Jump to content
Lamberth

Coil: Why We Are Giving Away $100m to Creators with Mozilla and Creative Commons

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, XRP-JAG said:

Do you think this just happens over night?

Let's rewind say 5-10 years.... 

"The top actors, writers and producers are always going to work on Hollywood blockbusters and major movies"

And it's true, until suddenly you look around one day and find the biggest names in the industry are in huge budget TV series, with bigger budgets than most films. When did that happen? How did that happen? Somebody changed the rules of the game and tempted that talent to something new. They didn't all come over at once, a few did, then a few more, and a few more after that... now A list celeb in a TV series is fairly common.

Same applies to the gaming sector, it's following the same pattern as above right now.

I am not sure what you are referring to when "do you think this just happens over night?".  Building user base, increase revenues, etc.? Advertising models like Google are estimated to make $6 a month per user: https://www.marketingcharts.com/advertising-trends-77000. This is just one internet resource.  How will Coil scale to provide enough revenue to offset advertising losses for all internet content creators?  Google is obviously taking a chunk of the $6 per user revenue.  But, consumers will have to pay at least a few dollars for each internet site to offset not relying on advertising.

In your example, TV heavily relies on both subscription/monthly fee and advertising models.  Which I agree Coil can be successful with a hybrid approach.  I argue they will not be successful with a business model of being an alternate to advertising.

I do agree with the gaming sector as a use case.  We have already seen a lot of success with mobile games and microtransactions (even though some hate this).  If done correctly, I believe Coil can be huge in the gaming sector.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, wogojump said:

I would agree there is a small market for pay as you go solution.  But, this is a minority.  Majority of the content creators and internet users will utilize the business model that provides greatest revenues at least costs to consumers.

This bit makes no sense at all. If millions of people already pay say £8 p/m for Times, £10 p/m for Spotify, £12 p/m for Netflix etc, there is 100% without any shadow of a doubt a market for those who consume less to use a pay as they go system. New customers for these companies that would not otherwise buy at all.

Look at Sky Sport, traditionally you would have to add this to your TV subscription at a monthly cost of around £20-£30 p/m. They know that for the football addicts etc, that is an acceptable cost. For the person who wants to watch the odd match once in a while, it's prohibitively expensive. Now they cater for that market in a 'pay as you go' model via a "Day Pass" for a one off £10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, wogojump said:

In your example, TV heavily relies on both subscription/monthly fee and advertising models.  Which I agree Coil can be successful with a hybrid approach.  I argue they will not be successful with a business model of being an alternate to advertising.

I do agree with the gaming sector as a use case.  We have already seen a lot of success with mobile games and microtransactions (even though some hate this).  If done correctly, I believe Coil can be huge in the gaming sector.

I don't feel they need to focus on just one. Coil needs to hit a certain critical mass, then it comes unstoppable. The next Netflix etc.

If that is achieved by getting some customers from micro gaming transactions, some from PAYG content, some from as an alternative to advertising... then great. Once the person is the customer via one method, you've got them ready for everything else you facilitate.

Netflix / Amazon Prime literally threw money at their projects to get them to where they are now. Content creators will go to where the audience is, and the audience goes to where the best content is. Classic 'chicken or the egg' scenario. Coil has to get the ball rolling, and force the issue. If they can do that, no reason why it cannot be huge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, King34Maine said:

To your concern regarding the need to reach a larger audience (i.e. Netflix, Amazon Prime Videos, etc.) Stefan mentioned in the extended Ripple Drop episode (01:48 - End) back on September 5th that partnering with larger platform and Internet service providers where you have a Coil bundle as part of your subscription to Netflix, Hulu, Charter, etc. 

Why would ILP need xCurrent (a closed-permissioned network)? The whole point of ILP is to create an open standard for all to build upon similarly to how xCurrent was developed based upon ILP technology. Also, web-monetization is about sending "low-value" high-volume" streaming transactions/payments via the internet. xCurrent is built for sending/settling large chunky payments for banks and corporates.

