Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Advertising on a Free Wireless Network?

Cliff posted more than 12 years ago | from the anything-to-grab-those-eyeballs dept.

The Internet 406

Mischievous0ne asks: "I had an idea yesterday, and I wanted to run it past the Slashdotcommunity. Would you use a honeypot (free wireless access point) that covered a large downtown area (3-4 blocks of restaurants, coffee bars, an iceskating rink, a small park, and general hangout) if you had to have a framed banner ad at the top of every page you visited while on the network? Do advertisers still pay for banner ads? Are banner ads, effective? I live in a college town in Indiana, and I know there are wireless users here, but the campus wireless network is severly limited. I'm also not sure how people would react to the banner ad space in exchange for free access."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

If its free.. (2, Insightful)

shift (222320) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275505)

Who cares what they think about banners.. They will use it regardless..

Re:If its free.. (1)

critter_hunter (568942) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275561)

I wouldn't bet on that. A few years back, there were lots of free, banner-supported internet connection (I remember Altavista offered such a service, among others). It didn't stick around for too long.

Now banners are worth less and people hate them more than ever... why don't you just charge money anyway? Don't you think there's enough ad banners as it is?

Re:If its free.. (1)

shadow303 (446306) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275607)

If I am not mistaken, they disappeared because they had problems making money, not because people weren't using it.

Re:If its free.. (1)

BagOBones (574735) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275719)

True, in fact they where VERY popular but since next to no one clicked the ads the companies didn't make money because there demand was always higher than thier profit. I think it would be great if I could walk around and surf, even with adds everywhere but I would likely never click on one.

Re:If its free.. (2, Insightful)

dunkan44 (537519) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275575)

I think your missing the point. I think what he is asking is does banner advertisment work? Could he maybe pay for the bandwidth that he is giving out for free? Doubt it! Not using conventional banner ads. But maybe if you got the local businesses in on it, hit them up to have their name shown to the users of the network, that might bring in a little income.

free wireless would be great! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275764)

free wireless (like 802.11b 11MB/sec?, broadband?) would be well received with banners as long as they aren't annoying (popups, etc). static banners would be fine. free banner-based dialup wasn't successful but free wireless is a new idea and would probably be successful at leat in the beginning. try it out and see how it goes!

Sure... (2, Funny)

mrgrey (319015) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275507)

Sure I would. I still read slashdot....

I don't want the necessary web proxy (1)

sulli (195030) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275519)

to get in the way of my usage. Better to pay for the service, a la Starbucks/T-Mobile.

it all depends on (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275527)

what kind of advertisements you put up. For instance, if you were to advertise goatse [] , I'm sure the neighborhood would object to it. However, advertisements for rummage sales or town meetings might be greeted with arms wide open.

Re:it all depends on (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275591)

arms open wide? as opposed to something else being open wide?

Thanks for the lovely thought!

PS - some neighborhoods might enjoy that sort of thing.

Re:it all depends on (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275616)

I personally would be pleased to see goatse ads up on a free wireless network. Free wireless, plus hot pictures? Hell yeah, i'm there.

Re:it all depends on (3, Interesting)

doublem (118724) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275617)

This brings up a good point.

As wireless networks become more and more common, how long will it be before we have a lawsuit involving the content on those networks?

Can't you imagine some litigation happy jerk finding porn on a shared drive and suing for distributing the content?

"We must protect the children! My son say porn on my neighbor's hard drive over the wireless network!"

Opera? (1)

Dexter77 (442723) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275528)

Do you mean banners like in the Opera?
I personally don't mind about them, but atleast among my friends I'm the only one who doesn't mind..

Re:Opera? (2)

Fastball (91927) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275574)

Do you mean banners like in the Opera?

Do you typically "make the love" or just "get it on?" Sorry. Had to. :)

Re:Opera? (1)

critter_hunter (568942) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275604)

Banners in opera are not too obnoxious, don't float around on the desktop, don't open pop-ups, and you can even get rid of them by navigating full screen. How can anyone mind them?!

never in a million years (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275534)

I would never use integrity is too important.

