|
|
|
|
|
by binarybits
2786 days ago
|
|
Author here. What do you mean by "short?" The piece is 1,500 words, which is about double the length of a typical newspaper column. I'm not going to get into the exact economics, but Ars writers write about a piece a day, and the average piece gets tens of thousands of visitors. Revenue per article (for most mainstream news site, not just Ars) is significantly better than $0.001 per visitor. High-end advertisers are willing to pay a premium to put their ads next to high-quality content and to know the demographics of the people seeing their ads. None of us is getting rich doing this though! We're also fortunate to have a significant base of paying subscribers, which makes it easier for us to write in-depth pieces that might not generate enough revenue from ads alone. |
|
First of all, let me say that I liked the article. I am the one who posted it to HN after all.
Maybe "short" was not the perfect word to express what I mean. I mean that the message/idea is kind of short. It's almost like a showerthought "See this chart? It looks like they are in the red all the time. But think of it this way: They build success after success. They could have been profitable ever since Model S. But they keep investing in bigger projects instead.".
Interesting, that the revenue is significantly higher then $0.001 per visitor. Because it looks like the main ad spots are filled with Google Ads. Which I run too. Do advertisers really target specific sites manually via Google Ads? I would have thought they do that algorithmically based on demographic factors.