RE: UKNM: Free vs paid for ISPs

[Sophie Polani]

> Here's an interesting one that will be familiar to those who

> have worked in traditional media. From an advertisers point of view, does an ad

> impression bought on an ISP offering free access have less value than an

> impression bought on an ISP where access is paid for?


It seems to me that one cannot compare free and paid for ISPs to free

and paid for newspapers.


The first major difference is that most free newspapers are not

requested by the reader and there is no guarantee that anyone is even

going to look at it. And if someone did read the publication, it is hard

to evaluate the impact and interest this publication will create...

which questions the value of readership figures, etc... 


But for an ISP, the situation is different. Someone switching to or

creating an account with a free ISP has to make that request, and

therefore already shows some interest. The traffic created on this site

will depend on the quality of service / content offered on it. Not on

whether the user has paid for the service or not. (This would then mean

that  the value of banner advertising on a free ISP is the same as the

value on a paid for ISP : as banners are generally sold by thousand,

you only get what you pay for.)


I think that the only reason why value could be inferior on a free ISP

is if the audience it attracts is different to the usual Internet

audience : free ISPs should expand the market and make it more

massmarket... And usually, an upmarket audience will be seen as offering

higher value than a downmarket one... This results from the ISP being

free, but is not linked to the quality of the exposure to the

advertising.


Sophie Polani

Media Solutions

spolanimedsol [dot] co [dot] uk