Interesting article for those who block ads

how about something that's based on pay as you go:  maybe you can buy let's say 10 games for a penny etc

You're brushing up against a strategy some sites use, that of interstitial ads. Forbes.com (for example) uses those a lot -- a full page ad, with a minimum view timer, that shows before you can see content.

The primary barrier to getting something like that into place is traffic quality. While the demographics of those who visit Forbes.com might be attractive to full-page interstitial advertisers, I can't speak to what it might be here. Also, I suspect Chess.com has a great deal of international traffic -- right now, only US-based traffic is getting decent rates.

I've been through that math for my site. In reality, only about 0.5% (at best) of daily visitors would be paid accounts. So it doesn't work out.

That's been the "forgotten" factor in a lot of aspects of the Internet -- international users with expensive (for them) bandwidth caps.

Google (through DoubleClick) and Xaxis (and one or two others I can't recall), are working with many international service providers to implement systems where advertising assets don't count against your bandwidth useage. But it's probaly at least two years away for you, which sucks.

You're 100% wrong, these things are still happening.

Here's an article from a few weeks ago.  http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/porn-dethroned-top-source-mobile-malware-n44371

And another, even Yahoo has served up malvertising. http://www.zdnet.com/yahoo-serves-malicious-ads-7000024775/

Thanks for serving up some sources. I know from my personal experience that this is still happening, and hopefully, this will convince him.

I was going to get the chess.com subscription, so I wouldn't see these ads anymore. But now I understand how much that would hurt chess.com financially. Thank you for the info!

That's the way it is on Chesscube, more or less.  You can't play more than a few games per day as a basic member anymore (unless you are betting and consistently winning).

I love your response! It's a totally reasonable conclusion given what's been discussed here.

Not really, just obtuse.

The value of one subscribed user is much higher than a non-subscribed visitor.

Only a non-subscribed user can turn into a subscribed user.  No non-subscribers = no subscribers.  Piss off all the non-subscribers with shitty ads and no subscribers!

Right! In theory, a subscribed user would have a higher value when compared one-on-one with an unsubscribed user, but if there are not enough paid subscribers on board, then a website's revenue would be mostly dependent upon ads. And since you seem to be saying that many sites aren't even breaking even with paid subscriptions, then the pool of users who see advertisements ends up paying the bills better than the subscribers. 

The alternative is to restrict even basic access to people who have subscribed, but that would conceivably hurt the site even more, wouldn't it? If we assume that everyone must pay to use this site (with the benefit of complete ad-elimination), the pool of users will shrink considerably and the subscription rates would have to skyrocket to compensate.

That's the unfortunate balancing act. On my site, we offer a couple fairly premium services, but never take subscriptions. We tend to have a few more ads per-page than some sites (but very tall pages), but as long as we keep the high-bandwidth ads on certain pages, people seem generally okay with the value trade.

But here, with the type of content, and levels of service, subscriptions make sense. 

Perhaps there should be a "donation fund" where those who are able can donate cash to a general fund, then from that fund subscriptions are regularly awarded to those who can't afford one.

Ads can be blocked, on any site, and it is the right of the person visiting said sites to use software that blocks obtrusive, often distracting or annoying and even sometimes downright disgusting advertisements. End of story.

Well, you don't get it. What SkepticGuy and others are criticizing are not your legal right to do so, but your moral right.

...

Actually I don't get it either, but nevermind.

Whoever wrote this article, may I please have his name, address, e-mail address, and phone number?

I have several things I would like to sell. Now that I know he never blocks ads.