18 ms·

I wouldn't lump either Google or Youtube with Facebook. I signed up for Youtube Red, their commercial free subscription. I fill my subscriptions with topics I

I wouldn't lump either Google or Youtube with Facebook. I signed up for Youtube Red, their commercial free subscription. I fill my subscriptions with topics I want to learn more about. It is easier to curate content on Youtube than Facebook. I would pay Facebook $2-5/month not to show me advertisements.

newscracker 9y ago
> I would pay Facebook $2-5/month not to show me advertisements. I'd expand that beyond ads alone, to have the payment prevent tracking, profiling, "filter bubbling", and sometimes emotional manipulation experiments. [1] But that model won't scale, and it wouldn't offer Facebook growing value over time either. [1]: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-28051930 http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-28051930
- anindha 9y ago
  Why wouldn't it scale? It is the same strategy that Apple uses: build a compelling base product, and then sell additional services. You could still have a free service that displays ads.
  - ubernostrum 9y ago
    Apple's successes have generally not involved a default position of "free but ad-supported". For example, the iTunes store is a massive success for Apple, but didn't begin with free downloads supported by embedded ads in the music (which is what other music services have done). Instead they said "here it is, $0.99 per track". Apple's track record of not needing to track me or sell my personal information to prop up its business models, because they launch products that have real "get the end users to pay money for it" business models, is one reason why I stick with their products.
- jpalomaki 9y ago
  Most expensive keywords on Google can cost something like $50 per click. If you put a monthly fee for ad free service, probably your mostly valuable customers (those error m with money to spend) are first to switch. Facebook can probably generate vast amounts of profits from the users if it manages to be part of the actual transaction, not just an ad platform. The same kind offer thing Google was planning with Google Checkout. IIRC the idea was they would not charge for clicks, but would get payment of customer actually makes the purchase. Think about Facebook first creating for you the urge to buy something (by manipulating you feed) and then selling the thing or taking their cut off the transaction.
- jpalomaki 9y ago
  Most expensive keywords on Google can cost something like $50 per click. If you put a monthly fee for ad free service, probably your mostly valuable customers (those error m with money to spend) are first to switch. Facebook can probably generate vast amounts of profits from the users if it manages to be part of the actual transaction, not just an ad platform. The same kind offer thing Google was planning with Google Checkout. IIRC the idea was they would not charge for clicks, but would get payment of customer actually makes the purchase. Think about Facebook first creating for you the urge to buy something (by manipulating you feed) and then selling the thing or taking their cut off the transaction.

newscracker 9y ago

> I would pay Facebook $2-5/month not to show me advertisements. I'd expand that beyond ads alone, to have the payment prevent tracking, profiling, "filter bubbling", and sometimes emotional manipulation experiments. [1] But that model won't scale, and it wouldn't offer Facebook growing value over time either. [1]: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-28051930 http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-28051930

anindha 9y ago
Why wouldn't it scale? It is the same strategy that Apple uses: build a compelling base product, and then sell additional services. You could still have a free service that displays ads.
- ubernostrum 9y ago
  Apple's successes have generally not involved a default position of "free but ad-supported". For example, the iTunes store is a massive success for Apple, but didn't begin with free downloads supported by embedded ads in the music (which is what other music services have done). Instead they said "here it is, $0.99 per track". Apple's track record of not needing to track me or sell my personal information to prop up its business models, because they launch products that have real "get the end users to pay money for it" business models, is one reason why I stick with their products.
jpalomaki 9y ago
Most expensive keywords on Google can cost something like $50 per click. If you put a monthly fee for ad free service, probably your mostly valuable customers (those error m with money to spend) are first to switch. Facebook can probably generate vast amounts of profits from the users if it manages to be part of the actual transaction, not just an ad platform. The same kind offer thing Google was planning with Google Checkout. IIRC the idea was they would not charge for clicks, but would get payment of customer actually makes the purchase. Think about Facebook first creating for you the urge to buy something (by manipulating you feed) and then selling the thing or taking their cut off the transaction.
jpalomaki 9y ago
Most expensive keywords on Google can cost something like $50 per click. If you put a monthly fee for ad free service, probably your mostly valuable customers (those error m with money to spend) are first to switch. Facebook can probably generate vast amounts of profits from the users if it manages to be part of the actual transaction, not just an ad platform. The same kind offer thing Google was planning with Google Checkout. IIRC the idea was they would not charge for clicks, but would get payment of customer actually makes the purchase. Think about Facebook first creating for you the urge to buy something (by manipulating you feed) and then selling the thing or taking their cut off the transaction.