Quote:
Originally Posted by PikaPoka
I will laugh when advertisers will start quitting this free-porn-tube-era-model.
It's obvious they don't make much money, speaking about ROI.
So, free tube sites, who will pay your hosting bill? You better save some money for the days to come.
|
I found this on the
Wikipedia article for Manwin:
Quote:
|
The Manwin business model is based on low margin and high revenue. The many millions of users watch free movies along with ads for paying pornography sites that belong to the Manwin network. It is estimated that only one in a thousand users click on these ads. The viewer then pays either a fee for one-time use or signs up for a pornography subscription that offers better-quality, longer films than what is available free.[5] One former employee for the Manwin website MyDirtyHobby.com reports signing 14,000 actors and actresses, some 6,000 of which are regularly active. For every euro of turnover for a film or live chat the actor or actress appears in, they usually are credited with 25 cents. A single actress could thus generate an income of about ?12,000 based on a turnover of around ?50,000 per year.[2]
|
In another thread I tried to figure it up.
100 million video views a day
$3 cpm
$300,000 a day or $110 million a year
That's not a lot considering how much traffic they are pulling. So the "low margin" statement is probably dead on if the numbers are anywhere near this. It's astounding to think that all those tubes that size only do that much money when say in comparison CCBill recently stated that they process over 1 billion in annual transactions. I was reading another article yesterday where CBS I believe spoke of a trend where advertising dollars for online companies tend to be peanuts in comparison to the subscription model. Interesting to consider that as applied to our industry.