The place where I buy pizza has to pay for the ingredients, the rent, salaries, etc. These costs and a reasonable profit add up to $18 for a pie, which I pay, because their pizza is worth at least $18. What if their pizza wasn't so good, and too few customers thought it was worth $18? Is it right for them to hand out "free" pizza in a box covered with advertising inside and out, and the advertised products get marked up $22 to cover the pizza cost as well as the advertising overhead and collateral costs[1]? Let me be clear: the customers are getting a pizza that costs $18 for "free", but $22 is added to the cost of the other goods they buy. They don't realize this and the pizza shop is taking advantage of this ignorance.
> "And what does it say about you if you want to use a product and not aren't willing to pay for it? Not even indirectly via ads?"
If you're referring to me, I'm totally willing to pay for it. If you mean people in general, they fall into three categories:
1. They are willing to pay for it. They wish there weren't ads, and switch to ad-free, for-pay products when available.
2. They are willing to pay for it, but are happy to take what appears to be free.
3. They are not willing to pay for it, but are happy to take what appears to be free.
Both #2 and #3 don't realize that instead of being free, it costs a lot more. Or they are too lazy to find a for-pay product. Or they think they don't buy advertised products and are happy to mooch off of others.
-
[1] If I don't buy those products, someone else must be, in which case they are subsidizing my pizza. I'll bet the effects are regressive, in that people with lower incomes end up subsidizing people with higher. In any case, on average we all pay for the true cost of the "free" product plus the previously mentioned overhead and collateral costs.