Thanks for the thoughtful response.

When you mention add-on Coil packages for Netflix/Hulu etc, that’s not what I have in mind. I’m talking about ILP getting in the middle between Visa and Netflix as a means of intermediating those monthly payments, in order to get companies like that connected to the IoV. Until that begins to happen, IoV is in limbo.

Streaming web monetization is a great idea, but it will necessarily be a fraction of the way we pay in the future since breakage and one-off payments still (and will always) play an important role in high-quality content creation. There’s a reason current Coil content is lower-value, and it’s that the payouts are lower value. This may seem like a chicken-egg problem, but it is not. It is a problem of Coil’s business model.

The problem is, Coil has limited the flexibility of ILP by forcing streaming payments and ignoring the one-off and high-value markets, in order to create an experience they want. Not the one that consumers want.

Here’s the relationship to xCurrent. Ripple solved a problem for banks by creating better connectivity between ledgers, with the future goal of getting banks to use XRP. I believe Coil is better off focusing on something similar — getting the small and large players who are already making payments online to connect to ILP for their existing transactions. If that sounds like an intractable problem, it’s because at the moment it is. Eventually, Coil or a company more suited to solving that will have to identify a business with a problem that can be solved by ILP payment routing. The more the network grows, the more you can start thinking about how, or if, XRP can make that network more efficient for participants. But until we have an IoV we can’t have IoV+XRP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

     This view is coming from someone with zero internet subscriptions. I would consider paying for $5-$15 dollars a month for access, even if limited, to read articles that I was really interested in, or watch a movie once a month. If coil could provide a service to where I wasn't tied into five different subscriptions and still have access to certain material that I would not otherwise have access to I would subscribe to Coil if it seemed appropriate.

    

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what remains to be seen is how a $0 customer acquisition cost impacts the unit economics of subscription businesses.

How much did Netflix, Hulu, and Spotify have to spend on advertising before you dug out your credit card and typed it in your browser? 

Only a tiny percentage of the populations that recognize those brands have an active subscription.

These companies are missing out on a giant pile of incremental revenue by opening up the paywalls. None of this money was available in the past because of credit card merchant fees.

It’s a huge ask for a credit card and a monthly commitment, particularly when you’re probably already subscribed to a competitor or just won’t use a service enough to justify the ongoing cost.

I would love to be able to actually read the two or thee Wall St. Journal articles that show up in my Twitter feed every month. I’m never going to subscribe to those guys because it’s redundant with my other subscriptions. The WSJ could make a dollar or two from me every year, which they would spend exactly nothing on to acquire since I’m visiting from links posted by others.

Once Coil gets a user base, given how simple it is to implement web monetization on a website, I think you’ll see some big guys experiment.

imgur is a perfect test case - it’s an expensive to run website with a high volume of tech savvy ad blocker using visitors who are unlikely to pay for a subscription. If coil can show better monetization than advertising, then owners of sites with high value content are going to look twice.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, wogojump said:

Talented writers and content creators are going to stick with using business models like advertising, as long as it generates more revenue for them.

My point is that the majority of talented content creators are currently creating their content for free, while facebook, twitter etc are earning all the revenue from their work.

THEY will switch to a platform where they are being paid for their talent, once it becomes simple to route payments directly from reader to author.

Leaving advertising platforms with only garbage.

Then you will switch too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m sure they are aware of this,  and that there are probably technical issues...  but I really don’t like the pay everyone model.

I want to allow or disallow payments.  I would also like to throttle up and down the amounts.  And pay-as-you-go not subscribe.

It may be curmudgeonly of me,  but I’m not in until at least some of that is available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Tinyaccount said:

I’m sure they are aware of this,  and that there are probably technical issues...  but I really don’t like the pay everyone model.

I want to allow or disallow payments.  I would also like to throttle up and down the amounts.  And pay-as-you-go not subscribe.

It may be curmudgeonly of me,  but I’m not in until at least some of that is available.

