[Previous] [Next] - [Index] [Thread Index] - [Previous in Thread] [Next in Thread]

Subject: Re: UKNM: Re: Portals?
From: Mike Bracken
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1998 17:35:40 +0100

-----Original Message-----
>>>This constant recycling of information that has characterised the early
>>>years of the Web will not survive 1999.
>>Errm, I'd ask PA/Reuters et al what they think of that.
>Right, but there's information and *information*. In portal terms it these
>organisations that are providing some of the (the only?) original daily
>content churn in the form of news and share prices. Another side of their
>business then re-sells this archived data.

I'd question this and also say - 'so what.' This point doesn't seem to have
any relevance to the previous post.

>You can always charge for business critical information (historical or not),
>but I doubt whether you could build a successful subscription-model business
>(like Reuters & PA) around archiving puff & spam.

This doesn't follow the thread.

Correct, but that's not the point. My point is that the previous post said
that recycling of information will decrease by the end of 1999. I disagree.
It's getting worse. The value of information is falling and information is
becoming ubiquitous. Rather than it ceasing to be recycled I think recycling
will increase while making much information value free. Of course you can
charge for high quality info, but then I didn't say otherwise.

[Previous] [Next] - [Index] [Thread Index] - [Next in Thread] [Previous in Thread]