U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-20-2018, 07:28 PM
 
18,258 posts, read 11,653,926 times
Reputation: 11865

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
Let's make commercials more costly.

I'm a proponent for the commercial tasks of selling, distributing, or purchasing electronic transmitted time be “unbundled” from all other commercial tasks, and no reduction of taxable income should be granted for purchase or use of electronic transmission time.
[There's a precedent for such “unbundling”. Federal court' required the International Business Machine Corporation to “unbundle” the sale or lease of their equipment from all of their other goods and service products].

This would consequentially increase sales of other media's advertisement while reducing revenues of such enterprises that now electronically transmit advertisements.

I suppose it's likely to reduce the proportions of advertisement time electronically transmitted by entertainment providers, and a lesser proportional increase of cable and satellite TV prices. It will not eliminate, but it will reduce the extent of this one particular advantage of wealth; it will reduce wealth's ability to influence those who read less and is not likely to increase their influence upon those who read more.


You've got things backwards.


Advertising by a business/company in any form is a huge and nice tax deduction. Efforts in past to limit or even remove have largely been unsuccessful.


http://thehill.com/policy/finance/33...ax-break-alone
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-20-2018, 07:31 PM
 
1,026 posts, read 559,196 times
Reputation: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaraG View Post
Explain how your idea would relate to me. I'm a small business owner that buys advertising through a variety of venues including tv, radio, print, Facebook, google, etc.

I'm not a wealthy corporation. You may be surprised how affordable commercials are for small businesses and I'm not sure why you want to hurt local mom and pop shops. There is a specific customer base we reach with TV commercials and radio commercials and it has nothing to do with how much they read.
KaraG, refer to the previous post (#20); government now subsidizes commercial advertisements which are also of substantial political purposes.

A free and aggressively inquisitive press is of great benefit to a democratic republic, and the loss or reduction local independent newspapers is extremely detrimental to our nation.
Rachel Maddow's arguments are superior to my own. Refer to:
Column: Local newspapers are key to good journalism

Electronic broadcasters, wireless or cable providers would be required to itemize their prices for message transmission time or screen space. Those charges should not be commingled with any other expenses, or the entire expenses could would not be deductible.
Expenses regarding messages' contents, (e.g. artwork, scripts, actors, ect), continue to be tax deductible and reduce their purchasers' the purchasers' taxable incomes.
Those electronic transmission enterprises are being treated as public utilities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2018, 06:58 AM
 
3,268 posts, read 2,338,584 times
Reputation: 5622
Rachel Maddow. More government control. More taxes. More requirements.

No thank you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2018, 09:05 AM
 
4,319 posts, read 5,268,236 times
Reputation: 4229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyewackette View Post
There is no free market. That's an economic myth. We have giant corporations that control pretty much all aspects of our lives. In a true free market, we wouldn't have bailed out banks or big car manufacturers. Capitalism is inherently wasteful. It relies on a model of constant growth.

There is only one thing that grows unchecked. Cancer.



Ridiculous. Poverty is not a choice. The day all persons, regardless of wealth, have the same access to education and health services and a safe domicile is the day you can start spouting off about lazy people who "choose" to be poor.
You were never promised free ANYTHING and yet we already have free education right through high school. Student loans and grants for college. Everyone in this country has an opportunity to better themselves. It’s nobodys fault that a lot of people are simply stupid. The average IQ is 100, which is honestly really not good. That means literally almost half of people have an IQ in the double digits. These people are not bright by any means. Some will still find something they’re very good at and they’ll work hard to achieve success anyway. But if you’re lazy and have an IQ of 91, I mean, what do you expect?! You can’t make life fair because some people will always be born much smarter, much stronger, much better looking than other people. That’s nature.

The only reason we don’t fully have a free market is government interference so it’s exactly the opposite of what you wrote. Companies aren’t allowed to become too big or they’re broken up as monopolies. We have safeguard in place and you do have choices. If I want to rent a movie I can use Netflix’s DVD service, iTunes, or Amazon and that’s just to name 3 services. Or I can just not watch that movie and watch something on TV instead of through a smaller indie streaming service. There are always choices in the market.

If you knew even the first thing about the Great Recession you would understand the banks couldn’t all be allowed to fail. That just wouldn’t have worked for any of us. And these companies have by and large paid back their debts, they didn’t just get free money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2018, 09:23 AM
 
6,183 posts, read 1,500,623 times
Reputation: 4501
Whats strange about cable tv, today there are more commercials on cable than on free network tv! Anyone who watches SyFy or TLC knows this all too well, they have an average of about 18-22 commercials per break, and usually its the same ones over and over again.

I dont think advertisers realize this has the opposite effect on people, I have actually changed my purchases due to a company having too many commercials, I bought from the company that didnt advertise like this when i had originally planned to buy from another company.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2018, 10:46 AM
 
5,046 posts, read 3,330,095 times
Reputation: 4868
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
Whats strange about cable tv, today there are more commercials on cable than on free network tv! Anyone who watches SyFy or TLC knows this all too well, they have an average of about 18-22 commercials per break, and usually its the same ones over and over again.

I dont think advertisers realize this has the opposite effect on people, I have actually changed my purchases due to a company having too many commercials, I bought from the company that didnt advertise like this when i had originally planned to buy from another company.
Why I don't have cable anymore.

I find myself watching fewer videos online now with 30 sec to a minute long commercials becoming more common that you have to watch. I prefer the five seconds then can skip if you want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2018, 05:33 PM
 
18,258 posts, read 11,653,926 times
Reputation: 11865
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordSquidworth View Post
Why I don't have cable anymore.

I find myself watching fewer videos online now with 30 sec to a minute long commercials becoming more common that you have to watch. I prefer the five seconds then can skip if you want.

FB has been on a tear lately with the commercials/advertising on Youtube, and it is getting annoying. But it is how Mr. Zuckerberg and his own make their money....


Not only have the advertisements gotten longer, fewer and fewer are subject to "skip this ad". Meaning one must sit though the entire whatever in order to watch/listen to following video. I turn down the volume and or do something else, but there you are then.


In fairness Youtube does offer way round watching videos, just sign up for their "Red" service. This of course not only costs money, but gives FB/YT yet more personal information to collect.


https://www.theverge.com/circuitbrea...e-subscription
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2018, 07:17 PM
 
5,046 posts, read 3,330,095 times
Reputation: 4868
Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
FB has been on a tear lately with the commercials/advertising on Youtube, and it is getting annoying. But it is how Mr. Zuckerberg and his own make their money....


Not only have the advertisements gotten longer, fewer and fewer are subject to "skip this ad". Meaning one must sit though the entire whatever in order to watch/listen to following video. I turn down the volume and or do something else, but there you are then.


In fairness Youtube does offer way round watching videos, just sign up for their "Red" service. This of course not only costs money, but gives FB/YT yet more personal information to collect.


https://www.theverge.com/circuitbrea...e-subscription

Yeah... I don't want subscriptions to everything.


I think advertising is going to go through it's third iteration soon.



First was page views.


Currently ad clicks.



Next comes actual product sales.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top