You create revenue sharing schemes, people will expect to be paid?

I have always been a little skeptical of revenue sharing in collaborative sites, and am following the life of Gather.com which adopted the approach in either 2005 or 2006 alongside the more recent emergence of sites like Spot.US. Like you, I'm skeptical of Gather's model yet the site still exists. Perhaps it is just a case that the Gatherers haven't yet discovered the Spot.US model? Possibly the adoption of the voluntary contributions model hasn't become quite as frictionless as it might well become?

It is also interesting to think how both models play out. In raising capital for the Gather model you are raising money against the idea that advertising works - a simple principle - with which many funders are familiar. Moreover, income rises or falls with costs and that there is a sort of cynical momentum that could be generated by sites that pay for content as writers people may bring their friends with them to make money. (Think Amway online!) The voluntary contribution model is counter intuitive - voluntary, donations, (You mean some months we might get nothing to cover overhead? Are you crazy?) I share this as it suggests to me the death of revenue sharing models may take longer than would be expected at first glance.

-- TomGlaisyer - 23 Dec 2008