2 ms·
> If Twitter was worth paying for, they wouldn't have used an ad-supported model to begin with Twitter doesn’t cost $0 because no one thinks it’s worth paying
by nindalf 5y ago
> If Twitter was worth paying for, they wouldn't have used an ad-supported model to begin with
Twitter doesn’t cost $0 because no one thinks it’s worth paying for (demand side), it’s because if they did charge they’d be replaced by someone who didn’t (too much potential supply).
- OldTimeCoffee 5y agoIf there was a market of people who would pay for such an app, there would be one on the market to satisfy the demand for it. Supply is irrelevant if there is no demand for it in the first place. Even taking this assertion, it means there is effectively infinite supply so Twitter's service has effectively no monetary value to the consumer. It's still impossible to charge a consumer for it then (and the costs to provide the service have to be paid by a 3rd party in ads). Edit: It's very difficult to build a network and get to a critical mass like Twitter. I'm still arguing it's demand constrained (people unwilling to pay) because you would see more viable competitors if it were supply.