Answers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275537)

Would you use a honeypot (free wireless access point) that covered a large downtown area (3-4 blocks of restaurants, coffee bars, an iceskating rink, a small park, and general hangout) if you had to have a framed banner ad at the top of every page you visited while on the network?

You mean, like, through a hidden proxy server deal? I dunno, I imagine it would fuck the layout and such of pages up quite a bit. I there would be for the logging/privacy concerns. But in theory, sure I guess...

Do advertisers still pay for banner ads? Are banner ads, effective?

No. No.

NO they wouldn't (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275538)

It would never work. Now, what town did you say you lived in?

hmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275540)

I would try to find ways arround it...too annoying. Besides whats the point? What are the stats on people actually clicking those things anyway?

is this a joke? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275543)

were you entirely asleep during the dot-com boom and meltdown? how does this crapola get on slashdot?

1. give something valuable out for free.
2. (nevermind technical, legal, and other liability issues)
3. (something involving banner ads.)
4. ???
5. profit!

Re:is this a joke? (3, Funny)

Jacer (574383) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275589)

i thought it was 5. go bankrupt

Re:is this a joke? (1)

mendepie (228850) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275677)

i thought it was 5. go bankrupt

Why are you spoiling everything by bringing reality into the picture???

Re:is this a joke? (3, Informative)

alienmole (15522) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275696)

"5. profit" was the business plan, based on somehow figuring out what step #4 should be.

Some companies thought it was "4. Spend IPO money and worthless inflated stock on acquiring other companies with loser business plans, and hope beyond all rational expectation that one of them will succeed and save our butts (and stock options)."

As one would expect, "5. go bankrupt" was the result.

You can't make money this way (5, Informative)

floppy ears (470810) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275720)

Do advertisers still pay for banner ads?

Yes, but ...
  • The going rate is less than $1 per 1000 impressions.
  • Most advertisers only like to buy from sites that have a lot of inventory. We're talking hundreds of thousands of impressions per month, generally.
  • Advertisers want to know about the demographics of the people who will be visiting the site. It would be difficult (although not impossible) to develop this information for a honeypot.

Re:You can't make money this way (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275778)

less than $1 per 1000 impresions? try less than $.01 in many cases, and even .001 in some cases.

Re:is this a joke? (5, Insightful)

ergo98 (9391) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275787)

1. give something valuable out for free.
4. ???
5. profit!

Actually, that's pretty much exactly what network television does, and they're rolling in the dough.

In fact, this is a great idea (if it weren't for the technical problems with it) because it solves the primary problem with internet advertisement: A lack of ability to target advertisements to a paricular group of consumers. In this case because it's a wireless network, you know that they are within a small geographical area, and hence it's a gold mine for stores and businesses in the area.

In any case, while we need to learn from history, history doesn't dictate with certainty: When the first airplane failed to get off the ground, they didn't give up and forget about it. History is full of examples where there are countless failures, followed by success.

Interesting Idea (2)

doublem (118724) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275546)

This means all the wireless networks out there could become a revenue stream of the company hosting them!

I think this is a dangerous idea. I can name several companies that would enable this by default on all wireless connections if it were available. It would be a way to force users to help offset the cost of the wireless networks.

Interesting the same way NetZero was interesting.. (1)

jcrb (187104) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275613)

for a couple of minutes

Re:Interesting Idea (2)

the_quark (101253) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275652)

I think the real value would lie in location-targeted ads. Just getting money from another "click the money" worthless banner pool probably wouldn't even be worth the trouble. But think how much value targeted advertising would be to local businesses - you can give them people who are literally right next door.

