4 ms·

I always wondered what's stopping a rival to Facebook that offers users a share of the money they are generating. Besides the scale barrier to entry of course.

I always wondered what's stopping a rival to Facebook that offers users a share of the money they are generating. Besides the scale barrier to entry of course. Generally speaking, people like money and will switch products and services that puts money in their pocket.

ksk 6y ago
>I always wondered what's stopping a rival to Facebook that offers users a share of the money they are generating. They sort of do. The money is converted into the utility of the product to each user. Technically, they could lower the utility of Facebook and pay you the rest.
s1artibartfast 6y ago
I think challenge it doesn't solve a user oriented problem. Most users care about the enjoyment/utility/stimulation they get out of a social network. Some users care about their privacy. Needing an extra $30-60/year does not rank high on user priorities. While facebook might make $200/US individual, their profit margin is only 30%.
- diggernet 6y ago
  Imagine if Facebook gave 10% to their users, lowering their profit margin to 20%. Let's say every user gets 10% of the average, or $20/year. As you say, not a big priority. But some people would sign up, who otherwise would not. And some people would keep their accounts, who otherwise would not. Win for Facebook? Hard to say. Now, what if Facebook gave each person 10% of what they personally brought in? That wouldn't take much more tracking than what they already do. But in this case, you'd have a lot of people maximizing their time on Facebook in order to increase their payout. Win for them, bigger win for Facebook. Heck, Facebook could even get rid of all their stupid dark patterns, and stop the endless research into more dark patterns, improving their bottom line even more. No need to trick people into engaging if they are voluntarily engaging for a small sum.
  - s1artibartfast 6y ago
    >Now, what if Facebook gave each person 10% of what they personally brought in? That wouldn't take much more tracking than what they already do. But in this case, you'd have a lot of people maximizing their time on Facebook in order to increase their payout. Win for them, bigger win for Facebook. Heck, Facebook could even get rid of all their stupid dark patterns, and stop the endless research into more dark patterns, improving their bottom line even more. No need to trick people into engaging if they are voluntarily engaging for a small sum. I still don't think the ROI for the user is there. The average FB user spends about 35 min per day, or 210hrs/year on the platform. Assuming 10% revenue sharing, that is $0.10/hour. If the average user were to double their time on the platform, they would make an extra $20/year. This is a laughable incentive for most people, let alone your most valuable add targets (people with disposable income).
    - diggernet 6y ago
      Oh yes, the ROI is crap. But even today with an ROI of exactly $0 there are still vast numbers of people spending the day in their feed or playing whatever the hot FB game is these days or whatever. Getting paid (a pittance) for doing that would certainly drive more engagement. "They're actually paying me to do this!"

ksk 6y ago

>I always wondered what's stopping a rival to Facebook that offers users a share of the money they are generating. They sort of do. The money is converted into the utility of the product to each user. Technically, they could lower the utility of Facebook and pay you the rest.

s1artibartfast 6y ago

I think challenge it doesn't solve a user oriented problem. Most users care about the enjoyment/utility/stimulation they get out of a social network. Some users care about their privacy. Needing an extra $30-60/year does not rank high on user priorities. While facebook might make $200/US individual, their profit margin is only 30%.

diggernet 6y ago
Imagine if Facebook gave 10% to their users, lowering their profit margin to 20%. Let's say every user gets 10% of the average, or $20/year. As you say, not a big priority. But some people would sign up, who otherwise would not. And some people would keep their accounts, who otherwise would not. Win for Facebook? Hard to say. Now, what if Facebook gave each person 10% of what they personally brought in? That wouldn't take much more tracking than what they already do. But in this case, you'd have a lot of people maximizing their time on Facebook in order to increase their payout. Win for them, bigger win for Facebook. Heck, Facebook could even get rid of all their stupid dark patterns, and stop the endless research into more dark patterns, improving their bottom line even more. No need to trick people into engaging if they are voluntarily engaging for a small sum.
- s1artibartfast 6y ago
  >Now, what if Facebook gave each person 10% of what they personally brought in? That wouldn't take much more tracking than what they already do. But in this case, you'd have a lot of people maximizing their time on Facebook in order to increase their payout. Win for them, bigger win for Facebook. Heck, Facebook could even get rid of all their stupid dark patterns, and stop the endless research into more dark patterns, improving their bottom line even more. No need to trick people into engaging if they are voluntarily engaging for a small sum. I still don't think the ROI for the user is there. The average FB user spends about 35 min per day, or 210hrs/year on the platform. Assuming 10% revenue sharing, that is $0.10/hour. If the average user were to double their time on the platform, they would make an extra $20/year. This is a laughable incentive for most people, let alone your most valuable add targets (people with disposable income).
  - diggernet 6y ago
    Oh yes, the ROI is crap. But even today with an ROI of exactly $0 there are still vast numbers of people spending the day in their feed or playing whatever the hot FB game is these days or whatever. Getting paid (a pittance) for doing that would certainly drive more engagement. "They're actually paying me to do this!"