Don't forget convenience.

When I buy a bottle of water I cringe at the price, but I don't want to run home and fill a jug with filtered tap water. The ability to grab it, drink it, and throw the bottle away is what I'm paying for.

Kind of sad, really.. :)

What in the fuck are you talking about? Facebook is free, so is Google, so is Yahoo, etc. This is not a new fucking business model. :1orglaugh :helpme

you can still get it pretty cheap. i buy 35 packs at costco for like 3 bucks. thats less than 10 cents per bottle. its still cheaper coming from the tap but it tastes like chlorine, so..

facebook and google is a service. these tube sites are giving away a product. its a bit different.

I should have read further before I replied to PR_Glen. You got it first :)

I also see people continuing to pay for site memberships based on quality and convenience.

I can download MP3s from all over. Then I have to make sure the MP3 is what it's supposed to be. Then I delete all the low bit rate stuff. Then I organize into albums, and search for missing songs. It's a huge waste of time.

I'd MUCH rather buy a DVD, rip it, and move on, or buy the MP3's directly online, assuming they don't have rights management. That's a huge pain in the ass.

IMHO, it's the same thing with porn. Yeah - I can search and find movies, but I'd rather not waste time. I'd much rather use a VOD site on PPM and watch what I want, when I want, then move on. Or hit a pay-site, whatever.

Your customer base shrinks drastically with this view, but your paying customer base has a much lower cost of sales. If you can target that guy, you win.

the saddest part is the pollution nightmare of water bottles.

if I could reliably and consistently plan my purchases I'd agree :1orglaugh

Agreed. In a few years we'll have plastics (or similar) that degrade gracefully, so that *should* become less of a problem. "Few" being relative. Maybe "several"?

It's not different at all. Yahoo and Google have many products, they just have no cash pricetag. Call it a product or service if you want but tubes are doing the same exact thing as Google.

offer a better product.

google is taking someones copyrighted material and giving it away as a means to create traffic for their ads?

anyone who doesn't recycle in this day and age is a retard.

See, you are already being absorbed by freenomics without knowing it. A service is a product like anything else. The difference is where in the chain you extract the value. I used to subscribe to paid newsletters back in the day, today I get that streamed to me for free as service.

Google is doing piles of shit. The disconnect it takes to not understand that

Tube providing easier and free access to porn is the same as Google providing free and easier access to email / search results / 1000 other products

is amazing.

Tubes are the exact business model that most of the top sites operate on. Google owns YouTube for fucks sake, what other proof do you need?

I've given out nuggets here and there on GFY. Some of the solutions depend on your situation, your type of site and your resources if you can do it or not. Some are pretty generic and can be applied to almost all sites.

I'm not going to post the details here. I feel I have a lot of information of value that can help people and while I give away more information that most people here, I'm going to reserve the fine details and good stuff for someone who is willing to pay me.

If you are a company that is looking to turn things around and make positive changes I will consult for you for a very fair price and offer you a money back guarantee if you are not satisfied with my suggestions.

What tubes are doing is no different than what warez sites did/do. If it was their legal content to distribute there would be no issue but its not. yeah sure, there is youtube but youtube is actually supported by user uploads, unlike tubes where the owners upload the content. If you don't believe that taking content from a member paysite area and then uploading it to a free site to get traffic isn't a theft, no matter how you want to put it, there is no use talking to you.

the free tube model is not sustainable in the long term. it relies on more and more new scenes to upload, which they pay nothing for. it simply can't last as when there is no money to make the scenes, there is no new porn, people will get bored and go elsewhere

This is completely irrelevant to the discussion. You can choose to purchase content for your tube and at the current prices it's not even expensive anymore. I assure you, even without buying content YouTube invested a lot more money on their PRODUCT than most huge porn sites. They have now managed to turn that into a net profit by means other than charging for content.

It will be reproduced in porn, it's only a matter of time. The fact that you can let people upload stolen shit and not face legal action just makes this easier. :upsidedow

The people profiting from the piracy are going to try to blame the people suffering from it. That's how it usually works much how a program that steals the affiliates rebills (or shaves) will often try to justify it in some way and assign blame to the affiliate. It's not that different. It's basically "I can do this, it's most beneficial to me, so screw you." We've seen it many times.

With the devaluation of porn the only way to adapt is to sell something other than the devalued porn even if the main attraction bringing the people is still the porn itself. There seems to be no way around this. The problem with this is that overall doing this is unlikely to be near as profitable as it was before the devaluation. At least in the long term.

It is just as profitable. The problem webmasters are having is that the huge companies are the only ones playing the game effectively so they are making it all for themselves. 1 Billion between 4000 webmasters or 1 Billion between 5 megacorps, it's already moving to the latter at an amazing pace.

Yeah, you can purchase content cheaply for a tube but thats not what people want to see. They want to see scenes from the popular sites they see all over the net who don't sell their content to anyone, so it gets stolen.

And, there are no users uploading content. Its just a legal loophole. I can see a place for tubes in the industry, but certainly not based around stolen content. I think tubes should have free and premium sections where studios can showcase their movies and get paid based upon how popular they are with the members (or something similar).