Banners (2)

Kaz Riprock (590115) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275550)

I think in my entire time on the net (nearing 10 years now), I've intentionally clicked on less than a dozen banner ads. If they're even selling something I'm interested in, I'll often look for the webpage of the parent rather than click on the ad. BUT, I do appreciate them a LOT more than pop-up/pop-under/go-thru ads.

If I want to avoid a banner, I can. If someone's going to pay to have the banner there, then that's their business. I can ignore them a lot easier than any of the other mentioned ad types.

I'd use it, if... (0)

Ichijo (607641) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275551)

(1) they were only banner ads (no popups), and (2) if it didn't require adding any new software. Which would mean they'd have to use a transparent proxy.

Sure they'd use it. (1)

sugapablo (600023) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275558)

They'd just bitch and moan and I'm sure whoever was running the network would make it more and more restrictive, start making advertisements more pervasive, and begin charging for "expanded services" that were at one time gratis.

Anyone ever use Yahoo? :)

NetZero (1)

elBart0 (444317) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275562)

How's their business been lately?

Not too good I would suspect.

And most of the other "free internet for ad" companies have already tanked.

Same idea, different mechanism will have the same results.

Re:NetZero (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275768)

Same idea, different mechanism will have the same results.

I have to disagree. The original question is about using the banners as a way of supplementing some earnings for a business/institution that can afford to install and run the wireless network. A way to "justify" to the PHB's and the bean counters that the network "could become a viable source of income" or some such thing...

remember netzero (2, Insightful)

pbranes (565105) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275569)

Netzero and other similar companies failed after many strong and repeated attempts to offer the same service, except through dial up. The idea sounds nice except for a couple of problems: no one ever clicks on banner ads (except the great slashdot ads, of course), and people will just find a way to keep the banner ad from displaying on the screen. I would love for your idea to work, but I just don't see that happening, given the past history of free internet access. Today, I don't think there is a single free ISP left (could be mistaken), and this is mostly due to a poor revenue model.

sounds good to me (1)

CySurflex (564206) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275570)

Sounds like a businessplan straight out of 1999. Just make sure when you move this business into an "office" there are razor scooters, ping pong tables and a masseuse, and you're all set.

Re:sounds good to me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275630)

And maybe they could buy a chic new car, say a Daimler Chrysler product, and stamp their logo on the side to give away as a promo piece.

Free Internet access works so well... (1)

gurnb (80987) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275573)

Wouldn't the example of JUNO or NetZero be enough to detour something like this?

mmmm, free stuff (1)

FunkyELF (609131) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275576)

People are used to banners, they're becoming like the voices you hear between songs on the radio telling you to head down to Joe's Pontiac dealership, and like commercials on tv. Its a way to keep everyone happy. I wouldn't pay 10 times the price to watch tv without commercials, or to browse the internet without ads.

Re:mmmm, free stuff (2)

Fastball (91927) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275751)

Except they're the voices you tune out between songs on the radio. I don't know about you, but I'm not paying attention to the radio in my car until I heard the typical:

BAM! BONG! BOOM! click. Twirp. 98.5FM! The Worm!

A song begins, then I turn the dial because the song typically sucks. Repeat until I can take no more and switch the radio off.

The RIAA has been moaning about P2P and Internet radio killing their profits. I postulate that advertising has had a lot to do with this. The time most folks listen to the radio is during the drive to and from work, and you're fucking lucky to get one or two songs an hour between ads. Why bother?

Advertising is so ubiquitous that I don't even notice it, especially when its up in my grill.

I didn't work before... (2)

gambit3 (463693) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275578)

... for wired ISPs. Why should it work now?

Absolutely.. (1)

joshua404 (590829) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275585)

Just as soon as I install my favorite popup/popunder/banner ad blocker. :)

honeypot? (1)

krich (161944) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275586)

No. honeypot != free wireless access point

Re:honeypot? (3, Funny)

God! Awful (181117) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275743)

No. honeypot != free wireless access point

Nah, this'd be great. Setup a honeypot server that offers free wireless web access. Then when someone tries to hack you and you go after them, you're guaranteed to find them within a 3 block radius.


that's not a honeypot (3, Informative)

g4dget (579145) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275588)

A honeypot is a machine that looks suspectible to break-in but is monitored. It's used by sys admins and security "experts" to find out what techniques people use to break into machines.

