Sitting at a coffee shop and bloging on my phone (as you do in this digital age), my table - and the rest of the cafe - is festooned with ads for Lipstick Jungle, which plays on Living TV in the UK.
If you take the road downtown from JFK, the Queens skyline is littered with ads for TV shows and channels.
Equally, if you run a website, the most effective way to drive traffic is advertising.
Essentially, modern media economics is based on buying an audience and then seeing if you can monetize it better than the person who referred the user/viewer to you.
It's a hellishly precarious way to make a living, and is, of course, what drives the Google model.
This is perhaps why the EPG is seen as the next frontier and why video search seems so attractive to those who participated in the Blinkx IPO.
But for most Internet TV moguls acquisition cost v. revenue per head is a hugely important metric.
If you take the road downtown from JFK, the Queens skyline is littered with ads for TV shows and channels.
Equally, if you run a website, the most effective way to drive traffic is advertising.
Essentially, modern media economics is based on buying an audience and then seeing if you can monetize it better than the person who referred the user/viewer to you.
It's a hellishly precarious way to make a living, and is, of course, what drives the Google model.
This is perhaps why the EPG is seen as the next frontier and why video search seems so attractive to those who participated in the Blinkx IPO.
But for most Internet TV moguls acquisition cost v. revenue per head is a hugely important metric.
Comments