenity."

    If the geek wants to see more films that appeal to him he has to find a realistic solution to the problem of how to pay for them.

    Otherwise production simply ends or shifts to more profitable markets. "High School Musical" and a "Hotel for Dogs."