Adverts.
 

MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch

[Closed] Adverts.

10 Posts
6 Users
0 Reactions
62 Views
Posts: 97
Full Member
Topic starter
 

I know its revenue guys, but please lose the bloody Charge Video...
Or at the very least once its played 10 times or so.
And whats with the advert that appears inside each post...bloody annoying.

Its turning into the mtb equivalent of some cheap porn site.

I thought a "Work-Safe" option was on the wish-list for the new site...?

"[moan][/moan]"

Seriously though, what about a sub funded log-in option that removed the adds ?


 
Posted : 26/01/2009 2:42 pm
Posts: 31206
Full Member
 

Seriously though, what about a sub funded log-in option that removed the adds ?

Yep, I agree. It would be a some nice "added value" if they could offer a "Subscribers Version" of the site, like they do for the mag.

It wouldn't have to be advert-free. Just replace some of the flashy ads with text ads instead.

I guess it depends how ad-revenue balances against subs-revenue tho.


 
Posted : 26/01/2009 2:54 pm
 Mark
Posts: 4287
Level: Black
 

The only ads that appear in posts are in the classifieds. There are no ads displayed in posts in either the bike or the chat forums.

The Charge ad is one of the most popular ads we've ever run. We think they are great.

We've considered a subscriber option for no ads but it's uneconomic. In terms of the money we would gain compared to the money lost through ad revenue it's not a model that, right now, is going to serve any financial advantage for us.

The ads on this site are targeted as best we can make them. Ads are necessary. Targeted ads are as useful as ads can be.

There are less ads visible on this site than the previous version of the site.

The ads are displayed in the right hand column only. There is no left hand column anymore.


 
Posted : 26/01/2009 3:23 pm
Posts: 31206
Full Member
 

We've considered a subscriber option for no ads but it's uneconomic.

Fair enough. Good to know you have looked at it anyway.


 
Posted : 26/01/2009 3:53 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

We've considered a subscriber option for no ads but it's uneconomic

I know I'm on shaky ground here, but you get no revenue unless the ads are clicked, and I will not click an annoying ad on principle, but I would click unobtrusive text ads. How much would I have to pay each year for a clear conscience ?


 
Posted : 26/01/2009 4:09 pm
Posts: 36
Free Member
 

whilst you and I may share the same approach to clicking on ads SFB, as Mark has said many, many times before, high impact ads generally get the highest clikthroughs (and hence revenue) regardless of the number of cantankerous northerners on the site. And as such, they shall remain I expect.


 
Posted : 26/01/2009 4:12 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I was told that there was no click-through revenue.


 
Posted : 26/01/2009 4:50 pm
Posts: 36
Free Member
 

it neednt be clickthough revenue to have an impact.


 
Posted : 26/01/2009 4:53 pm
 Mark
Posts: 4287
Level: Black
 

We deliver ads in many flavours.. Some based on clicks.. others on views.. others on a flat rate.


 
Posted : 26/01/2009 4:55 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Some based on clicks.. others on views.. others on a flat rate.

so I can ignore them free of guilt ?? YAY - RESULT !! Harmony, contentment and group hug :o)


 
Posted : 26/01/2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Mark - any chance you could publish the click-through links? That way, I could save them as bookmarks and use them all the time (i.e. whether or not I've actually navigated there from this site).


 
Posted : 26/01/2009 5:13 pm