Ace of Spades HQ

« INDC vs. RedState | Main | Intel: Third London Strike Planned; City Faces Lockdown »

July 31, 2005

Pajamas Media: A Big Bust?

This is only of interst to bloggers, but...

Okay, so I've been waiting to here from Pajamas Media, the last best chance at some of that Crazy Blog-Money I crave.

And it turns out... well, apart from a signing bonus, they're pretty much offering me just a little more per month than I've been making on BlogAds. But with BlogAds, I can have great months, whereas with Pajamas Media I'm stuck at the same level every quarter.

Or, I could go with the "Basic" plan, in which case I can continue using BlogAds too, but Pajamas Media gets the top four slots, which will of course depress my BlogAds prices.

I'm not knocking Pajamas Media. I suppose they did their best to negotiate with the sort of big coporate advertisers they wanted to attract. But they're barely offering more than Internet-based t-shirt sellers are offering.

Long story short: You can't make money in blogging unless you're one of the top ten bloggers. So, probably, best not to try at all.

Oh, And... I never had much by way of illusions that blogging could provide a salary, but I had hoped that Pajamas Media could manage to make it a worthwhile side-gig.

But the amount I'm being offered (and I'm a semi-somewhat-large blogger) doesn't even make it that.

I think it's time to go back to my sequined throw-pillow business.

posted by Ace at 05:49 PM

Comments

I noticed that from one of the other blogs that they would actually make less from pajama media than they were currently making from blogads. Not much of an offer.

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt on July 31, 2005 06:09 PM

You're doing the wrong class of ads - if you go with a bunch of High Times doper type ads, this place will 10X its traffic overnight.

Sell out Ace, sell out - its the only rational thing to do.

Posted by: on July 31, 2005 06:22 PM

I suspect that PM will be a lot more useful to bloggers who don't have the traffic threshold to sell BlogAds.

Also, once PM is actually off the ground and has a proven product, they'll have a much better time signing up skiptical advertisers.

Posted by: Beck on July 31, 2005 07:22 PM

It's amusing to me that you think I'd reject a High Times ad if they were offering me even the normal amount of money.

Posted by: ace on July 31, 2005 07:46 PM

If anyone had the ability to be one of the top ten, it's you ace. May I suggest more nudity?

Posted by: on July 31, 2005 07:57 PM

I'd like to order two of the heart shaped, please; one pink, one white, with 'HOT' spelled out on both in red sequins.

Thanxx

Posted by: lauraw on July 31, 2005 08:02 PM

> May I suggest more nudity?

Heck, I'd settle for more Kim Richards in full 80's regalia.

> waiting to here from

Glad you finally herd from them.

Posted by: Guy T. on July 31, 2005 08:18 PM

Guy, cot hem som slak.
Are time is short heer on Arth. To shart for speling rite bulshite.

Posted by: lauraw on July 31, 2005 09:33 PM

Em I rite? Peepul? Am I rit>?

Posted by: lauraw on July 31, 2005 09:34 PM

Cheez rit az rayn.

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt on July 31, 2005 10:05 PM

I'm seconding that nudity thing. Not joking. Think there's a huge market waiting to be had for a conservo-tarian pundit w/ smart stuff who also puts up the boobies. Just sittin there, baby. Waitin.

Posted by: Ray Midge on July 31, 2005 10:40 PM

Let's be a little cautious on the nudity thing.

First of all, the last piece of nudity on this blog had a devastating effect on everyone with the courage to look at it.

Secondly, no man-titty photos. They're not nudity, they're a henious crime against humanity.

Posted by: Dogstar on July 31, 2005 10:53 PM

The question with Pajamas Media isn't whether you can make more money with Blogads or with them. If you're seriously asking that question you probably don't want Pajamas Media. If you're all about immediately maximizing the bux$$$ then don't sign with them--use blogads and hustle for ads yourself.

The question is whether they can reduce your headaches and increase your traffic over time by affiliating with them, and pay you enough to make it worth your while.

I'm signing with them. I like Blogads but I hate their user interface--I've done professional software and web design, and theirs is one of the worst I've ever seen. I hate it when customers try to sign up for ads with them but then get frustrated by what has to be the worst user interface on the planet.

I've also noticed that my blogads revenues vary wildly from month to month--the average is pretty good but I never know when or how many I'll bring in.