If it's free, why not ? (1)

Nickdawwg (609344) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275590)

If the banners don't bog down the overall operation I would.

Why not? (1)

ktulus cry (607800) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275592)

Sure, banner ads are annoying, and would generally only disuade one from using the advertised product - but its a free wireless network. I think it would be taken advantage of, so long as it's in an area where one would WANT to get online (i.e. public park, downtown area).

honeypot? (1)

djtack (545324) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275593)

Are you sure you're not confused about the meaning of a honeypot [] ?

But sure, I'd use it, why not? But I'd probably try to block the ads.

How to implement? (1)

gordm (562752) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275595)

It sounds like a very interesting idea to me, but how do you implement the frame? Is there an example ISP who frames what you're browsing? I believe typical implementation of such ad-based approaches involve customized browsers. That would be a pain in the ass to enforce, and restrict user choices. -g

yep. (1)

ak81 (606520) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275598)

as long as I am getting some extra service for free, I don't mind seeing ads. Although the online ad industry isn't money-making these days...with all this privacy-features in the latest browsers ;-)

how people would react (2)

Wise Dragon (71071) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275600)

>I'm also not sure how people would react to the >banner ad space in exchange for free access.

I know how I'd react: block those ads! Are you with me, everybody?

Nothing wrong with this (2, Interesting)

thatguywhoiam (524290) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275601)

I think it's a fine idea. My own slant has always been this: if it's free, as in beer, then subjecting yourself to ads is fine. You pay, no ads.

On a side note, I think the reason advertising on the internet gets such a negative response is that they are designed badly. Why do banners animate? Banners should not animate. Nor should things pop up/under what you are working on. People are just fine with the ads in magazines and such because they aren't constantly dancing around and flashing things at you. It's distracting, and detracts greatly from the reading experience. I'm sure static banners would raise a minimum of fuss in the average user.

I mean, we're predators, and our eyes are automatically attracted to movement. That's why good UI design calls for animation only when you want the users attention for something important.

Aww crap, I just answered my own question. I hate people.

Honeypot?? (5, Insightful)

casio282 (468834) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275605)

Wait, isn't a "honeypot" a dummy system used to trap malicious crackers? [] seems to think so too [] .

Does the word "honeypot" now also mean a "free wireless access point?" Nobody tells me these things...

Re:Honeypot?? (1)

Ark42 (522144) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275694)

Thats what I was thinking. And how exactally do you enforce this banner-ad showing program for free wireless access? Wouldn't that mean downloading some sort of proprietary software that is required for the net connection?

Am I the only one who thinks the person who submitted this story hasn't got a clue about technology, and just wants to find some fast cash?

Re:Honeypot?? (1)

AnyoneEB (574727) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275729)

You could require using the internet through a proxy server which adds a banner at the top of every page.

Re:Honeypot?? (3, Informative)

Jahf (21968) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275758)

It is not implausible that they would force all :80 traffic out through their web proxy and intercept the HTML code and possibly email to insert ads.

In essence, it would be the opposite of alot of client-side proxys that intercept HTML and -remove- ads. I would expect the system to add text and graphics, possibly even Java aps to try and make sure you see them.

Not polite, but hey, it's their network. Not completely enfoceable (since someone will surely write a client-side proxy to remove the ads), but neither is any other form of advertising.

Unless you're in a tech saturated market I don't expect you'll see this for a long time. The guy standing on the corner with a sign is much more effective.

Re:Honeypot?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275707)

you are thinking of a 'honeynet'

Yes, a honeypot is a trap. (5, Informative)

alienmole (15522) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275742)

A Google search [] brings up plenty of references, like Honeypots [] , or What is a honeypot and how is it used? [] .

