4 ms·

Glossing over the fact that they probably wouldn't have all of those 1.5 billion users if it had stayed a paid service. Even at $1, having to pay money pushes p

Glossing over the fact that they probably wouldn't have all of those 1.5 billion users if it had stayed a paid service. Even at $1, having to pay money pushes people off to other free platforms.

pmlnr 8y ago
So? It would still be profitable. Not everyone has to use the same thing.
- sushid 8y ago
  Sure but it will start to erode its market share as other companies offer similar but free products. And a mobile messaging company relies on the network effect to stay relevant and popular.
- pmontra 8y ago
  One of their free competitors would have grown to 1.5 billion users and whatsapp wouldn't be able to charge money for the same product. They would have had to pivot to something people would pay for or close or sell for a much smaller amount. They could try charging $1 per year now and see what happens. Probably a flood mainly to Facebook Messenger and in part to other apps.
reitanqild 8y ago
Maybe not all those users but they where growing really fast despite announcing their business model loud and clear, - I'd say even to some degree because they were loud and clear about their business model: selling a great service.
jethro_tell 8y ago
You, could do tiered models as well. At a billion users they were running 11 servers. Free with ads and data sharing, .25 targeted ads no data sharing, .50 geolocated ads only. $1 privacy + the standard. 1.50 premium extra storage or w/e
- sushid 8y ago
  The jump from free to $0.25 is the biggest hurdle of all. Right now, you basically don't need a payment form connected to your account to use Whatsapp. But you do with $0.25. The tiers you suggest don't affect any layperson (would your grandmother even know what geolocated ads are? Would she care?). If anything, it sounds alarming to a layperson to even have these options. IMO your comment is a clear example of why technical people should not always be the product decision makers.
- Thiez 8y ago
  Those tiers wouldn't fly under the GDPR, at least not the free one.
vesak 8y ago
People are so mindbogglingly stupid that it hurts. Every user of these so-called free platforms pay way more than $1 yearly for using them, via products they have been pushed and attention they have lost. If you're a potential high-wage earner, you're paying more than that in an hour!

Glossing over the fact that they probably wouldn't have all of those 1.5 billion users if it had stayed a paid service. Even at $1, having to pay money pushes people off to other free platforms.

pmlnr 8y ago

So? It would still be profitable. Not everyone has to use the same thing.

sushid 8y ago
Sure but it will start to erode its market share as other companies offer similar but free products. And a mobile messaging company relies on the network effect to stay relevant and popular.
pmontra 8y ago
One of their free competitors would have grown to 1.5 billion users and whatsapp wouldn't be able to charge money for the same product. They would have had to pivot to something people would pay for or close or sell for a much smaller amount. They could try charging $1 per year now and see what happens. Probably a flood mainly to Facebook Messenger and in part to other apps.

reitanqild 8y ago

Maybe not all those users but they where growing really fast despite announcing their business model loud and clear, - I'd say even to some degree because they were loud and clear about their business model: selling a great service.

jethro_tell 8y ago

You, could do tiered models as well. At a billion users they were running 11 servers. Free with ads and data sharing, .25 targeted ads no data sharing, .50 geolocated ads only. $1 privacy + the standard. 1.50 premium extra storage or w/e

sushid 8y ago
The jump from free to $0.25 is the biggest hurdle of all. Right now, you basically don't need a payment form connected to your account to use Whatsapp. But you do with $0.25. The tiers you suggest don't affect any layperson (would your grandmother even know what geolocated ads are? Would she care?). If anything, it sounds alarming to a layperson to even have these options. IMO your comment is a clear example of why technical people should not always be the product decision makers.
Thiez 8y ago
Those tiers wouldn't fly under the GDPR, at least not the free one.

vesak 8y ago

People are so mindbogglingly stupid that it hurts. Every user of these so-called free platforms pay way more than $1 yearly for using them, via products they have been pushed and attention they have lost. If you're a potential high-wage earner, you're paying more than that in an hour!