I hate all online ads. Pop ups are appalling. On screen ruins the simplicity of the layout.

I've rejected huge offers to put adverts on this site and these boards (when they spotted our viewing figure of 10,000 a day or so) because I simply don't like them.

Online advertising is a careful balance.

Pop-ups are very unpopular, so are animations and audio.

Added to that very effective ad-blocking. I use Firefox and the Adblock extension which means I never see any adds anyway.

I quite like Google-Ads, they're unobtrusive and obviously ads, although as I said above I will never see them anyway.

This website is an example of why website ads are not the solution for most band websites - they don't get 10k visits in a day. If a band is getting that that don't need the ads.

I think one of the key things while this board is read is pure accessibility.
You don`t have to clear all the pop-ups first to read or contribute.

If in the little list on my left as I type here, had a heading saying "Advertisements", I really don`t think it would be clicked on.

That said, I bet a "click here for the famous beer advert" would be.

I'm sorry guys but i disagree with you. First let me address Zooloo's point about website visits.
For a start with Google Ads, considered to be one of the best and well targeted ads you don't need 100,000s of visits to get on board.

Secondly, whether you guys like it or not the punters still do click on Ads and find offers they like.

Thirdly it's a bit hypocritical to hate ads when ads basically is what you need to build your brand. Also you fail to realise the huge potential of internet ads vs ads in the traditional media. Ads fund radio, Ads fund TV, Ads supplement Sky, Ads are in papers. We all
advertise when we need to.

Fourthly Adblockers cannot block ads that appear to be like a normal graphic with a link. You can use any configuration you like with this. Promote the latest hit album, market a related product etc. Be creative and use a format that works for your target audience.

But most important point of all is this. CD sales will continue to tumble. Downloads will never come close to free music on the net and will eventually flatline. This is never going to be enough for the music industry. If you are able to recoup your costs using aDs while at the same time providing fans free music i cannot understand why you are close minded about this.

Ads work online and Pop ups believe it or not are the
highest performing in this group. Fair enough if you don't like them for your own sites but for Fecks sakes most people on here have a Myspace page and a Youtube page both of which have guess what Ads on them, so you can't hate them that much.

Are we trying to make money here or not ? Or do we prefer others make money off our content ?

This sort of thinking and no disrespect to anyone here is like the argument trotted by the music industry in the heydays of Napster dismissing the internet and mp3.

Mind you, we can pooh-pooh online ads (although I don't), yet we are here on this board due to the contributions of JK and his team. Remember, there is no such thing as free. Perhaps JK could show us his bandwidth charges for 10,000 ppl a day. It adds up.

So I've no problem with online ads. When they become obtrusive, ppl switch their eyes off anyway. It's a well-known fact. The GoogleAd format works as it doesn't (usually) get in the way of the reading.

Further to my last post.

Sitepoint is in the top 400 websites as ranked by Alexa.com, with a huge active forum. They have ads on the site which integrate well with the site. Have a look.

Also by putting ads on your site you can also advertise, with the ads bringing in much needed cash to soften the blow of acquiring new customers.

Anyway i've said my piece on this and it's horses for courses. My personal opinion is the public don't care about ads that's why myspace is still huge despite the plethora of ads on their site.

I have been testing, tweaking and looking at different ad solutions which have all given good results, some have even made a profit. I see no reason in giving people music for free without the inconvenience of ads, and if you don't like them, look at your customers/fans. A 1-3% click thru ratio is still very much a possibility and a good return.

My point on website visits isn't the threshold you can advertisers to advertise it is the number of clicks your ad generates.

Your figure of 1-3% Click Through Rate (CTR) is unrealistic unless your website is your full-time employment, even then few achieve that rate. People make money from ads on websites by building multiple websites focused on single ideas.

A band's website and these commercial websites are in entirely different worlds, they are beyond mutual comparison.

Pop-ups may generate a higher CTR than other forms but it is still very low.

MySpace and YouTube have ads? News to me - never seen one.

I don't object to ads, I object to intrusive ads - using audio and animation for example. By blocking those ads I block them all, that's a by-product not my desire - Google Ads are executed very well and I'd be more than happy to have them.

The public DO care about ads, they will leave sites that have too many (In their opinion). The start of this thread was an expression of dislike for ads, JK is a fairly typical website user, at least no reason to think he's an exception.

Advertising and websites is a full-time job. These websites are written to cater for a demand that is already there (Identified by prevalence of search terms).

Website advertising is a specialist job and not related to doing a website to promote a band/artist.

The reason for giving music away free is to promote the band and their other music, gigs and merchandise.

Sitepoint clicky repaired - sometimes ads are done well and sometimes not but that is a side issue about advertising on the web.

For most people ad revenue from their band website is going to be negligible - there are much better, and profitable, things to focus your time on.

I'd say your "...thinking ...is like the argument trotted by the music industry in the heydays of Napster dismissing the internet and mp3". I'd say give some music away and get over it. The Internet and MP3 is a fantastic opportunity for the music business.

Like the music industry you are trying to find ways round users behaviour, in particular focusing on a model that is irrelevant to your market/objectives.

My final point is a repetition but it is the essence of this issue raised - websites for your music and websites for advertising revenue are two very different animals.

Zooloo there are so many things in your post that are just plain wrong.

