Hacker News Reader

Comment by midasuni | Hacker News Reader

Raises a tiny percentage of income. That said seeing static posters for west end shows on the escalators is hardly the worst advert. The trend to do “event” adverts which do confuse people (James Bond Street etc) certainly should be stopped.

Ultimately though people wont pay the extra 20p on their journey to get rid of adverts

View on HN

Advertising income was £130 million for last year [1], where passenger income was £4398 million[2], so around 3%. (Minus costs of running commercial advertising?)

I can see many people wouldn't want a 3% fare rise, but it shows smaller changes to the policy — like no longer having these whole-station or other excessive campaigns — wouldn't be a problem.

[1, PDF] https://content.tfl.gov.uk/tfl-advertising-annual-report-aug...

[2, PDF] https://board.tfl.gov.uk/documents/s19826/TfL%20Budget%20202...

I hope these numbers aren't correct. Only 3% for being bombed by ads? (And bombing the whole city with ads on buses as well?)

I would gladly pay 20% and maybe even 50% more if they could stop with the ads.

I am conscious of those with more limited budgets. Rises of just 1-2% above inflation are already avoided if possible.

I'd be fine with increasing the subsidy part of TfL's income to get rid of the adverts — then the cost falls mostly on those who can afford it.

From memory the entire ad income for sky was about 1/10th of their income as a whole. That includes all that damaging gambling adverts in football matches.

People are far too accepting of adverts imo, it’s a horrendous industry

Reply on news.ycombinator.com