I’ve not really followed Coil in a huge amount of detail, but your point seems fairly obvious so I’d hope there is a solution in the making. If I’m personally paying, I’m inevitably going to be willing pay more or less per minute depending on what the content is.

The issue I suppose is making the price comparison uncomplicated for the customer. It does not work if I’m trying to figure out my likely expenditure in fractions of a penny / cent per second.

The model / starting point I do like is something along the lines of this song or movie is X price. If you decide it’s terrible and turn it off half way through, you pay half. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, peanut56 said:

Being early means no one really knows how to get web monetization to work or how it will work long term. Personally I expect 90% of what coil tries to fail, but then what is learned form the 10% of successes will lead to better mapping

Being early, trying things that haven’t been done before and having 9 out of 10 tried that fail is exactly what Sir Richard Branson said less than 24 hours ago. It’s exactly what he was saying he was willing to do to grow his fledgling businesses over the years. It is, perhaps, what helped make him a self-made multi billionaire.

I have trust in these people and applaud their boldly pressing into the unproven business models. They’re crafting the future and there will be mistakes and from those mistakes will come understanding, adaptation and success.

9758F393-FBF4-41B7-9904-4F05E4C24629.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Roaring_Twenties said:

Being early, trying things that haven’t been done before and having 9 out of 10 tried that fail is exactly what Sir Richard Branson said less than 24 hours ago. It’s exactly what he was saying he was willing to do to grow his fledgling businesses over the years. It is, perhaps, what helped make him a self-made multi billionaire.

I have trust in these people and applaud their boldly pressing into the unproven business models. They’re crafting the future and there will be mistakes and from those mistakes will come understanding, adaptation and success.

 

Your creative dreams will never be realised if you are unwilling to take the risk of starting.  The  creative process is about looking across the landscape and being willing to put yourself in that driving seat and not to be deterred by the bumps in the road.  On that first mourning, when you are looking across the landscape towards your target the mountains, they will appear much closer than they really are.  You will not see the deep valleys and rivers that block the direct line to your target and you will naturally misjudge and underestimate how long it will take to reach them.

Learning is about keeping your focus on your principle and repeating and repeating and getting better.  Creativity is about recognising the opportunities of new destinations that will reveal themselves as you travel.

By my estimation Ripple/XRP community is doing very well.  New destinations have revealed themselves (think the world of micro payments) and there have been some very big bumps that have had to be worked at (think regulations and the resistance of banks towards changing their ways).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the things that worries me about the concept is that the company also needs to make money.  It's essentially a big pool of cash that is being divvied out by a talley of attention.  Assuming it gets ubiquitous enough that every website is Coil monetized, considering how much time people spend online, they're going to have to start picking and choosing who actually gets paid at all, even if they drastically increase the subscription fee.  Which would make them a publisher, and I feel like once they start making those kinds of decisions, we've come full circle.  And that's not mentioning the natural tendency people and companies have to take a big slice of the pie for themselves.

That being said, I do adore the concept and the site in general and it's a place that has motivated me to get off my butt and start writing.  I just tend towards practical cynicism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was in college it was sometimes hard to find papers for topics that really interested me . Lucky me the authors gave me their articles for free even though they were really expensive 

 

I would have loved a system like coil where I could have read any paper I wanted for a fixed fee a month. But that’s a special use case 

If big magazines like the economist started experimenting with coil i could maybe start using coil , right now I don’t know why I should pay fort articles because everything I read is free or physical, nothing beats books :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coil guys worked at Ripple labs. Coil guys had a great idea. Coil guys quit Ripple labs. They are exited! We gone make it! After a while they realized how hard is it to make money! Coil guys think: if we just have XRP to sell, we will have all the money in the world. Coil guys goes back to Ripple labs talk a little bit about The internet of value and got 1billion xrp!!! Coil guys are happy. They grant 100 million dollars??!!! They grant??!! They have no money. Ripple lab are granting, distributing... Ok after the crypto winter the sight is more clear. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...