Bright and early this morning I noticed the new design on TechCrunch. I sent a link to Mike, Colin and Scrivs because I just knew this was one of those times when my lack in design sense was blinding me to the wonderful design a new TechCrunch design should be. Um, Mike doesn’t think so, and I agree with his analysis, but that is not what prompts my entry today. It’s this:
I’m really excited about the “TechCrunch Sponsors” area of the site in the top right. This is an area where people can purchase a permanent presence on TechCrunch and gain access to our audience. We’re going to be very selective about the brands we allow there – we’re not just putting their logos up, we’re saying that we believe in the product as well.
I bet you are Mike. Let’s check out why you’re so excited, since you’re pimping it:
Pricing for each of the four ad units is currently $7,500 per month, which translated to a very low CPM. There is a minimum term of two months, followed by a month-to-month plan where either party may terminate the relationship on 30 days notice.
4×7500=30,000×12=$360,000 a year
Let’s quote Mike:
Revenue generation from advertising isn’t and won’t be the primary goal of this site because the value of TechCrunch isn’t in page views, but in networking (I agree with Dave Winer almost entirely on this).
Yeah, right. What a difference six months makes. To find that entry I had to dig around a bit, and I noticed another pageview inflating change. The archives (if you can find them) only has 5 entries per page. To find the entry I was looking for I impatiently had to click several pages back. In total I probably created 20 impression just trying to find what I knew was there. Makes me take a much closer look at those impression figures.
And if you’re wondering about the green theme, there’s a reason for it (hint – it keeps me focused on my goals).
Yes, I get it…laughing all the way to the bank. Thanks for bashing your readers over the head with the concept. Much appreciated…and I appreciate it so much…I unsubscribed. That much focus on money + that much money + change in policy = bias (to me).
Wow, that’s a completely different slant. Dave Winer implied he’d end up being a sell out.
Oh my goodness. I was a sporadic reader. Not anymore. I’d like to hear his explantion for this.
I think I feel something coming on. Sorry Tyme…can’t resist.
I hate this kind of crap. He RELIES on readers to make this money, but what does he give back? Bash on the head is pretty light Tyme. It’s an insult. A slap in the face. And there is only one way to respond.
Spreading the word like a virus…
If anyone questions why I love you and Scrivs I will point them to this entry. Everyone would like to be comfortable, but to have so little regard for the readers…I refuse to go to the site to look at it.
9rules would never do such a thing. I love you guys but more important, I respect you guys. Querks, screw ups and all. I’m glad Tyme turned me on to 9rules.
I’m rather appauled. The blanantness of it. I doubted you took things out of context but it is what it is. He’s become a sellout.
I unsubscribed. I saw the new design this morning, was hit over the head as well with the ads, but I had no idea he was charging that much.
I don’t think Tyme has a problem with a blogger making money. It’s a complete change in ethics. As a reader I’m supposed to trust him now? Please.
It’s disturbing. All that Valleywag talk must have gone to his head.
I find it particularly disturbing that he removed the link to the Web 2.0 Group. And he’s one of the founders.
But he remembered those ads.
I’m not looking at the site, inflate his traffic even more. I unsubscribed. If he says something worth while I will hear it elsewhere.
Not that I’m into his site that much. I subscribed to learn. Instead I feel like he’s making a fool out of his readers.
LMAO hogging the traffic! It must stay on his site now!
He used Dave Winer.
He used the people in his network.
And he’s laughing while he gets rich.
BUT WHAT IS HE GIVING BACK?
To quote Janet: What have you done for me lately?
I unsubscribed but his stats didn’t go down?
Maybe I’m dumb but wouldn’t his subscribers be higher than that? His site is geared towards geeky people right? Using RSS readers?
How does he get a million uniques? Each and every month?
Wouldn’t 1M uniques draw more than 3M pageviews? His audience isn’t very sticky, is it? He makes a couple of entries a day…seems like he came up with a 1M and multiplied it by 3 – approximately the number of posts he makes per day.
Even with comments those numbers make no sense. The vast majority of his readers AREN’T using RSS?
Jack we’re only the readers he needs to make that money. We shouldn’t care how he came up with those figures (ridiculous).
I don’t think anyone minds a blogger making money. Those aren’t the only ads on the page. He’s not DOING enough to DESERVE that much.
I didn’t go to the site. I refuse to help him get rich when he hasn’t done anything with this site design (from what I’ve read around the internet) to enhance the readers experience.
Do the advertisers get to see the stats? How many times their ad displays? It doesn’t seem like the site is tracking anything.
Yes, I wonder that too. The ads are static for a two month period minimum. It’s more about exposure than actual stats….I think. Not sure though.
Welcome back Tyme!
I agree, I miss these honest entries.
When everyone calms down, he’ll still be making money. Too much money, in my opinion, for what does. Maybe it’s to fund all those parties.
