I call bullshit on those numbers, specifically the Google ones since much of their revenue is forwarded on to small publishers. The number seems to have come from this PDF on the bottom of page 8. As it stands, those numbers aren’t very Longtailian.

The notion that we are suddenly in a “post-scarcity” world is hogwash. Print people have never been burdened with scarcity. They can expand the book any time they want. But they have to demonstate to advertisers they have value. Want to lessen the demand of the front cover (or Big Site front page)? Make the back of the book more valuable.

Want more advertising dollars? Get more customers.

I have to agree with Mike here. As an agency person for 20 years working in media, we are lazy, don’t seek out new opportunities and only react to what is placed in front of us. It’s horrible but that’s how it is. If the “knowns” are sold out, it’s assumed everything is sold out. I do agree with you though that there really is no such thing as an ad inventory problem ion the web, It’s false. It’s a story, perhaps planted, simply to raise rate for publishers.

The people at the top don’t even know how to turn computers on half the time.

Even the people in the middle don’t spend hours and hours learning about every blog. Any medium needs to be served on a platter to them. (Hence Pajamas Media, or whatever it’s called now. That’s one attempt to aggregate a bunch of sites/content for an easy sell.)

The end result is, they wind up knowing the names of exactly five blogs. And when they’re sold out, well, oh no, scarcity! As absurd as it is. Of course it’s not absurd when your agency has bought them up and then can say to you the client, well, your competitors can’t buy X, but WE can get you on it.

This is SOP for ad agencies and media buyers, alas. The young twentysomethings of the media department buy what they know and what they don’t know doesn’t exist. I was at one three-initialed giant a few years ago when Readers Digest made a big push, setting up kiosks with free copies in the lobby. Here was the second or third largest circulation publication in America– and to watch the staffers approaching the kiosk likes apes approaching the monolith, it was obvious that most of them had never touched it in their lives. Which is why ad dollars flow to hip urban publications with tiny circulations, while a red-state stalwart like Readers Digest was quite literally overlooked. (Flyoverlooked.)