What happened here is that the submitter read or heard something about a wireless honeypot being used to trap wardriving/walking etc. activity, and thought that the term just meant a free access point. He's confused.

Re:Yes, a honeypot is a trap. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275789)

He's confused.

That about sums it up.

College Campus (1)

ianaverage (168691) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275606)

I would think that that would never work at a college campus. I would think that the majority of college student either know how to block that stuff, or have friends that will set it up. It would last for like a few months, the company would get little or no revenue, and it would die. Sounds like a nice idea though.

Honeypot = Free wireless access point??? (1)

paul_cairney (209501) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275619)

Since when did a honeypot become a free wireless access point? Last time I checked the idea of a honeypot was to log and monitor the activities of Crackers.

For more Details on what a Honeypot REALLY is check out this page []

Depends on annoyanced level (5, Insightful)

Subcarrier (262294) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275622)

If the banner said things "Would you like another coffee?" and the waitress would bring it within a couple of minutes I might even like it.

Otherwise I'd probably just ignore the banner.

If the adverts were too intrusive to ignore I'd stop using the service.

Locally relevant advertising, that's the thing.

honeypots are not free WAP's (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275625)

Honeypot is a term used in infosec circles to denote a machine left intentionally vulnerable to learn techniques of system crackers. What the fuck are you talking about?

Two things (0, Offtopic)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275631)

1.) For the clarifications of others:
honeypot (free wireless access point)
Do not confuse a honeypot with a honeynet (the network with little security to watch for breakins).

2.) Look at Juno web. They allow free (modem) web access, and make a profit off the banner ads across the top of the browser.

Useless sampling (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275643)

"Hey, all you people who read a free website even though it has banner ads, would you use a free wireless network even though it has banner ads?"

yeah, go for it (2)

tps12 (105590) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275646)

It worked for slashdot.

Most people will not click ads on the go (1)

iamacat (583406) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275651)

Think about most cases you are using a public wireless network. You are probably in a hurry to check e-mail or anyway do something. Will you really click a banner ad? I don't think people will mind that much but they probably will not pay attention to them either - even less than banners on a regular network.

Sure, banners for everyone. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275653)

Why not? Let's have tons of banners. Why, there'll be a banner in the browser (opera), a banner in the web page, and then your special banner. Sounds fine with me. Try to make it so that the text of web pages flow around the banners too like a lot of keen articles are doing now-adays. Nothing like those intrusive "middle of the page" ads. Make them HUGE too. You never did mention how big they'd be. I suggest at least 600x 600 pixels.

Effective? If ads were effective then everyone who visits slashdot would be using Visual C# and harnessing the power of source forge.

--Don't hate me because I'm an AC

banner ads (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275654)

Are banner ads, effective?

About as effective as the comma in that sentence is I surmise.

It's not the Banners it's the service that matters (1)

Mattzilla (525821) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275656)

People will accept banners as long as the service for which they are accessing the service/software/etc, is what they want.
The banners in this specific case should not pose a significant deterrent as long as they remain banners and not mandatory select-to-continue style banners where the users spend time before realizing they have to *do* something to get the ad to go away so they can proceed with their business.

Again, the service is where the focus needs to be, history has shown that people will pay to get quality service when free service with banners was offered but was of lesser quality...

Do Banners == Revenue? (5, Insightful)

daoine (123140) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275659)

Looking at the latest trends, one thing seems to be very clear. Online business models which rely on advertising as their sole source of income generally fail. The sites/portals/whatever you want to call them that succeed tend to do one of three things:
  1. Have a parent company which is willing to fund them at a loss to maintain web presence (like
  2. Have multiple sources of income (a la Yahoo!)
  3. Have such specialized services/content, people are willing to pay for it(like an ISP)
I can't think of a single site/service which is based on advertising alone and is actually *making* money. Banner ads just don't cut it anymore.

