Chris Harris on publishing...

[rossybee]

Let's watch the generalisations, shall we?

Shouldn't that be in blue?

No, just my opinion. Sweeping generalisations are not in themselves against the rules.

Cheers,
Robin

OK, perhaps what I really meant was the responses were typically youtubey/internetey, which by and large have a tendency to be made by American people, who, on the whole, can have unbelievably insular views when it comes not just to motor vehicles, but other stuff too.

[Eric K]

They're fat as well.

[robin]

OK, perhaps what I really meant was the responses were typically youtubey/internetey, which by and large have a tendency to be made by American people, who, on the whole, can have unbelievably insular views when it comes not just to motor vehicles, but other stuff too.

Would you like to borrow my spade? Might be easier to keep digging that way ...

[Claws]

They're fat as well.

[rossybee]

OK, perhaps what I really meant was the responses were typically youtubey/internetey, which by and large have a tendency to be made by American people, who, on the whole, can have unbelievably insular views when it comes not just to motor vehicles, but other stuff too.

Would you like to borrow my spade? Might be easier to keep digging that way ...

Yes dear

<MWAH>

Robs, you obviously missed the tongue firmly in my cheek. Am I allowed to say cheek?

[rossybee]

They're fat as well.

Hehe quality Eric

Reminds me of one time I was in a queue at Magic Kingdom in Florida....and a large woman in one of those rental electric buggies rudely barked at me "let me through, I'm disabled!" to which I immediately responded "no you're not, you're just fat"

Kids thought it was hilarious, wife less so...

[woody]

They're fat as well.

Hehe quality Eric

Reminds me of one time I was in a queue at Magic Kingdom in Florida....and a large woman in one of those rental electric buggies rudely barked at me "let me through, I'm disabled!" to which I immediately responded "no you're not, you're just fat"

Kids thought it was hilarious, wife less so...

Maybe she's fat because she's disabled.

[Dominic]

Irrespective of the reason for her size, simple good manners don't cost anything.

[Eric K]

Irrespective of the reason for her size, simple good manners don't cost anything.

My thoughts exactly.

If the lady had said; “please”, Ross would likely not have felt provoked into making a caustic remark like that.

[graeme]

I think the problem with the pay-video model /Drive went with was that it was a monthly subscription. I don't want a monthly subscription.

App makers have no problem shifting their quality "content" for 99p a time, and at that level it's an impulse purchase, not a financial commitment with unknown future benefit.

I won't pay a subscription to watch Harris, just like I won't pay a subscription to read Evo or Top Gear, but I'll pick one up if the cover is good and I've got a boring flight ahead. If Harris (or any well-made) web videos could be pay-per-view, without advertising, and my payment details are already held by YouTube making it a one-click 99p decision to watch or not watch the latest video, I'd watch most of them I'm sure. Maybe not immediately, but I tend-to cluster-watch the last few episodes from channels I subscribe to. I might not do it 25 times per channel per year making a £2 per month subscription model seem more attractive to them cash-flow, but I'll bet more people would impulse-watch each video in the long term making more money overall. It could also spike if one video went viral, just like an AppStore/PlayStore game which gets popular... the more popular the "content", the more money it makes. I don't have to subscribe to every App developer in the hope they produce something I like every month.

In short, I think webby video content needs a small-price, pay per view model with instant, one-click access, like an app-store.

(EDIT: Pay per view isn't quite right... If you pay 99p for a web vid, you should be able to watch it as many times as you like. Pay per video would be more accurate).

[robin]

They're fat as well.

Comedy gold

Typically yank replies, on the whole....

OK, perhaps what I really meant was the responses were typically youtubey/internetey, which by and large have a tendency to be made by American people, who, on the whole, can have unbelievably insular views when it comes not just to motor vehicles, but other stuff too.

Robs, you obviously missed the tongue firmly in my cheek.

I guess I did - was the tongue in cheek the "typical yank" bit or the subsequent prose?.

Am I allowed to say cheek?

Yes

[campbell]

Epic thread drift

Why is Chris Harris not on Top Gear? Perhaps because they don't think they can make money with his help. Q E D.

For the record, I quite like him / his style. But the blog was a fairly intelligent whinge, little more, in my eyes. Which are tired. Night night!

[Rag_It]

Seems this guy is doing something right, bedroom affair to what looks like a decent business model. Maybe Mr Harris, has tried to over think paid content...

The young petrol head who set up a hit car website
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30897077

[campbell]

Fantastic.

I'm hearing "know your audience"

Are you listening, Chris?

And the point about keeping a diary of year 1 of your new business is extremely well made.

A certain Mr Hay encouraged me to do that too. Thank you, sir.

[Shug]

From Harris' reaction to this story though, this lad who's set up the site is just aggregating content from across the web. In other words, clickbait.

Whilst it's a very valid way to make money in the internet as it is just now, if you're not creating content but just leeching what's there, when does it start to kill new content? Agree that Harris definitely has his head stuck in the old days, but I have some sympathy - if all you need is a catchy title and a teaser image to get the click and create the ad revenue, where does quality journalism (that takes time and money) exist?