Hacker News Reader

Comment by taejo | Hacker News Reader

But if all the people who can afford to buy stuff buy "no ads", then there won't be a free/ads option at all, because advertisers are only interested in the people who can afford to buy stuff, who don't see the ads.

View on HN

  But if all the people who can afford
  to buy stuff buy "no ads"

Have you ever heard of a newspaper editor complaining "Too many of our readers are paying subscribers" ?

I haven't - seems to me that's a problem a lot of publications would love to have!

Newspaper subscribers still see ads... that's the whole point of this discussion.

That's a fair point, but realistically, everyone won't be paying to hide ads - lots of people would prefer to browse for free, even if they could afford the subscription.

The people that can afford to pay and do not is a less valuable population than the people that can afford to pay and do.

Edit: valuable from an advertisement point of view.

Indeed, which is how we got into this comment thread to begin with. Personally I'd gladly pay to hide ads in services I use frequently, but that also makes me more attractive to the advertisers. Fortunately most services that I use that have an ad-free option have also kept it ad-free, at least for now.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com