Re:Do Banners == Revenue? (1)

NineNine (235196) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275709)

can't think of a single site/service which is based on advertising alone and is actually *making* money.


No volume. (1)

NineNine (235196) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275661)

Yes, banners still do work to an extent. No, banners would not work in this situation. The number of users would be much, much too low to attract any kind of advertiser whatsoever. Advertisers are interested in hundred of thousands of impressions. With wireless being still so bleeding edge, you wouldn't have more than a handful, daily, unless you happened to be in the hippest of hip neighborhoods in San Francisco or NY. Or, you could go for some kind of pay per signup for whatever program, in which with the kind of volume your service would bring in, could amount to only a few signups a year.

I would love (1)

WetCat (558132) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275669)

to pay up to $18/month for wireless access to my

I would use it happily... (2)

Nomad7674 (453223) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275671) long as it was free otherwise. Problem is, I doubt it would remain effectively in place for long. It would only be a matter of time until someone (probably a Slashdot reader) programmed something to "block" the banner ads. Since that would increase the speed of downloads, many folks would use it and thus your profitability would plummet. Likewise, AOL IM chatters would be using your network WITHOUT accessing HTML pages which you could inserts ads into. It is unlikely this business model would last long.

My two cents.

Re:I would use it happily... (1)

AnyoneEB (574727) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275786)

It's already done. [] The Proximatron (Windows only, but I'm sure that someone here could wirte a Linux one if there isn't already one) filters html. Set-up a rule to block the ad and it's gone. (I don't see ads on /. and articles auto-matically create random users :)

I'm all for it (2)

matsh (30900) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275675)

As long as the banner size is the same, so I can use Bannerblind [] ... ;-)

Local ads? (5, Insightful)

tsangc (177574) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275678)

What if you spoke to local businesses like a bakery, bookstore, supermarket, etc, and bought location specific ads? You wouldn't need to pay for an online ad brokerage house or use their rates, and you could give geographically targetted ads that people who happen to be surfing while having a coffee might actually be interested in since they're right next door. It's unlikely anyone would be interested in the usual online banner ads, but you never know with something that's right down the street and associated with the area.

There would be a lot of work involved-such as proving the ads actually worked, but it would be fun to start such a small enterprise up. Try something like arranging to offer a coupon from a local store on the banner ad itself, and see how many people come in with your coupon to determine the retention and usefulness of the service. Then you could turn it around and use that information to sell more ads to local shopowners.


Size matters... (2)

jaaron (551839) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275679)

Advertizing could be done and it might be effective -- but size does matter. I don't think "banner" ads would work well because, think about it, if it's a wireless network, I'm probably on my PDA or small portable laptop, so I don't have much screen to deal with here. And if you fill up the screens with ads, well, then that's just a waste.

Then again, some advertizing could work because people will put up with some of it, even if they complain. I mean, how many people have actually stopped going to a website due to some small limited advertizing. Done in measures, the users will tolerate it. They may not like it, but they'll keep using the service because it's free, and you'll start having at least a small revenue source.

Didnt work well for NetZero (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275685)

Free access.. all you gotta do is have banners..

Doesnt seem to be the best business model as they keep dropping your 'free' time.. guess they cant get enough advertisers.

Idle speculation (5, Informative)

pete-classic (75983) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275697)

1. Prepare for a constant arms race. They will block your ads.

2. You might get some love on local ads, from businesses that normally wouldn't use internet ads. Like a local sub shop or bookstore. Your one advantage will be genuine geotargeting. (Sorry, OSDN.)

3. Figure out some reasonable way to do traffic shaping first or some yahoo will put you out of business by sucking up all your bandwidth. I'm not an expert on this sort of thing but maybe withholding TCP ACKs from abusers as a throttle would help.

4. Let us know how it works out!


One condition (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275710)

If I can make (or get) a browser that pretends to read those ads, and display them prominently on /dev/null, then I might be interested. Otherwise don't even think of spamming my machines!

