Google’s nice comes at a small business price for any publishers who might want to use the planned subscription tools, but the details are still being ironed out with publishers.
“It will obviously come down to what we think that business relationship should be, but bottom line, I think [revenue sharing] will be exceedingly generous [to news publishers],” Google’s head of news Richard Gingras told the Financial Times on Sunday. “In our ad environment, the rev shares are 70 per cent-plus. The rev shares [for publishers] will be significantly more generous than that.” (Google’s AdSense offers around a 70-30 split for publishers who use it to place ads on their sites.)
Gingras made sure to distinguish Google’s tack from Facebook’s “walled garden” approach, telling the FT that “unlike other participants in the environment, we’re not trying to own the publisher. If there are cases where we do cause the subscription to happen, we don’t want to own the customer. None of this changes the marketplace economics, people will pay for what they value.”
That “other participant in the environment” on Friday formally announced its test of news subscriptions models within its Instant Articles format, through which it won’t take any cut of the revenue from subscription signups (the subscription transaction and payment processing will take place entirely on the publishers’ site). Facebook’s subscription tests are Android-only, as it’s been wrestling with Apple over the past few months over Apple’s default 30 percent cut of “in-app sales,” Recode reported.
Like to see @Google following Apple in reducing its subscription cut after the first year https://t.co/XM4wd0l1nu (ht @patters)
— Greg Emerson (@emersongreg) October 20, 2017
Always fun watching @richardgingras subtly burn Facebook :) 'Google plans to share revenues with news publishers' https://t.co/54PCJtnunN
— Tony Haile (@arctictony) October 22, 2017
Dear @FT, based on what's in the article, Google isn't planning "to share rev with" but to extract rev from you. https://t.co/HPpNklz1MF
— Benjamin Braun (@BJMbraun) October 23, 2017
One comment:
If Google had a social platform people actually wanted things would be different. But they don’t- remember G+? Comparing Google to FB when it comes to publishers, well, it’s not an apples to apples comparison. YouTube has a great social layer built into it, but its a video consumption platform first, social is secondary. The facts are that Google is taking a rev share here and FB is not through the new paywall they are testing, so what am I missing here?
Trackbacks:
Leave a comment