Web Business

TwitterFacebook
Get flash to fully experience Pearltrees
My argument is simple: blocking ads can be devastating to the sites you love. I am not making an argument that blocking ads is a form of stealing, or is immoral, or unethical, or makes someone the son of the devil. It can result in people losing their jobs, it can result in less content on any given site, and it definitely can affect the quality of content. It can also put sites into a real advertising death spin. As ad revenues go down, many sites are lured into running advertising of a truly questionable nature. We've all seen it happen. http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars

Why Ad Blocking is devastating to the sites you love

from the get-over-it dept Every so often we hear about a random blog or website that freaks out and claims that ad blockers are "stealing" or somehow damaging websites. But it's quite a surprise to see a similar argument from a site like Ars Technica -- one of the top techie sites out there, which is now owned by Conde Nast. Over the weekend, Ars wrote an odd post claiming that ad blocking "is devastating to the sites you love." http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100306/1649198451.shtml

Don't Blame Your Community: Ad Blocking Is Not Killing Any Sites

The Long Tail - Wired Blogs - Mozilla Firefox

Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:46:19 “ Priced and Unpriced Online Markets ” by Harvard Business School professor Benjamin Edelman. Discusses tradeoffs in market such as email, IP addresses, search and dial-up Internet. http://www.longtail.com/the_long_tail/2008/11/the-miraculous.html

Mary Meeker Web 2.0 Presentation

Very usefull data on CPM, CPC and Web advertising market... by Patrice Mar 1

Dow Jones VentureSource released its second quarter numbers for the venture industry today, and there’s a reason they’re not dominating the headlines. They’re pretty boring: Overall investors put $8 billion into 776 deals in the US in the second quarter, a decrease of 5% in terms of invested cash and 2% in terms of deals. The median amount raised per deal was $5.2 million, up from $4.6 million a full year earlier. Yawn, right? But the fact that the numbers are so unremarkable is what makes them interesting. http://techcrunch.com/2011/07/22/more-evidence-theres-no-bubble-vc-investments-were-flat-in-q2/

More Evidence There’s No Bubble: VC Investments Were Flat in Q2 | TechCrunch

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/07/11/dont-call-it-the-next-tech-bubble-yet/ Signs of exuberance are everywhere: Tesla roadsters, soaring real estate, overpriced vinegar - and eye-popping valuations for pre-IPO companies like Facebook and Zynga. So why are so many Silicon Valley denizens reluctant to use the B-word? FORTUNE -- Michael Dreyfus, 49, is a leading real estate broker in the heart of Silicon Valley. During the winter he sensed the housing market was coming back, though he hadn't a clue what he'd be in for. In February prospective sellers came to him with a listing for a perfectly respectable property in Palo Alto: four bedrooms, three bathrooms, 7,500-square-foot lot, needs work.

Don't call it the next tech bubble - yet - Big Tech - Fortune Tech

Freemium monetization

Measuring internet audiences

Groupon's crazyness

Online payment

Creative SEO

Une bulle technologique? Vraiment?