Wireless infrastructure fund? (2)

TheSync (5291) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275711)

Imagine if 802.11b manufacturers put $1 per device sold into a fund for building wireless infrastructure. Hmmm, how many 802.11b devices have been sold? 10 million/year? If you generated $10 million per year, you could probably at least support 1000 wireless access points with T1'ish bandwidth, possibly seeding the purchase of more devices. Or twiddle the
numbers and make it work out better.

To answer the question, run-of-the-mill banners do 10 cents per thousand impressions these days. Even factoring in a select audience (like Slashdot) or pop-under/overs (unlike Slashdot), a couple of dollars per thousand impressions is all you can make.

IMHO, ads suck (1, Redundant)

JThaddeus (531998) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275721)

To me, banner ads are like SPAM--they get on my nerves and I pay them no attention.

Do something more sophisticated (2)

vondo (303621) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275725)

Rather than take up valuable real estate (especially on the laptops everyone will be using to access the network), display a full page ad every half-hour of connecting.

I'm assuming you'd do your banner method via a proxy server that inserts your add, why not do a commercial-like ad for each time interval. I'm thinking of something like what does for non-subscribers. Intrusive for just a few seconds, and then its like nothing ever happened.

Doomed to disaster (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275738)

honeypot (free wireless access point)

There's your first problem, "honeypot" != "free wireless access point".

Are banner ads effective? (3, Insightful)

jukal (523582) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275745)

No. []

"In the early days of online advertising in the mid-1990s, click through for banner ads might have been any where from 5 percent to 6 percent. But Denise Garcia, a media analyst for GarnterG2, a market research firm in Stamford, Conn., says that click through for banners have fallen to roughly two-tenths of a percent. "It's amazing that it's fallen so dramatically," says Garcia."

Say hello to Junkbuster (3, Interesting)

Wee (17189) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275747)

Sure, I would use your network. And I'd filter your ads, too, so I didn't have to be distracted by the annoying flashing. (I paid for Opera -- on both Linux and Windows -- so that I could toggle off the "Show animated GIFs" and "Use plugins" options, and not have to see the built-in ads. I don't like flashing things when I'm trying to read.) I'd use your network and I wouldn't see your ads. I don't think the idea is a good one. You make more money papering the parking lots of large malls or putting out door hangers or something than you would through banner ads.

Slow news day?


It could work (1)

Enforcer42 (302814) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275748)

I wouldn't mind the banner, I understand that it would cost money to setup and pay for bandwith so it wouldn't be a great loss for me to put up with a banner ad.

One problem I see though is dealing with P2P apps, I assume the point of this project is to remove some of the restrictions that are present with the campus network, but it doesn't take many P2P users to bog down the network for everyone, and most likely there wouldn't be any banner ad support to help with the costs.

As long as the only way to get on the network is to have a banner always be on top (Like netzero) the revenue would still be there, but that really annoys users. Then again, they don't have to use the service if they don't want to, after all, to them its free.

I crash enough thank you! (1)

redbaron7 (577469) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275749)

I crash enough whilst ice skating, without juggling a PC with an ad-ridden wireless connection! RB

A better idea... (4, Interesting)

Elwood P Dowd (16933) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275750)

Step 1) In a major metropolitan area, set up a huge wifi network. Name it "GCN $50/mo 555-1212" where 555-1212 is your phone number and GCN is the name of your ISP.

Step 2) ...

Step 3) Profit!

That's what some folks are doing in Mendocino, and it seems like it'd be a great service. I opened up my laptop in a friends house, and saw I was getting wifi access. I'd have paid them $10 for the weekend, easily.

Local Wireless Advertising (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275754)

I am planning on doing the exact same thing in a town near me.

There are several differences between this model, and that of NetZero.

