If this guy working from home can pull off $100K a year, why aren't newspapers making money?
The answer is low expenses. According to the article, "All he needed was a $2,000 Canon camera, a $6 piece of fabric for a backdrop and a pair of work lights from Home Depot."
Gannett, in contrast, has revenues of almost $7.5 billion annually, according to its annual report. But it has to pay almost 50,000 employees. Buckley has to pay essentially no one. It's pure profit.
Of course, most one-person operations aren't going to reach the audience level required to pull down 100K a year. But everyone can take advantage of the idea of making a little cash in a field where expenses are super cheap or even free.
For example, Blogger lets you host a blog on its Web site for free, and it lets you put AdSense ads on the blog. That means you have no expenses (except for the value of your time spent blogging and your computer and Internet connection, which you probably need for other reasons anyway). Any revenue you make from people clicking on your ads is pure profit.
Who cares if it takes you a year to make $100? It didn't cost you anything to get started, so there's no risk of losing money. Plus, with enough hard work -- "I was spending 40 hours a week on YouTube for over a year before I made a dime," Mr. Buckley said in the article -- you might start making some real money.
1 comment:
Yes, but news organizations have to worry about insurance costs, pension benefits, etc. They also have to worry about the overhead costs of renting a building, phone and internet for multiple employees.
However, I think there are certain things big corporations could learn from some smaller operations who know how to keep costs down.
Post a Comment