I think it's fair go that the investor get some public kudos for putting in his own cash. This is the same for any sponsorships (e.g. sporting teams/events), both sides benefit.

He's a businessman at the end of the day and wants to make a buck, sure. But the promise of financial reward is (and has to be) a strong incentive to people dropping that amount of money on a project. No one is going to throw cash at a cause if it's not going to be profitable, just because it's a good one.

PS. Bronze star! Wohoo

This original proposal completely embraces 'punk' spirit... call it cyberpunk if you will. That I like. Everyone else wandered in and 'complicated it all up', which is how we do things around here, it seems.

Some kind of corporate sponsorship of the top 15 seems like one avenue (The top 3, top 15, etc., brought to you by - XYZ Corp!) - which would conform more to 'traditional' ad models than the unique proposal you've floated, dag. Consider that too... not saying one's better than the other, just 'easier to understand'.

two words.. Venture Capital!!

ok, seriously, how about sponsorships from advertisers? say you have an advertiser that wants to sell product X they can sponsor one of the top 15 videos, then that video will have it's own special container that will house the ad material and the video. You can then sell up to 15 high profile sponsorships. I guess you could even customize this to work with tags, so if you wanted to cater to advertisers selling food products this container will show around food related sifts.

Just to let you know, your quality invocation didn't go through with siftbot. What a commie.

In reply to your comment:
“yep, the same paypal address your VS subscription goes to would work.
Sift sponsorship, cool.. Where's Sally Struthers

*quality”

yep, the same paypal address your VS subscription goes to would work.
Sift sponsorship, cool.. Where's Sally Struthers

*quality

argh i wish i could downvote for the redbull sponsorship. ugh.

What an idiot. Just because people were outraged that Nev Dem caucus wanted Fox News to have exclusive sponsorship, questions, coverage, and analysis of their debate...

That is somehow a threat to the Freedom of the Press.

Ailes is a threat to Democracy by not doing any real journalism. If you watch Fox and Friends it is very clear that there is NO diversity of thought anywhere on that station. What a hypocrite. You know Germany also had a free press prior to Nazi takeover. They just didn't do their jobs...

"Following the attacks of September 11th, a small group of grieving families waged a tenacious battle against those who sought to bury the truth about the event—including, to their amazement, President Bush. In ‘9/11 PRESS FOR TRUTH’, six of them, including three of the famous “Jersey Girls”, tell for the first time the powerful story of how they took on the greatest powers in Washington—and won!—compelling an investigation, only to subsequently watch the 9/11 Commission fail in answering most of their questions.

Adapting Paul Thompson’s definitive Complete 9/11 Timeline (published by HarperCollins as ‘The Terror Timeline’), the filmmakers collaborate with documentary veterans Globalvision (‘WMD: Weapons of Mass Deception’, ‘Beyond JFK’) to stitch together rare overlooked news clips, buried stories, and government press conferences, revealing a pattern of official lies, deception and spin. As a result, a very different picture of 9/11 emerges, one that raises new and more pressing questions.

What actions were taken by top government officials who received dozens of specific warnings before the attack? Was Osama Bin Laden and his top al Qaeda leadership allowed to escape U.S. forces in Afghanistan? And what has been the reason for the deliberate obscuring of evidence for state sponsorship? Perhaps the most important one of all: Why, five years later, are so many of the families’ questions still unanswered?"

http://www.911pressfortruth.com/story

"Food says it was a "slight technical problem," with the episode. According to the network, a small McDonald's logo, normally inserted on a stats chart as a paid sponsorship by the fast food chain, was inadvertently inserted to run full-screen. The network says the graphic appears as a mere red flash if viewed in real time and is only apparent as the Mickey D's logo if viewed in slo-mo." [via]

Still gets an upvote.

Believe it or not, suffering, poverty, and the occupation are not the main motivators in palestinians committing terrorist attacks. Its martydom.

Here's an excerpt of an article written by Nasra Hassan, a Pakistani Muslim:
SINCE 1982, I have been an international relief worker. In 1996 I was posted to the Gaza Strip during one of the most vicious cycles of suicide bombings. To understand why certain young men voluntarily blow themselves up in the name of Islam, I began, without official sponsorship, to research their backgrounds and the beliefs that had led them to such extreme tactics.

From 1996 to 1999, I interviewed nearly 250 people involved in the most militant camps of the Palestinian cause: volunteers who, like S, had been unable to complete their suicide missions, the families of dead bombers, and the men who trained them.

None of the suicide bombers — they ranged in age from 18 to 38 — conformed to the typical profile of the suicidal personality. None of them was uneducated, desperately poor, simple-minded, or depressed. Many were middle-class and held paying jobs. Two were the sons of millionaires. They all seemed entirely normal members of their families. They were polite and serious, and in their communities were considered to be model youths. Most were bearded. All were deeply religious.

The bomber’s family and the sponsoring organisation celebrate his martyrdom with festivities, as if it were a wedding. Hundreds of guests congregate at the house to offer congratulations. The hosts serve the juices and sweets that the young man specified in his will. Often, the mother will ululate in joy over the honour that Allah has bestowed upon her family.

Read the full article here http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7-1692606,00.html

Yeah Coupland, but that's placing trust in a corporation (which legally is not even liable for any damages). I don't know if you know a particular car called the Ford Pinto. Apparently, Ford has not forgotten the lawsuits and the public relations disasters forged by its Pinto hatchback and sedan. The Pinto's famous safety flaw, of course, was that it was prone to blowing up if rear-ended. When people talk about how bad American small cars created an opportunity for the Japanese to come in and clean house in the 1970s and '80s, they are referring to vehicles like this.

I still like the clip above, it's very touching and beautifully shot, just corporate sponsorship leaves an acid taste.

It's hard to put a pricetag on a website, always has been.
I help run a website called ACSSR (http://acssr.slowchop.com), and it has been a huge challenge to find a way to cover the costs of the server usage. So far google ads seem to bring in 2-3 USD a day. Sponsorship is few and far between, and the Paypal donate button hasn't generated much in the way of revenue (notably our users are a younger 10-20 crowd that are less likely to have credit cards).

The only kind of advertising that has worked on me, and made me go clicky click is ones for like Bustedtees.com etc that have *cough* hot ladies wearing funny shirts... so thats the basis of my suggestion. Sex sells.

It's not like you can actually charge for the content, or even membership. The only thing you could possibly do would be to throw in a video ad (10 seconds max) at the end of each vid played. I say the end because the ones at the start of videos reallllly annoy me so if you intend to keep your strong user base i'd recommend against that idea.

Anyways, thats my verbal diahorrea for the next few hours

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Nike couldn't have paid for a better commercial, the way the logo comes around on the ball, just as it's falling in. That's the power of sponsorship.