Same. There's really no telling how readers will embrace this pay-what-you-want model. Some readers are superfans and will cross an ocean of video ads for the comics they enjoy, others are total misers who won't do a thing. No one knows what will happen until the program finally goes live. For Tapastic's staff that has invested over 6 months of time and money into developing this, its a complete leap of faith in the community.
Our understanding of the previous support program on Tapastic is that readers had to open their wallets. Now with video ads, there's no need to open a wallet or even have a wallet to support a series. A lot of young readers here don't have access to funds to give to comics, but they do have mobile phones and free time to watch ads. Consequently, the bar to support a series has now been lowered to rock bottom.
In the case of @Alli who is with Hiveworks, the spread right now is $100/month between being on Tapastic and being on HW. HW gives them $130 in ad revenue and Tapastic $30. However if the donate-to-series feature starts paying them more than $101/month on a regular basis, then which is the better site to be at, HW ($130/mo) or Tapastic ($30+$101/mo)?
One complaint is that video ads here on Tapastic aren't paying a whole lot. We're getting about 30x on the 1st tier ads and 14x on the 2nd tier ads (with an overall range of 2x to 60x). Fortunately, as Michael pointed out in the recent LiveStream, video ad payments are going to improve over time as ad consumption goes up.
How does that make any sense? Here's one way of explaining it. TV show A has 500K viewers who see 8 minutes of ads in 22 minutes of programming. Because their reach is 500K they are worth a $X amount to advertisers. TV show B has 8M viewers who see 8 minutes of ads in 22 minutes of programing. Because B's reach is 16x greater, they are worth $Y to advertisers. 1Y does not equal 16X because advertising doesn't work that way. The bigger a single audience is the more valuable it is.
Case in point The Super Bowl:
"Super Bowl XLIX, played on February 1, 2015 and broadcast by NBC in the U.S., was watched by more than 114.4 million viewers in the United States. The cost for a 30-second advertisement spot during the Super Bowl broadcast reached a record 4.5 million U.S. dollars in 2015." (https://www.statista.com/statistics/216526/super-bowl-us-tv-viewership/)
$4.5M can buy a lot of ads in many regional markets and reach well beyond 114.4M impressions. But because The Super Bowl has this one single massive audience, they can command a huge premium far beyond the sum of many smaller audiences. What Michael is pointing out is that as the Tapastic community grows larger and larger and consumes more and more video ads, it can demand a higher and higher premium. So the good news is that videos ads will progressively pay out more and more over time.
If video ad rewards are going to progressively improve then tip amounts should as well. Meanwhile display ad revenue is going to remain in decline. This is what makes the Hiveworks model one that may not go the distance. They have hitched themselves to a revenue stream that is far more likely to go down than up. Tapastic on the other hand is going after a revenue stream that is far more likely to go up than down.