Slashdot Mirror
Would You Pay For YouTube Videos?
secmartin writes "A couple of weeks ago, Google's CEO mentioned to investors that they might start charging YouTube's users for viewing content: 'With respect to how it will get monetized, our first priority, as you pointed out, is on the advertising side. We do expect over time to see micro payments and other forms of subscription models coming as well. But our initial focus is on advertising. We will be announcing additional things in that area literally very, very soon.' With the recent Disney-Hulu deal, Google is under increasing pressure to generate more revenue and at the same time attract more premium content. That means we might see payment options coming even sooner than expected, with control over the pricing models being handed over to the studios providing that content, like the way Apple caved in over variable pricing on iTunes. This raises an important question: would you actually pay for premium content on YouTube and other sites, or will this draw viewers away to other video sites?"
then what the hell is the point of the subject line in the first place? Seems to me the problem isn't the parent, it is a flaw in the comment system. Really, what function does the subject serve?
WRONG !
I would make my own ring tone if I could! So why can't I then? Nowadays, if the tunes aren't locked with a DRM from the cell company, you just can't use them as ring tones! So you don't have a choice. If you don't pay, you don't get to have a ring tone. I'm guessing that their biggest market has to be teenagers who probably have more free time then money to spend and who would gladly make their own ring tones if they could.