Aardvark Daily

Please visit the sponsor!

The One-man pay-TV model

I like to think that I have at least some kind of understanding of the net "vibe".

Spending a lot of time in cyberspace means that I have a finger on the pulse of many of the trends that affect what people do online, how they use the Net, what their expectations are and where opportunities may exist.

Last week however, I was rather surprised -- and in a very pleasant way.

As regular readers will know, I've been trying to figure out a way to more effectively leverage my YouTube audience for the purpose of keeping a roof over my head and food in my mouth. To this end, I mooted the prospect of charging my subscribers $1 a month for advance access to my regular content and/or access to "premium" content.

When I posed this to the thousands who regularly view my material, I was rather taken-aback by their response.

Although there were some who said they would not pay -- a surprising number said that the proposed $1/month would be fine by them and they'd gladly ante-up with such a stipend.

Woohoo!

Of course I realise that there's bound to be some difference between the number who say they'll pay and the number who actually do -- but the level of positive response was far in excess of that I'd expected.

So it would appear that the concept of paid subscriptions for what people perceive to be valuable content is definitely alive and well on the Net.

But, if a few thousand people are prepared to give a buck a month to some old-fella who knocks out videos about toy planes way down on on the arse-end of the planet, why do they still balk at paying money to access online newspapers and magazines?

Well I think the answer is that it's all about value.

One dollar a month is an amount that almost anyone can spend without a second-thought -- this means it's "as good as free" to most people. At an individual level, the amount of money involved is trivial -- however, when you aggregate all those trivial amounts from a large number of people, the total becomes a decidedly non-trivial sum.

It strikes me that many of those who have tried the subscription model online and failed have failed, mainly because the value they offer is just too low.

Someone who may think nothing of spending $1 a month on something as non-essential as some videos about their hobby may also hesitate or decide not to spend ten times that amount for access to a news website.

One dollar is just a bit of coin that wears holes in your trouser pockets. Ten dollars is a bit of paper-money which can buy a takeaway meal, an 8GB USB drive, a discounted DVD or CD at The Warehouse -- and a lot of other "real" stuff.

It strikes me that far too many of those sites who have tried and failed with the paid-subscription model in cyberspace have over-estimated the amount that people will pay whilst also under-estimating the potential size of their market.

Surely it's better to get a dollar a month from 10,000 people than $10 a month from 500 people?

Of course it's early days -- I 'm not yet offering a paid subscription and not collecting $1 month from anyone. When/if I do so, the numbers who said "yes" that suddenly decide "no" may become a significant issue.

However, from what I've seen so far, the era of the "one man pay TV service" is about to take-off and I intend to be right there at the bleeding edge.

If you've got an area of expertise, interest or experience that you could share with others by way of regular videos -- why not consider "giving it a go"? Remember, there are hundreds of millions of people out there watching such videos every day -- a 1% share of that market could be very rich pickings.

Please visit the sponsor!

Have your say on this...

PERMALINK to this column

Oh, and don't forget today's sci/tech news headlines

Rank This Aardvark Page

Change Font