3 ms·

Until Reddit posts a decent profit it's not clear either of them really 'won' is it? Digg tried to monetize and drove away their users. I'm not sure Reddit has

by axod 16y ago

Until Reddit posts a decent profit it's not clear either of them really 'won' is it? Digg tried to monetize and drove away their users. I'm not sure Reddit has really tried to monetize as much yet apart from their 'donate' thing.

michaelchisari 16y ago
If Reddit makes enough to pay the bills, maintain steady paychecks, and keep their users happy, then maybe a huge profit margin isn't necessary. If they can continually do that, that may mean a longevity that few corporations could claim, let alone internet companies. The great thing about reddit, also, is that it's structure lends itself to accommodating niche communities. If you don't like the Pics subreddit, you read the Funny subreddit instead. If you just want to read about Harry Potter and Ruby on Rails, you can, and you can pretend the rest of the site doesn't even exist. This minimizes the possibility that a shiny new site will attract users away. If Reddit can keep the lights on, the employees paid, and the community diverse and satisfied, then I'd say they've "won", and I don't think large profits are necessary. As an aside, I also wonder if web 2.0 has really proven itself, outside of a few exceptions, to be generally profitable the way valuations show that investors expect it to be.
- Legion 16y ago
  The ability to create your own personal walled garden of content topics is key. Sometimes I forget how strange and meme-obsessed Reddit is until I find myself at the front page while logged out. "My" front page is a much less silly place. My wife's page is all crafts and Disney - she has no idea what lurks in other corners of the site.
redthrowaway 16y ago
The founders already cashed out, so now it's Conde Nast's problem. They don't really seem to notice Reddit, so Reddit just putters along. I'd say it was damned successful, with Ohanian and Huffman cashing out within a year. Everything since is just gravy.
- axod 16y ago
  Sure. I was talking about Reddit the business rather than the founders. It's clear these days you barely need a company or business model to be able to cash out as a founder if you get lucky or know the right people.
  - redthrowaway 16y ago
    That's a fair point, although they sold in 06, a bit before the current fever to throw money at startups. It seems like CN originally thought they'd use reddit to drive traffic to their sites, that didn't work, so they kind of forgot about it.
planckscnst 16y ago
I really don't think it's the monetization that drove people away. I left because I found the content to be increasingly bland, repetitive, and irrelevant.
- SkyMarshal 16y ago
  Try subscribing to /r/BestOf or /r/IAMA. Some of the more non-bland/repetitive stuff comes up there. Though whether it's relevant depends on your individual measure.
- dhughes 16y ago
  It was going along well the first two or three years and then it's like someone flipped a switch and turned on the douchebag magnet, then the ultra-right wing nutjobs arrived in droves. That's when I stopped commenting and pretty much left. I'm not political in any way either left or right (I'm Canadian we like out political parties numerous and weird) but I found digg had become very polarized politically and to the point it was no longer a social news site it was a soapbox for for extremists.
Estragon 16y ago
I haven't followed reddit in years, and reddit.com's not letting me log in to search for the posts where I raised this speculation, but I think that any business which controls a website like reddit has a huge marketing advantage. I saw some high-scoring posts which I believed didn't merit much attention and which seemed to be shilling for Conde Nast products. So they may be getting value out of the site without explicit monetization.

by axod 16y ago

michaelchisari 16y ago

If Reddit makes enough to pay the bills, maintain steady paychecks, and keep their users happy, then maybe a huge profit margin isn't necessary. If they can continually do that, that may mean a longevity that few corporations could claim, let alone internet companies. The great thing about reddit, also, is that it's structure lends itself to accommodating niche communities. If you don't like the Pics subreddit, you read the Funny subreddit instead. If you just want to read about Harry Potter and Ruby on Rails, you can, and you can pretend the rest of the site doesn't even exist. This minimizes the possibility that a shiny new site will attract users away. If Reddit can keep the lights on, the employees paid, and the community diverse and satisfied, then I'd say they've "won", and I don't think large profits are necessary. As an aside, I also wonder if web 2.0 has really proven itself, outside of a few exceptions, to be generally profitable the way valuations show that investors expect it to be.

Legion 16y ago
The ability to create your own personal walled garden of content topics is key. Sometimes I forget how strange and meme-obsessed Reddit is until I find myself at the front page while logged out. "My" front page is a much less silly place. My wife's page is all crafts and Disney - she has no idea what lurks in other corners of the site.

redthrowaway 16y ago

The founders already cashed out, so now it's Conde Nast's problem. They don't really seem to notice Reddit, so Reddit just putters along. I'd say it was damned successful, with Ohanian and Huffman cashing out within a year. Everything since is just gravy.

axod 16y ago
Sure. I was talking about Reddit the business rather than the founders. It's clear these days you barely need a company or business model to be able to cash out as a founder if you get lucky or know the right people.
- redthrowaway 16y ago
  That's a fair point, although they sold in 06, a bit before the current fever to throw money at startups. It seems like CN originally thought they'd use reddit to drive traffic to their sites, that didn't work, so they kind of forgot about it.

planckscnst 16y ago

I really don't think it's the monetization that drove people away. I left because I found the content to be increasingly bland, repetitive, and irrelevant.

SkyMarshal 16y ago
Try subscribing to /r/BestOf or /r/IAMA. Some of the more non-bland/repetitive stuff comes up there. Though whether it's relevant depends on your individual measure.
dhughes 16y ago
It was going along well the first two or three years and then it's like someone flipped a switch and turned on the douchebag magnet, then the ultra-right wing nutjobs arrived in droves. That's when I stopped commenting and pretty much left. I'm not political in any way either left or right (I'm Canadian we like out political parties numerous and weird) but I found digg had become very polarized politically and to the point it was no longer a social news site it was a soapbox for for extremists.

Estragon 16y ago

I haven't followed reddit in years, and reddit.com's not letting me log in to search for the posts where I raised this speculation, but I think that any business which controls a website like reddit has a huge marketing advantage. I saw some high-scoring posts which I believed didn't merit much attention and which seemed to be shilling for Conde Nast products. So they may be getting value out of the site without explicit monetization.