3 ms·
The thing is they get paid better than that by the advertisers for your attention. Their ARPU is estimated[1] to be $53 for 2016 and that is across all the user
by Maakuth 9y ago
The thing is they get paid better than that by the advertisers for your attention. Their ARPU is estimated[1] to be $53 for 2016 and that is across all the users, not only people who are ready to spend money on online services. And as a free service, I bet they are quite a bit more resilient to churn than a similar paid offering would be.
1: https://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2017/05/24/why-facebook-will-maintain-its-arpu-advantage-over-snapchat/#4db659d927b9 https://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2017/05/24/wh...
- amelius 9y agoBut how do you explain that $4.65 per quarter does not match $53 per year?
- JamesBarney 9y agoThe $4.65 per quarter is the revenue per user(globally). The $53 per user is a figure for North America only.
- nightski 9y agoWhat am I missing? That is less than $5 per month and I'd even pay 10-15+. They could make it optional.
- owebmaster 9y agoYou would, 99% of facebook would not. You would have to pay 1000 dollars/month together with the rest of the 1% for it to be viable, but with only 1% of Facebook, another free one would appear.
- ajb 9y agoThat's the average. Anyone reading hn is probably worth rather more.
- autokad 9y agoMy guess is, if the users could pay to opt out, the value of the customers that couldn't would drop dramatically, and you'd end up paying substantially more