Your figure of 1-3% Click Through Rate (CTR) is unrealistic unless your website is your full-time employment, even then few achieve that rate..

Not true Zooloo. Not true at all. It is very much a possibility especially with music related content, with Google. Granted 3% is very high and is conditional on targeting but it is possible.

A band's website and these commercial websites are in entirely different worlds, they are beyond mutual comparison.

Well anyone who wants to build their brand online need to do so with sublety by providing what the internet users are searching for. In the world of entertainment
it usually revolves around already famous acts, or user generated content. You can
either set up a site to do this or partner with existing sites with that sort of traffic. Myspace for example. My point is that if you are going to give music fre why let others profit off your own toil ? Answer that.

Myspace and Youtube have ads....
Myspace has so many ads it's hard to ignore them. Still
the public are not leaving in droves are they ? Using
software to strip ads off websites is very dodgy. You are in a way similar to those who download music illegally. Ads are a form of income for sites. By blocking ads you deprive the site of vital revenue and are basically 'stealing content'. Sorry if this sounds harsh but it is true.

If you don't like sites with Ads don't visit them.

The public DO care about ads, they will leave sites that have too many (In their opinion).

Again a lot of assumptions here but not borne out by the reality. How many ads in your opinion is too much ?
Go to Ninemsn. Count the number of ads. Is that too much for you. Then go and check how popular the site is. Ditto Myspace, Youtube, Google etc. Most high traffic sites have lots of ads.

Advertising and websites is a full time job...The reason for giving music away free is to promote the band and their other music, gigs and merchandise.

Music is a full time job to which your website is GOLD in this day and age. Developing a strategy that will ensure that the more popular your band becomes, the more income streams you will get, is essential. Also by partnering with full time sites with the modules already inbuilt you don't need a full time person devoted to your website other than the person who is responsible for ensuring your FREE downloads actually get downloaded by the public.

For most people ad revenue from their band website is going to be negligible - there are much better, and profitable, things to focus your time on.
Most people make nothing from their music. Most bands do gigs that only their friends attend. Most bands sell little or no merchandise. Most bands spend a lot of money on their music. Most bands are on Myspace who have a cheek by profiting off the back of musicians. If Myspace were to sign up to the JOL agreement and pay for webcasting like they should do, expecially with the new rates that are proposed then Myspace would be a great place for artists. So many have debated the value of Myspace for generating record sales, on ROTD, Velvet Rope and others. Websites cost, bandwidth costs, giving away music costs. Recoup some of these costs and you can build on your marketing mix. It's not hard, it's not too time consuming either because others have done the hard work, tested it and are proposing solutions.

My final point Zooloo is this. One does not exist in a vacuum online. The most popular site bands use to give away music online at the moment is Myspace:

Myspace has ads.
Myspace makes money off your content.
Myspace makes money while artists hope to sell other product.
Joe Public visits Myspace a lot.
Most people don't block Myspace ads.
Most people view Myspace ads and some click on it (a small percentage).

Giving away music online should not be seen as "promotion"but rather as a legitimate source of income. You can set up your own site to do this or you can partner with others who at least PAY for the downloads. Monetise your content full stop.

I'm with JK on this.

Advertising on websites is annoying, distracting and cheapens the message. Some websites are littered with banner ads, Google ads etc. It looks cheap, messy and as if the site owner doesn't care about the pureness of their content.

If you can operate without including advertising - it's better.

If you have to have advertising on there - then it needs to be as subtle as possible. I have NEVER clicked on an advert on a website apart from Google (mainly because I'm not sure I'll be able to find my way back to the site where I started!)

When we start adding advertising (for something that isn't owned by us) or adding links to sites that aren't helping us, you'll know we're in trouble!


Stretch
www.Dastards.com

I agree with Jk, Stretch et al. Ads, pop ups etc are very annoying indeed and just make your whole product and/or service look cheap and nasty. No thank you.

Why isn't anyone complaining about ads in newspapers or magazines? It's even more offensive, surely, as I have already paid money for the publication. And on top of that, I have to waft through ads? Outrageous!

Adverts in newspapers and magazines don't dance about distracting me.

DJKZ gave an excellent example of what is wrong with Internet advertising (Ninemsn).

On the page is an animated graphic, which I find distracts me very much indeed. Adblock stops these annoying animations appearing, that's why I use Adblock. (The answer to your question DJKZ is, in my opinion, one animated image (aka advert) too many).

People aren't blocking adverts they are blocking stupid animations and audio.


*******
DJKZ - my answers to your other points would spiral this thread off topic and I also think you've raised issues of more general nature that may interest others.

With this in mind I think it best to bud off and start new topics.

Your questions as I understand them are:
1. MySpace, YouTube - why should I let them host my files and not pay me?
2. Why should I give away some songs? ...and
3. How do I get an income from my band website?

If you would please confirm, add or change those let me know and I will do my best to answer them.

I think that we may have to agree to disagree on the subject of ads.

We are so used to them on TV and without Ads there will be no Champions League on telly. I didnt think ninemsn's ads were bad and neither do the millions who still visit it every day. On occaisions you may see an offer you like but that's another story.

Onto your points Zooloo. Myspace and the like are using a technicality to get round paying for licenses which is odd because as we all know they have paid and are paying Major Labels for their content.

But to your questions please let me know why why, why and how ?