I have a pretty good idea what I can bring in with ads, and I'm absolutely certain that if I hustled for advertisers I could breat their offer. Thing is, I don't want to do that.

I didn't start blogging for money, and I don't blow for money. The money I get is nice--useful, sure, but I'd be doing this for nothing. In fact I did do it for nothing for a long time.

Looks like the Pajamas guys can reduce my headaches and increase my readers and well, what the hell. Seems like a better way to go to me.

Posted by: Dean Esmay on July 31, 2005 11:21 PM

Er, not only do I not blow for money, but I don't blog for it either.

Well... maybe for special friends....

Posted by: Dean Esmay on July 31, 2005 11:22 PM

Re: sequins, may i suggest the Bedazzler.

Re: cheesecake, don't forget Justine B.

Posted by: slickdpdx on August 1, 2005 12:42 AM

Dope and titties could be the answer...some might even mistake you for a democrat

Posted by: on August 1, 2005 01:05 AM

Dean....LOL!! I read that comment 3 times thinking.."oh well.. I guess he is trying to make a point about his integrity."

It's good to know there are just some things you won't do for money. (unlike ace apparently...;) )

Posted by: Rightwingsparkle on August 1, 2005 01:09 AM

Hmmm... rightwing politics and nudity...

Gee, the advertisers will be beating down my door!!!

Thanks guys. Thanks a yahoo.

Posted by: ace on August 1, 2005 01:25 AM

Uh, if you're going to do nudity, then I want to see men too, dammit. I mean you DO have three or four of us female readers, yanno. ;-)

And waitaminute...why am I not getting the High Times ads at my site, either? Cheap bastards.

Posted by: Beth on August 1, 2005 04:24 AM

It does seem Pajamas Media is likely to go bust, but some busts pushing aside those pajamas just might save it. Here's another vote for conservo-tarian nudity.

Posted by: Shaniqua on August 1, 2005 05:05 AM

time to go back to my sequined throw-pillow business.

Speaking of sequined throw pillows, Imelda Marcos had one that said:

"Good girls go to heaven, bad girls go everywhere."

I'll bet she's rethinking that now.

Posted by: 72 VIRGINS on August 1, 2005 10:23 AM

"Good girls go to heaven, bad girls go everywhere."

I like 'A rich man becomes bad, a bad woman becomes rich.'

Posted by: Karol on August 1, 2005 10:30 AM

As someone who has worked as a Senior Editor and in charge of the web sites for Penthouse let me assure you that you really don't want to go for the nudity unless you go down past the bottom of human experience and drill yourself down into the mud to a depth of 28 miles. Of course, you may indeed want to do that.

As for blogads vs. pajamas, the less I have to do with ads one way or another the better. I'm a pretty small site with around 3,000 a day and I'm really not into writing for money any more. Been there, done that, have the t-shirt.

That said, I have to remark that I've written blogads several times in the last year to see what the deal would be with them and have not once gotten so much as a reply back.

That's okay because I don't really care for the sorts of ads they place. Don't like the look and feel and "Back of Popular Science" items they put up on other sites. So I don't miss it.

Tried Google Ads but found their attempt to match ad to page content risible and didn't care for the Spartan google ad look so I commented them out.

If Pajamas can bring in some top shelf advertisers with good looking ads that would be great. It's a little recognized fact about magazines but the ads you have add to the look and feel of the book.

Just think about this startling contrast. Advertising in Penthouse vs. advertising in The New Yorker.

In a way, ads are like refs at a football game. You don't really notice them very much, but when you do its of interest to you and besides, they pretty much shape the game.

Posted by: vanderleun on August 1, 2005 10:49 AM

Besides, everyone is always going on and on about how this medium has got to evolve into a ready for primetime show. Seems to me that even with only 100 blogs Pajamas has got to be risking -- even before operating expenses -- hundreds of thousands of dollars.

It isn't as if the blogger was being asked to risk anything except a potential fall-off in chump change.

Posted by: Vanderleun on August 1, 2005 10:59 AM

So, Vanderleun, if I'm reading your posts correctly you are saying that there is a job opening at Penthouse.

Willing to put in a good word for me? :)

Posted by: Jack M. on August 1, 2005 11:32 AM

Karol

I like 'A rich man becomes bad, a bad woman becomes rich.'