I appear to be the only one unscribing as a result of this. Lesson to be learnt from this one then.
That site is so ugly now. Too much green. Way too bright. The old design was much better.
As far as the money, it’s THE ultimate slap in the face. The readers he needs don’t make anywhere near that.
The missing link to the webgroup is a blantant oversight. He’s not sharing the love anymore.
mutter or not the only one mutter
karmatosed Tyme unsubscribed, I think many of the NTG readers will avoid the site because it is such an insult.
I no longer trust his opinions as neutral. I questioned some of his reviews but now…I lost all respect.
FeedBurner must update daily or something. The number isn’t changing.
This would be a time for a Web 2.0 site to come in and kick butt. More power to ‘em.
With the new site, how does he give back to the community? That focus on networking – where did it go?
Tyme you wrote about something I can understand – money. Ethics. Those companies that advertise for him were reviewed by him, correct? Isn’t that a conflict of interest?
Let me get this straight. He’ll be making 360K a year writing a couple of articles a day. Not only that, doesn’t he get the free products as well?
Let’s not forget the parties, status, exposure, etc. There are many other perks besides money.
I hope someone takes him down a couple of notches.
How many commercial bloggers really care about the reader? Truly? Not many, they don’t act like it. Many don’t even respond to comments.
Can we raise 14k really quick to buy an ad in the empty spot that says, “This design sucks. Don’t click the ads!”
How often does Feedburner update? I know quite a few people that unsubscribed but the number does not change. I’d check back tomorrow but I doubt I will visit the site again unless something “really” important is said.
I thought these complaints about ads on a site went out 5 years ago. I remember at one time it was expected that a website was simply a hobby and the thought of actually making money was absurd.
But people have a life and need to make a living. What’s wrong with wanting to be paid for the time you write?
Otherwise this design nor the old is nothing to get too excited about.
Kelake you obviously thought wrong. As it was said many times here no one has a problem with a blogger making money. Quoting Mike (as per the article) he said his focus was NOT money, it was networking. Those principles are what drew his original readership.
He lost those principles. He introduced advertising on his site in 2005…no one had a real problem with it. Accepting sponsorships from companies he reviews (or in the industry) is a CLEAR conflict of interest. It’s ETHICS not the fact he’s making money.
And he lost 2000 subscribers yesterday. The counter changed.
He lost 2000 subscribers not because he launched a bad design, because the user experience changed. The trust is gone. I don’t see why people don’t understand: the site is no longer neutral opinions anymore. Hasn’t been for a long time, but his latest move confirmed it.
I agree, welcome back!
I can’t help but feel that the money is going into the wrong hands. He spends all his time doing geeky things. I understand, that’s his thing. Tyme, you spend a lot of time with your readers. I asked you many questions about 9rules and you answered every one of them, promptly. Through you 9rules earned my trust and I subscribed to at least 10 sites in the network.
Without readers there is no money to be made. Piss us off, we’re gone. It’s a simple principle. Not to imply bloggers have to bow down to us but damn, give us a reason to be loyal.
I’ve been watching the counter. It dropped down to 45,003 and now it’s back up to 47,381. It’s still a significant drop from 53,651. He needs to update his advertising page as he no longer has 50,000 subscribers.
Jesus people! It’s not up to you to decide how much he deserves for the advertising on his site. It’s up to the advertisers to decide how much the advertising is worth.
To be honest, how much work he does or doesn’t put into it doesn’t mean a thing. It’s the fact that he owns a site that pulls in a certain amount of readers who are prepared to click on the ads.
I have a friend who is a musician. He knocked up a track in an afternoon. He’s still making money off the royalties from that track 3 years later. Should people stop using the track and stop paying him royalties simply because he’s not working for it?
The fact is, he put the work in for however long the site has been going. It’s entirely up to him whether he chooses to make some money out of all that hard work. His priorities are likely to change over time. so why should he feel bound by statements he made under different circumstances?
I really (really, really) don’t understand why people expect website owners to run sites for little or no financial reward.
What does the guy give back? TechCrunch is the best resource I’ve found for keeping up with Web 2.0 developments. That’s why so many people read him and, apparently, people want to pay him lots of money to be on his site. Serious trade publishing is like that and more power to him for making it work by blogging.
I don’t even get the bias comment considering you haven’t shown any evidence of bias. That’s just weak.
should I just kill the site? I never knew how much people hated me. I honestly don’t think it’s worth it anymore.
It used to be the occasional anonymous hate comment. Now people are saying who they are when they tell me they hate me. This stuff adds up to the point where I’m basically depressed all the time.
Anyway, this isn’t the crowd to talk to this about. But many of you may get what you want, soon.
I wanted to give everyone an update. The conversation has continued over here. Mike is responding over there but please if you have something to say, do so in a respectful manner.