3 ms·

The issue I see with that is that messengers (platforms) have a strong network effect - it becomes useful to you if you can reach your contacts there. Making i

by pph 4y ago

The issue I see with that is that messengers (platforms) have a strong network effect - it becomes useful to you if you can reach your contacts there. Making it paid creates an inconvenience even if the price extremely low, if you don't even know if your friends are on there (= if it's useful to you) even more so. If your target group is worldwide you need regional pricing (and payment methods) to not exclude economically disadvantaged regions. And even then it might have selective effects towards people who can afford the service more easily. For a case study of a paid messenger see Threema, though it is probably difficult to measure the impact of its payment model on its success.

ephbit 4y ago
> Making it paid creates an inconvenience even if the price extremely low, ... Buying ... isn't it always "inconvenient"? Shopping for groceries, what an inconvenience. I get your point: not having to do something to get something is always easier. But when you're literally paying for soooo many other things every day .. where's the proportionality? When in this case of instant messaging app you'd have to buy it once. > If your target group is worldwide you need regional pricing (and payment methods) to not exclude economically disadvantaged regions. Yes, valid. Like with most other services/products all over the world, of course the messaging app as well would be priced according to the usual standards in the respective country. Food prices and all other prices vary from region to region, country to country. So I didn't mean it should be priced the same in every country. Just that there better not be two different service levels. As I wrote, IMO this differentiation just enables gamification/maximisation of revenue. > For a case study of a paid messenger see Threema, ... Yes, Threema appears to move rather slowly. Of course they are, when all other apps offer even more shiny features and are free. That's just how most people decide: nice features, friends are there, free .. yep, I'll go with that. My impression is that Threema is doing ok, considering the fact that it costs a few bucks.

by pph 4y ago

ephbit 4y ago

> Making it paid creates an inconvenience even if the price extremely low, ... Buying ... isn't it always "inconvenient"? Shopping for groceries, what an inconvenience. I get your point: not having to do something to get something is always easier. But when you're literally paying for soooo many other things every day .. where's the proportionality? When in this case of instant messaging app you'd have to buy it once. > If your target group is worldwide you need regional pricing (and payment methods) to not exclude economically disadvantaged regions. Yes, valid. Like with most other services/products all over the world, of course the messaging app as well would be priced according to the usual standards in the respective country. Food prices and all other prices vary from region to region, country to country. So I didn't mean it should be priced the same in every country. Just that there better not be two different service levels. As I wrote, IMO this differentiation just enables gamification/maximisation of revenue. > For a case study of a paid messenger see Threema, ... Yes, Threema appears to move rather slowly. Of course they are, when all other apps offer even more shiny features and are free. That's just how most people decide: nice features, friends are there, free .. yep, I'll go with that. My impression is that Threema is doing ok, considering the fact that it costs a few bucks.