I'm sure that when that bad woman reaches the age of Imelda Marcos, she'll be rethinking that too.

Posted by: 72 VIRGINS on August 1, 2005 11:33 AM

I prefer: "if you marry for money, you'll earn every cent."

Posted by: shit from shinola on August 1, 2005 11:34 AM

Amazon.com Widgets

Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]

Top Headlines

Ryan Long goes to the No Kings rally to pick up young liberal hotties and is greatly disappointed in the quality of the mish
thanks to stevey

You know we "joke" about the GOPe just "conserving" leftist things?
David French just posted:

Populists ask what conservativism has ever conserved?
Well its about to conserve birthright citizenship!
Posted by: 18-1

I couldn't hate this queen of the cuck-chair more if it paid seven figures and came with a corner office.

TJM definitively ranks the films of John Boorman.

Kid punks CNN chump by speaking truth to retard

Podcast: CBD and Sefton talk birthright citizenship, the 14th Amendment and SCOTUS, no boots in Iran, Artemis II and refocusing NASA, the NBA's hatred of everything non-woke, and more!

In more marketing for Project Hail Mary, scientists say they've found the biosigns indicating life growing on an alien planet. It's not proof, just signatures of chemicals that are produced by biological metabolism, and it could be nothing, but scientists think it's a strong sign that this planet is inhabited by something.

In a paper published in the Astrophysical Journal Letters, a team of scientists announced the detection of dimethyl sulfide (along with a similar detection of dimethyl disulfide) in the atmosphere of an exoplanet called K2-18b. This is actually the second detection of dimethyl sulfide made on this planet, following a tentative detection in 2023.
Tons of chemicals are detected in the atmospheres of celestial objects every day. But dimethyl sulfide is different, because on Earth, it's only produced by living organisms.
"It is a shock to the system," Nikku Madhusudhan, first author on the paper, told the New York Times. "We spent an enormous amount of time just trying to get rid of the signal."

He means they tried to prove the signal was caused by things other than dimethyl sulfide but they could not.

Artemis moon shot a go, scheduled for 6:24 Eastern time tonight
Great marketing arranged by Amazon to promote Project Hail Mary. Okay not really but it does work out that way.

TJM talks John Boorman, director of Excalibur

Good rickroll

What? Skeleton of the most famous Musketeer, D'Artagnan, possibly discovered in Dutch church closet.
Dumas picked four names of real musketeers out of a history book, D'Artagnan, Athos, Aramis, and Porthos. So there was an actual D'Artagnan, though he made most of the story up. (Or, you know, all of it.)*

Charles de Batz de Castelmore, known as d'Artagnan, the famous musketeer of Kings Louis XIII and Louis XIV, spent his life in the service of the French crown.
The Gascon nobleman inspired Alexandre Dumas's hero in "The Three Musketeers" in the 19th century, a character now known worldwide thanks to the novel and numerous film adaptations.
D'Artagnan was killed during the siege of Maastricht in 1673, and there is a statue honoring the musketeer in the city. His final resting place has remained a mystery ever since.

A lot of Dumas's stories are based on bits of real history. The plot of the >Three Musketeers, about trying to recover lost diamonds from the queen's necklace, was cribbed from the then-almost-contemporaneous Affair of the Queen's Necklace. And the Man in the Iron Mask is based on real accounts of a prisoner forced to wear a mask (though I think it was a velvet mask).
* Oh, I should mention, Dumas says all this, about finding the names in an old book, in the prologue to his novel. But authors lie a lot. They frequently present fictions as based on historic fact. The twist is, he was actually telling the truth here. At least about these four musketeers having actually existed and served under Louis XIV.
Fun fact: You know the beginning of A Fistful of Dollars where the local gunslingers make fun of Clint Eastwood's donkey and Eastwood demands they apologize to the donkey? That's lifted from The Three Musketeers. Rochefort mocks D'Artagnan's old, brokedown farm horse and D'Artagnan is incensed.

