4 ms·

in this case FB is fighting for the consumer to get all the money, which is a fight worth having regardless of what the cynic might say > Hosts will be able to

in this case FB is fighting for the consumer to get all the money, which is a fight worth having regardless of what the cynic might say > Hosts will be able to collect the full ticket price from Facebook users who attend their online events via the web or Android. Facebook says it is using its own payment system on Android and letting developers keep all the money.

pwinnski 6y ago
Agreed!
dastx 6y ago
I'll give 3 months before Facebook starts charging individuals, or starts tracking them.
natchy 6y ago
well that's because FB in is the "growth stage" for its payment platform. Its common for tech companies to provide a service at a discount or free to get traction. No doubt FB would be taking a large cut if it becomes the cash cow that the app store is.
- TAForObvReasons 6y ago
  If it does become the cash cow, is 30% the norm? Or would it settle on something closer to 10% or 5%
  - actuator 6y ago
    It should come down to the credit card/PayPal range I think. So probably 2-3% as at economies of scale these are huge amounts. There are technologies like UPI of India which have a 0% charge but I don't understand who pays for maintaining the common infra and how do UPI apps like Whatsapp Payments/Google Pay earn money.
  - natchy 6y ago
    depends if it has platform lock-in. They just launched the instagram shop a couple months ago. I could see that taking a 30% cut: https://business.instagram.com/blog/introducing-shops-on-instagram https://business.instagram.com/blog/introducing-shops-on-ins...
- rtlfe 6y ago
  It's still better for FB to take a cut than for both FB and Apple to take cuts.
ysavir 6y ago
> in this case FB is fighting for the consumer to get all the money, which is a fight worth having regardless of what the cynic might say Sure, but that's not quite their goal. No doubt that the "Paid Online Events" feature will be exposing people to ads and generating revenue for FB. While FB is claiming to be doing this for "small businesses", what it really wants is to get people to use their product. If people offering events had to give 30% of their revenue to Apple, they wouldn't bother using Facebook's event product. Instead, they would use a competing product that takes only a minor cut and no ads, even if it doesn't offer a mobile pay experience. What FB is trying to do here isn't to help small business, it's to get ahead of the small companies that currently compete with their upcoming events platform by strongarming Apple into eliminating those small companies' edge. All while putting on a pro-small-business facade.

pwinnski 6y ago

Agreed!

dastx 6y ago

I'll give 3 months before Facebook starts charging individuals, or starts tracking them.

natchy 6y ago

well that's because FB in is the "growth stage" for its payment platform. Its common for tech companies to provide a service at a discount or free to get traction. No doubt FB would be taking a large cut if it becomes the cash cow that the app store is.

TAForObvReasons 6y ago
If it does become the cash cow, is 30% the norm? Or would it settle on something closer to 10% or 5%
- actuator 6y ago
  It should come down to the credit card/PayPal range I think. So probably 2-3% as at economies of scale these are huge amounts. There are technologies like UPI of India which have a 0% charge but I don't understand who pays for maintaining the common infra and how do UPI apps like Whatsapp Payments/Google Pay earn money.
- natchy 6y ago
  depends if it has platform lock-in. They just launched the instagram shop a couple months ago. I could see that taking a 30% cut: https://business.instagram.com/blog/introducing-shops-on-instagram https://business.instagram.com/blog/introducing-shops-on-ins...
rtlfe 6y ago
It's still better for FB to take a cut than for both FB and Apple to take cuts.

ysavir 6y ago

> in this case FB is fighting for the consumer to get all the money, which is a fight worth having regardless of what the cynic might say Sure, but that's not quite their goal. No doubt that the "Paid Online Events" feature will be exposing people to ads and generating revenue for FB. While FB is claiming to be doing this for "small businesses", what it really wants is to get people to use their product. If people offering events had to give 30% of their revenue to Apple, they wouldn't bother using Facebook's event product. Instead, they would use a competing product that takes only a minor cut and no ads, even if it doesn't offer a mobile pay experience. What FB is trying to do here isn't to help small business, it's to get ahead of the small companies that currently compete with their upcoming events platform by strongarming Apple into eliminating those small companies' edge. All while putting on a pro-small-business facade.