I think you don't take in the context of Barry's comments. I work for IAC, BTW, so here's some clarification:
Barry is merely pointing to the fact that anything that's worthwhile will be monetized. That does not mean that you have to distinctly take out a credit card to purchase going on the website.
For example, your paying at this very second to be on VGChartz.com. You view pre-roll ads, view banner ads, and other such ads. This keeps VGChartz afloat. If there were no ads, VGC would struggle to improve, but fortunately VGC is now Brett's fulltime job.
The fact is that more sites will go toward monetization in some way. Nothing (and I repeat nothing) on the internet is free. As long as there's a server somewhere, someone is paying for it. Some may give the guise of free, but some such companies (like a Twitter) may struggle to continue despite the userbase...Why? Costs outstrip income. As new, more bandwith-intensive services come to market, sites offerings' will cost more to produce, requiring some sort of revenue generation.
Even Wikipedia has to have revenue generation. Albiet it's done with donations, but if you look at the amounts given, you'll see that millions of USD are spent to help improve and maintain the site...For many, even Wikipedia is not free.
If you want to see the next wave of game monetization:
Imagine Halo 4 launching for free. No cost other than paying $3 for the disc. Rather than pay $60 upfront, you pay $3. How do you pay for it? 1, 30 second video ad per game session, and optional content that is available for cash. If you don't want to pay for it, you can take 10 minutes to fill out a survey, or sign up for an affiliate marketing offer.
That's still monetized, but your getting Halo 4 for $3. Would that be better or worse than what's currently offered?
Back from the dead, I'm afraid.
