3 ms·
Of course these firms are struggling -- (did I word this confusingly?) The point is, it's a market that never took off, and Facebook could change that very quic
by niftich 10y ago
Of course these firms are struggling -- (did I word this confusingly?) The point is, it's a market that never took off, and Facebook could change that very quickly, due to their sheer scale, their market penetration, their homescreen presence on millions of devices, and the value of the audience they already command.
They don't even need it to be a significant amount of their income. But they could show that some people are in fact willing to pay, which may be enough to entice big publishers to supply content to Facebook again, closing the loop on the original idea of "outsourcing [news] distribution".
- coldtea 10y ago>the point is, it's a market that never took off, and Facebook could change that very quickly, due to their sheer scale But maybe, I say, it never took off for a reason? Some things are just not what people want. (Though of course all the content providers crave them like crazy)
- ethbro 10y agoI think niftich's reasoning was chicken and egg. No one (practically speaking) accepts micropayments because there's no unified system with good UX, and no one can build a unified system with a good UX because no one is accepting micropayments. Facebook could change all that in the same way that MS can push a feature to Windows and instantly make a new market. Barrier to entry looks different when you're a de facto monopoly.