Amazon caves in, will remove ads from Kindle Fire for $15 fee
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
How to think of LCD ads: http://news.ycombinator.org/item?id=4490562
How ads work: http://news.ycombinator.org/item?id=4490590
I'm on the engineering team that makes KSO, and we have had opt-out throughout the release.
For existing ad supported Kindles, you can pay to have the ads removed. The cost, for my mom's older subsidized Kindle 3 model, is $20. So the newer, more expensive Fire's will be a bit cheaper to go ad-free.
Interestingly enough, there's an option I hadn't noticed before for activating ads on my unsubsidized Kindle. However, I don't get any sort of cash or freebie for doing so.
Also, screw Amazon.
I know it's en vogue to scream "screw this company" when upset with it (re: the recent paypal incident), but given Amazon's broad range of products and services, saying "screw amazon" over a $69 device is a pretty heavy indictment.
Amazon is subsidizing the cost of the device through the advertisements. Google subsidizes the cost of email through advertisements. AT&T subsidizes the cost of cell phones through contracts.
I don't understand. Why is subsidizing a device with advertisements suddenly evil?
This is a calculated move on Amazon's part to build a lucrative ad network. This isn't evil per se, but it's certainly not in my best interest as a consumer. Personally, I've done a fair bit to cut down the number of ads I see in a day -- I dropped my cable TV because the number and frequency of ads lowered my enjoyment of the programming. I've stopped buying gas at stations that blare ads from their gas pumps. So, I certainly wouldn't buy a device that wants to charge me extra to not see ads. Out time and attention is more valuable then the shells and trinkets being offered by these companies.
Letting people opt out of advertising for a fee, will just remove the small minority of people who would never click on ads anyway. A win-win.
He is suggesting that people who have they money and desire to pay for something that makes their lives a bit more pleasant are the kind of people advertisers wish to get their ads in front of the most.
Not all advertising is about clicks- tv advertisement was built around getting information in front of eyeballs.
The target customer for a product like that has a genuine hate on for those ads... if it's worth it to them, it's worth it to Amazon, in my opinion.
I'm not paying for a product with ads (especially intrusive ones) in it.
What Amazon did was say the following: "You can buy our hardware, and deal with the ads. You can pay us even more money to get a better experience."
That is a bad message for subsidised hardware. The real cost is hidden behind a 'pay us more money for a better experience'.
Instead, what they should have done was say the following: "Our hardware costs $X, but you can get it even cheaper if you agree to minimally intrusive advertisements!" And on this route, you can also offer the option to 'buy' off advertisements as well. Make this part easy. Don't piss off the user.
They should have turned that negative into a positive. Make it the users choice to opt in to ads.
I never said the Kindle should be free. I see no issue with paying for it, and I even pay extra for the ones without ads. This is because, as I said, I do not personally want to pay for a product that also contains advertisements.
Ever bought a paperback book? They all come with adverts for other book at the back, loose-leaf inserts etc.
The concept of partly subsidizing the cost with additional advertising is hardly a new business idea. It would seem almost impossible to never pay for a product with ads as you claim.
BTW can we drop the sarcasm? Doesn't seem like there's any reason you can't sell a product subsidised for advertising.
Dying industries are usually doing things 80% or 90% right - otherwise how did they become the powerhouses of old? But it's the 10% or 20% that's changed from their heyday that's killing them.
I don't even have an opinion of ads on the Kindle Fire. I just think the argument you're making is fallacious.
It was still a bad idea not to have an option.
Expect competitors who will sell, say, a $10 program that will disable the ads by rooting the phone and installing an alternate image without the anti-features.
I would imagine few people would go through the hassle and risk of finding and trusting a third party software to remove the ads to save $5 or $10
It's quite likely that I would have never bought either kindle if I didn't know that I'd have the option, after purchase, to pay the difference and get rid of the ads. This way, I can see how bad they are and judge for myself if I'd rather go ad free.
Having this option on the latest Kindle fire would make me more likely to purchase the version with ads initially, as it's a lower price and I know I've got an "out".
In the ~9 months that I've owned the kindle, the ads haven't been offensive or obtrusive so I've never bothered to get rid of them (and I refuse to watch cable TV because the ads bother me too much).