A commenter asked which should be read first, The Hobbit of LOTR?
Easy, no question -- read The Hobbit first. It's actually the start of the story and comes first chronologically. It sets up some major characters and major pieces in play in LOTR.
Also, the Hobbit is Beginner-Friendly, which LOTR isn't. The Hobbit really is a delightful book, and a fast read. It's chatty, it's casual, it's exciting, and it's funny. In that dry cheeky British humor way. I love that the narrator is constantly making little asides and commentary, like he's just sitting next to you telling you this story as it occurs to him.
LOTR is a very long story. Fifteen hundred pages or so. The Hobbit is relatively short and very punchy and easy to read. If you don't like The Hobbit, you can skip out on LOTR. If you do like it, you'll be primed to read LOTR.
Oh, I should say: The Hobbit is written as if it's for children, but one of those smart children's stories that are also for adults. Don't worry, there's also real fighting and violence and horror in it, too.
LOTR is written for adults. (It's said that Tolkien wrote both for his children, but LOTR was written 17 years later, when his children were adults.) Some might not like The Hobbit due to its sometimes frivolous tone. Me, I love it. I find it constantly amusing. Both are really good but there is a starkly different tone to both. LOTR is epic, grand, and serious, about a world war, The Hobbit is light and breezy, and about a heist. Though a heist that culminates in a war for the spoils.

The Hobbit Challenge: Read two more chapters. I didn't have much time. Bilbo got the ring.
I noticed a continuity problem. Maybe. Now, as of the time of The Hobbit, it was unknown that this magic ring was in fact a Ring of Power, and it was doubly unknown that it was the Ring of Power, the Master Ring that controlled the others.
But the narrator -- who we will learn in LOTR was none of than Bilbo himself, who wrote the book as "There and Back Again" -- says this about Gollum's ring:
"But who knows how Gollum had come by that present [the Ring], ages ago in the old days when such rings were still at large in the world? Perhaps even the Master who ruled them could not have said."
In another passage, the ring is identified as a "ring of power."
I don't know, I always thought there was a distinction between mere magic rings and the Rings of Power created by Sauron. But this suggests that Bilbo knew this was a ring of power created by Sauron.
Now I don't remember when Bilbo wrote the Hobbit. In the movie, he shows Frodo the book in Rivendell, and I guess he wrote it after he left the Shire. I guess he might have added in the part about the ring being a ring of power created by "the Master" after Gandalf appraised him of his research into the ring.
I never noticed this before. I know Tolkien re-wrote this chapter while he was writing LOTR to make the ring important from the start. And also to make Gollum more sinister and evil, and also to remove the part where Gollum actually offers Bilbo the ring as a "present" -- Bilbo had already found it on his own, but Gollum was wiling to give it away, which obviously is not something the rewritten Gollum would ever do.
But I had no memory of the ring being suggested to be The Ring so early in the tale.

Finish the job, Mr. President!
Melanie Phillips lays out the case for the total destruction of the Iranian government and armed forces. [CBD]

TJM acts like he knows anything about John Wick and screenwriting. It's embarrassing, really.

Podcast: Sefton and CBD talk about how would a peace treaty with Iran work, Democrats defending murderers and rapists, The GOP vs. Dem bench for 2028, composting bodies? And more!

Oh, I forgot to mention this quote from Pete Hegseth, reported by Roger Kimball: "We are sharing the ocean with the Iranian Navy. We're giving them the bottom half."

Batman fires The Batman
Batman is disgusted by the Joachim Phoenix version of Joker
Batman tries to fire Superman
Batman is still workshopping his Bat-Voice

Forgotten 80s Mystery Click: Red Leather Suit and Sweatband Edition
And I was here to please
I'm even on knees
Makin' love to whoever I please
I gotta do it my way
Or no way at all

Tomorrow is March 25th, "Tolkien Reading Day," because March 25th is the day when the Ring is destroyed in the book. I think I'm going to start the Hobbit tomorrow and read all four books this time.
The only bad part of the trilogy are the Frodo/Sam chapters in The Two Towers. They're repetitive, slow, and mostly about the weather and terrain. But most everything else is good. Weirdly, the Frodo-Sam chapters in Return of the King are exciting and action-packed and among the best in the trilogy. (Though the chapters with everyone else in Return of the King get pretty slow again. Mostly people talking about marching towards war, and then marching towards war.)

Sec. Army recognizes ODU Army ROTC cadets for their bravery and sacrifice in private ceremony
[Hat Tip: Diogenes] [CBD]