First of all, I plan to get the businesses that are in the cloud to pay a nominal fee for access. So this won't be free. (it is going to be free to users though). The second idea is to charge for LOCAL advertising. I.E. In town. You need to also consider the fact that the increased traffic to the area in the wireless cloud brings value that is worth paying for.

You'll have free wireless soon anyway... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4275756)

If it's the same college town where I live and the college that I work for/attend that you're speaking of. As a matter of fact I work at one of the buildings right across the street from the downtown area and Sprint has been here doing RF surveys for the past two days looking for ideal spots for the WAP's. As long as you have a userid and know how to set up your VPN your banner free wireless network is right around the corner.

Local banner ads (2)

Perianwyr Stormcrow (157913) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275759)

Actually, I'd consider it a service on the order of the ads in the local City Paper if the banner ads were entirely limited to businesses within the access area for your ISP.

Put restrictions on their design (no flashing, no animation) and size, and I don't see why they couldn't be left on for all subscribers period.

Wireless Juno/NetZero Net Access? (2)

jsimon12 (207119) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275760)

I am confused, this doesn't seem much differnt then what Juno and NetZero tried but could never make profitable, didn't they start charging? It is a novel idea, but I think the overhead with wireless would be more then dialup, so I wonder if it would be profitable.

So if I'm using it only for SSH traffic... (1) (184378) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275761)

How will you recoup your costs? You're assuming that everyone will be using it for the web. Maybe most people will be doing so, but if there are enough who aren't (FTP'ing large ISOs, for example), your bandwidth will be very expensive without being able to recover those costs through ads.

Careful (2)

aengblom (123492) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275770)

Careful how you do this. Don't want to piss off the big boys.
"Each page," might make the advert look like its loaded from the web site etc., time based would be safer.

For the linkage adverse, it's about NYTimes and Wash Post etc. suing Gator over pop ups

50/50 (2, Insightful)

ChickenMaster (466305) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275780)

I really think the people that would use it would be 50/50. For example, I know that I would not. Advertising just bothers me that much, and I would not want to be limited in any way from my browing experience. I am willing to pay to have a decent connection. However, my brother would love to use it. If it's free, then that's $20 a month he can spend on food or a date.

Subscribe to get rid of the ads, and GPS use? (4, Interesting)

Brian Stretch (5304) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275782)

Offer paid subscribers the option of turning off the ads. That way, the cheapskate users can't complain too much.

Neat GPS tie-in: click on an ad for a nearby coffee shop, send them your GPS coordinates with your order (paid by credit card or PayPal), and they'll deliver for a fee based on your distance from the shop.

OK, maybe that's a bit too geeky...

Major Bussiness plan doesnt seem to be the idea (2, Insightful)

Dimes (10216) | more than 12 years ago | (#4275783)

As some poster mentioned, it doesnt seem he is trying to figure out if this would make him rich or support a /corporation/. It sounded as if he was currious as the feasability of funding the bandwidth through adds for at least local places and maybe some larger vendors. Nothing major. Seems to me the biggest problem would be creating a piece of software...cross platform, of course....that would allow for this with no easy run arrounds.....of course since its for a small area...with a relatively close might be able to rely on the honor system....i.e "just dont get arround the banner adds in the software because this is a free not for profit operation for yours and everyone elses benefit kind of be cool and let the banners be". Which I dont think is an entirely unheard of thing. that said, it might not be too hard to get local shops restaurants to participate now that so many are becoming web/net savy. give them a way to offer up to date specials on the spur of the momment("Till 9pm tonight, one free beer with purchase of Chicken Dinner. At Joe's Chicken Shack!" or "$.50 Kamikazee shots for the next hour @ The Lounge !"). If you get time donated from some of the college geeks for maintenence, and get really lucky some how on a couple of AP's and antenna's....then it seems a few hundred dollars a month is all you would have to generate to cover the bandwidth. Seems like a pretty neat project for a couple of CS students to tackle.

Dunno, just my .02

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?