[alldayeveryday]

Again, you are taking massive simplifications. Flight information is only one dataset they manage. They also manage data on planes, their users' subscriptions, perhaps site analytics, etc. The cost of the storage goes beyond the disc size - you also need redundancy, you might have offline ETL jobs to enrich the data, etc. Quoting estimates of disc size and per GB storage costs is not sufficient to summarize their costs.

Further to the point, your reply (to my comment) is not addressing my reply at all.

> unlimited traffic = unlimited cost

To support additional traffic does not come free. Sure, the traffic:cost ratio is not linear, but I don't think you are making the point that supporting the additional traffic does not have a cost associated to it? Exactly how are you refuting my comment, if you are at all?

[kragen]

Site analytics can of course grow without bound, but collecting so much site analytics you crash your site? Thats dum. Design your site so that it sheds load by not collecting so much analytics if that's a problem. And load test it before it's the most popular source of information on an international diplomatic incident.

I never quoted any estimates of disc size. I linked a server with a terabyte of RAM. Are you seriously suggesting they might have more than a terabyte of data on their users' subscriptions and on planes? Offline ETL jobs? Come on, be serious.

Redundancy? Yeah, you should have two big servers, not just one. 12 hours of FlightRadar24's revenues.

Yeah, unlimited traffic would be unlimited cost, but this is not unlimited traffic, this is US$27 of traffic that should have been US$1 of traffic. If this were 01999, or if a billion people had swarmed their site instead of less than a million, you would have a point.

[alldayeveryday]

We seem to be talking past one another, and from what I can tell you are more or less agreeing with me. Supporting additional traffic takes additional money. The estimation of the amount of money it costs to support the traffic they receive is evidence of this being the case.

Commenter > In an era of unlimited scaling infrastructure, it's a shame they're struggling to capitalize on an exclusive superbowl scale marketing event.

My Reply > Unlimited Scale = Unlimited Cost

You > estimate the cost of a limited amount of traffic

Me > wasting time talking in circles reiterating my original point