It isn't as profitable. There's no escape from the devaluation of the product which is drawing the surfer. Compare the revenue Pornhub makes now with what they would have made with the same traffic being sent to a relevant paysite in 1998. I'd estimate they are probably making 10 - 50 times less from that traffic now than they would have then by sending it to a paysite in 1998. You are going to have a hard time finding any comparable product to sell and still generate that revenue. It might have made Manwin/Brazzers bigger and more profitable but that's mainly because they weren't a major player a decade ago so they had nothing to lose and everything to gain. The big established companies who didn't jump on bandwagon to help devalue their products are often hurting now. It's mainly because their product is actually worth far less. They had much more to lose unlike companies like Manwin.

I don't know if you noticed but it doesn't matter what you think. They will use copyrighted shit until they can't then they will purchase it. The business model will not change otherwise. Tubes have more viewers today than the largest porn sites on earth had 5 years ago. That traffic is worth a fuckload even if they are monetizing wrong. Someone will get it right, they are not investing millions in buying up all the tubes for no good reason. They will be the companies thriving today and in the future.

The old model is not going to recover. It is impossible as long as someone can boot up a server in Russia and post whatever they want. Surfers don't give a shit about you. They will go to 1 site or 50 to get their content as long as it is FREE. If webmasters allow one company to take over the entire market while they are busy fighting and pining for the old days then that is their own damn fault.

You are still stuck in using the old model for reference instead of understanding that where and what the money comes from is going to change and is in fact already changing. Everyone wanted to know how YouTube was going to make money when it opened, they burned millions while taking all of the market share. How are they doing now?

Get this clear, sending traffic to paysites will not be the same in 10 years or even 5 years. Yes the product is being devalued, just like TV shows that are available for free online. Revenue streams are changing, business models are evolving and everyone that is stuck reminiscing about the past will be left in the fucking dust.

I understand but my point is that the revenue under the new model is less than the revenue under the old. I think that's a very big point. It's really a rather stupid move on the part of anyone with something to lose in the industry.

I am not denying any of that but the simple fact is despite all the traffic, the free content is making it less and less valualble and will continue to drop in value.

Illegal tubes are criminal. Being digital on the internet does not make it ok. Who is going to pioneer the REAL tubes with legal content and work with studios instead of fighting them. They will be the winners. The illegal tubes will continue to be criminals.

Buy a shotgun...

Revenue is probably not any less than the old model and if it is that will be corrected soon. Problem is it's going more and more to the bigger companies leaving everyone else to fight for scraps.

The top tube has what, 14 million viewers per day? The Hun had I think 2 million in it's prime. Those viewers have money, they just aren't paying for what you want to sell them. If it hasn't already been figured out it will be, 100% fact.

It doesn't matter what you think about tubes though. They will operate by skirting the law for as long as they can then adapt when they can't. Well, judging by how people on here think a few will adapt and the rest will wither into nothing. Free / ultra cheap porn is not going away, ever.

Create a product that cant be stolen.

Porn is just as much an impulse buy if not more so, that is why we have trial prices. People can either get what they want and get out or stay and pay the monthlies. Sure the monthlies are more but like you said, its just a dollar, so about a dollar a day gets you access to our sites just as buying a case of water as you said.

We also offer convenience. We give them a chance to look at high quality adult vids/pics without worry of getting viruses or spyware on their pc's or phones.

Obviously water is more important, but my example was meant more as an example of marketing.

I know the secret....

You buy yourself a beer, then cry in it before donning the paper hat.

But then again the hun probably still made more back in 1998 with those 2 M than the top tube does today with 14 M. Easily. :pimp What you say is true about consolidation but there are all sorts of major tubes springing up left and right so that share will probably get smaller and smaller as time goes on. Soon that tube will probably have only 2 M again and revenue will probably be 1/10th of what the hun made in his prime.

This is a good point. What's more, it allows anyone to view whatever they want without the fear of having "Tripod Tranny Midgets 12" on their hard drive for the wife to find.

I doubt the hun made more in 1998 than the largest tube does now. In fact, I bet they beat his numbers by miles. Even if this weren't true it will be corrected, only took YouTube YEARS and millions of dollars to take over the mareket. This is already being done here but more with buyouts than organic building. You keep comparing the price of porn, the point is that kind of porn will be free. Other things will pay the bills.

I don't know. 2 Million surfers back in a time when 1:50 ratios were common versus 14 million surfers where even Fabian claims (very likely that it's actually higher since he has a vested interest) about a 1:1000 ratio. Do the math and don't forget better CTR back then as well. People probably pay good money to advertise on such sites now but if the ROI is low more than likely those rates are going to have to drop too. Don't forget that.

Somebody else will post it but the answer is

None: The Hun makes revenue from selling the top xx spots, all other spots are free.

Yeah, free porn will always be around in one form or another but the more free stuff that is out there, the less the traffic is worth for everyone. I only see it continue to decrease. The tubes aren't cheap to run and while I'm sure they make a good profit, how can they possibly continue to increase traffic (there is only so much of it) increase the amount of free content (the more free stuff that is out there, less people will buy) and increase the value of the traffic. They can't. I don't see it anyways. I predict most selling out down the road. To who, I don't know. Youtube was sold for a mint and supposidly doesn't make google any profit. Go figure.

YouTube is on the verge of brining in hundreds of millions per year in profit. Not gross, profit. They will be much more profitable in the future too. Sorry, but adapt or die couldn't be more fitting.

I think you missed the point. More money passed through The Hun in 1998 than what passes through Pornhub in 2010. The same will probably be true in 2015 as well, but by a greater margin. Ad rates are mostly determined by ROI.