yeah you right when we trying to watch any movie online there are some more pop up windows open without any click. i think advertising kill the internet entertainment.
Is the internet disrupting entertainment?
- Thread starter Aspiring Mogul
- Start date
What is killing internet entertainment is people who want
everything for free. It's great for you. It's terrible for those
of us who make product and want to get paid to do it. Since
people will not pay to watch internet entertainment ads are
the only way to monazite internet entertainment.
Movies are not free to make. They should not be free to watch.
Agreed, but the same was said for TV, and, yet, they found a way to make good money.
No one is forcing the producer to provide a free service. If a mogul, aspiring or otherwise, wants to be mogul, he will have to figure a way to do it in the new technological environment.
Of course not. But movies are being stolen at alarming rates. Far
too many people watch movies that were stolen and are thrilled
that they haven't had to pay to watch them. Too many feel that
paying for internet entertainment (even by way of pop up ads)
is somehow a bad thing.
My comment was not about producers who freely make their
movies available for free. My comment was about the people
who feel advertising is killing entertainment - that those pop up
advertisements that allow a producer to make a little money are
killing entertainment. Advertising is what allowed TV to thrive. It
didn't kill entertainment it allowed TV entertainment to grow.
Advertising in the internet is not killing internet entertainment it
is allowing entertainment producers to make a little money.
It nothing more than a perspective; the consumer of internet
entertainment what it to be free. The producers of internet
entertainment want to make some money because the actors and
crew and writer want to be paid. I come from the perspective of
a crew member and a producer. I want to be paid from what I do
so I do not feel that advertising is killing internet entertainment.
Agreed.
Forbes has a list of the top earning Youtube celebrities. There is no longer any dispute that big money can be made on the internet.
There are, however, two issues. The first, as Louise Levison said, is that there is no reliable data base detailing how and where that money is made, and investors will want reliable data. The second, of course, is that, as in movies, no one knows anything, as in why some Youtube stars are popular and others are not.
There are, however, two issues. The first, as Louise Levison said, is that there is no reliable data base detailing how and where that money is made, and investors will want reliable data. The second, of course, is that, as in movies, no one knows anything, as in why some Youtube stars are popular and others are not.
Last edited:
Besides that: it's close to a 'winners take all' system. Lots of people trying, a handfull succeed and make it big.
It's hard to extract data from winners only, while using all data is too much to handle for now, without some hardcore datamining, after finding a way to collect certain data on a massive scale...
It's hard to extract data from winners only, while using all data is too much to handle for now, without some hardcore datamining, after finding a way to collect certain data on a massive scale...
Gene Simmons has gone on the rampage against the digital age, because, even without piracy, artists are finding it harder to earn a living in an age of single-music downloads.
I have two responses to that.
1) First of all, as I understand it, most albums in the past had one hit song and many other songs that no one wanted. So the customer had to pay for ten songs when he only wanted one. The advent of singles did change that somewhat, but only to a limited extent. With digital downloads, a consumer can pick and choose, which would create greater pressure on the artist to provide better performance, but that's only good for society.
2) Last, but certainly not least, many artists can continue to make money. Taylor Swift did sue Apple over this issue, but her concerts continue to make her very rich. And the internet can allow a person to promote himself, which would then allow him to stage concerts and make money - look at Justin Bieber and Psy.
In the 1970's, the movie companies said that the advent of the video recorder would destroy their business, but it in fact created a new revenue stream. I have no doubt the internet will do the same.
I have two responses to that.
1) First of all, as I understand it, most albums in the past had one hit song and many other songs that no one wanted. So the customer had to pay for ten songs when he only wanted one. The advent of singles did change that somewhat, but only to a limited extent. With digital downloads, a consumer can pick and choose, which would create greater pressure on the artist to provide better performance, but that's only good for society.
2) Last, but certainly not least, many artists can continue to make money. Taylor Swift did sue Apple over this issue, but her concerts continue to make her very rich. And the internet can allow a person to promote himself, which would then allow him to stage concerts and make money - look at Justin Bieber and Psy.
In the 1970's, the movie companies said that the advent of the video recorder would destroy their business, but it in fact created a new revenue stream. I have no doubt the internet will do the same.
the internet has killed entertainment. I dont know what way your talking about. But the actual reason is well known. The commonality of video mixed with common people. Social media making everyone a fake star not to mention when napster started killled real entertainers and the money and professionalism behind to harvest real talent. fuck you people
This just in .. people canceling their hulu subscriptions in lieu of the instant gratification pirating provides
i believe its part of the reason is actually been halted. Halted.
What is being halted?
I have a channel about my second love: www.youtube.com/c/panossavvidis
Youtube does a great job with ads, in the late 2015 the profits almost doubled because of new features (I think ads on mobile devices). Youtube continues very professionally this game.
Youtube does a great job with ads, in the late 2015 the profits almost doubled because of new features (I think ads on mobile devices). Youtube continues very professionally this game.
Internet is not killing TV, because TV is where the money is at - even though audiences are declining, ad revenues are increasing.
Louise Levison is right.
Louise Levison is right.
Last edited:
Everyone wants to watch for free on YouTube. Unfortunately as a content provider you need a million views just to earn $1,275.00
http://www.investingadvicewatchdog.com/film-investing.html
http://www.investingadvicewatchdog.com/film-investing.html