Quote:
Originally Posted by stonetools
There's also been an even longer history of novels serialized IN magazines with ads. That alone should refute the notion that novels can only be read and enjoyed in an ad-free environment. As usual, people fall prey to the belief that what they are used to is what always was , will be, and should be.
|
Magazines, even with serialized novels, are not novels. They are different. There have been 150 years of so of magazines with serials in them...but this magazine model has not, in all this time, jumped to novels.
Pointing this out doesn't *refute* anything; it *proves* the exact opposite of your contention.
And again, absent any evidence or even cogent argument, you just *assert* by ad hominem argument that people who don't agree with you are Luddite stick-in-the-muds.
Quote:
|
Lots of things have been tried and failed, repeatedly even, until the right model comes along and succeeds. You may be completely right that ads in novels are impossible, but I don't think that this concept has to at all been "convincingly refuted" - just that it's difficult and that some folk hate the idea.
|
I just meant that your argument has been convincingly refuted. Not because people hate the idea, but because you haven't really made a good argument. Maybe one can be made - but it needs *numbers* to show it's economically feasible in the first place, and maybe some plausible explanation for why ads in novels will now succeed when they have always failed in the past.
Here's what I mean - the average CPM (cost per thousand impressions) for internet ads in the US is $2.50. That means that if 1000 people look at your ad, you make $2.50. If you sold 5,000 books, each with one ad that people looked at, you would make $12.50. That works out to $.0025 per book, or one cent per every 4 books sold. I don't really see a possibility of offering cheaper books to the public with this sort of ad rate - which is why magazines have hundreds of ads per issue.