4 ms·

In bid for international money, Facebook takes gifts off dollar standard

8 points by ashishk 18y ago

teej 18y ago
The issue with virtual goods is that most people don't "get it". "Why would you spend $1 on a stupid picture?". The business model differs too much from the produce. => market. => sell. people are used to. It's all a matter of psychology and sociology and until people realize that enough to execute on it, I don't plan on having competition.
- jgrahamc 18y ago
  Virtual gifts in Facebook are an example of the "How is this software going to get me laid?" question posed by JWZ(). You'd spend $1 on a stupid picture because you imagine some desired outcome. This is the same reason people buy flowers for other people, and in general the same reason people buy almost anything. The fact that the cost of making a virtual flower is entirely irrelevant. () http://www.jwz.org/doc/groupware.html http://www.jwz.org/doc/groupware.html
DanielBMarkham 18y ago
This revenue could get into the nine figures next year I did a lot of research last year on virtual economies. I really, really wish I had been able to put this together into a startup. This stuff rocks.
- Dilpil 18y ago
  You could, but it would be a hedge fund rather than a tech company.
- kirse 18y ago
  You know people have it good when they're siphoning money into virtual space where it's virtually worthless.
  - DanielBMarkham 18y ago
    Same as watching a movie at a theater. You pay your money and two hours later all you have is the memory of a feeling.
jrockway 18y ago
"Virtual money" always annoys me. I have to have Wii points to buy a Wii game. I have to have Microsoft points to buy an Xbox game. I don't want to keep my money tied up in these useless virtual currencies. Just charge my credit card $5 when I download a game and be done with it. Same for Facebook. Just charge me what the "item" "costs". Making it difficult to buy a worthless item is not a good way to make money. Making it easy is.
- eru 18y ago
  I would be more cautious. Sometimes hard access is the value. After all the marginal cost of those 'worthless items' is zero anyway.
byrneseyeview 18y ago
This revenue could get into the nine figures next year, Justin Smith of the blog Inside Facebook calculates, based on various estimates he tells me he’s heard. Smith is the head product manager at social network application company Watercooler, and generally has his finger on the pulse of what’s happening around Facebook. Combined with what Facebook has told me, his number sounds quite plausible. This kind of language used to show up when bloggers cited people in the mainstream media, or well-known consultants. It's interesting that, when they write about startups, the New York Times has to say "Trust me -- I heard this from a guy who is completely legit."
- teej 18y ago
  Regardless of the validity of his revenue claim, Justin is a pretty nice guy.

8 points by ashishk 18y ago

teej 18y ago

The issue with virtual goods is that most people don't "get it". "Why would you spend $1 on a stupid picture?". The business model differs too much from the produce. => market. => sell. people are used to. It's all a matter of psychology and sociology and until people realize that enough to execute on it, I don't plan on having competition.

jgrahamc 18y ago
Virtual gifts in Facebook are an example of the "How is this software going to get me laid?" question posed by JWZ(). You'd spend $1 on a stupid picture because you imagine some desired outcome. This is the same reason people buy flowers for other people, and in general the same reason people buy almost anything. The fact that the cost of making a virtual flower is entirely irrelevant. () http://www.jwz.org/doc/groupware.html http://www.jwz.org/doc/groupware.html

DanielBMarkham 18y ago

This revenue could get into the nine figures next year I did a lot of research last year on virtual economies. I really, really wish I had been able to put this together into a startup. This stuff rocks.

Dilpil 18y ago
You could, but it would be a hedge fund rather than a tech company.
kirse 18y ago
You know people have it good when they're siphoning money into virtual space where it's virtually worthless.
- DanielBMarkham 18y ago
  Same as watching a movie at a theater. You pay your money and two hours later all you have is the memory of a feeling.

jrockway 18y ago

"Virtual money" always annoys me. I have to have Wii points to buy a Wii game. I have to have Microsoft points to buy an Xbox game. I don't want to keep my money tied up in these useless virtual currencies. Just charge my credit card $5 when I download a game and be done with it. Same for Facebook. Just charge me what the "item" "costs". Making it difficult to buy a worthless item is not a good way to make money. Making it easy is.

eru 18y ago
I would be more cautious. Sometimes hard access is the value. After all the marginal cost of those 'worthless items' is zero anyway.

byrneseyeview 18y ago

This revenue could get into the nine figures next year, Justin Smith of the blog Inside Facebook calculates, based on various estimates he tells me he’s heard. Smith is the head product manager at social network application company Watercooler, and generally has his finger on the pulse of what’s happening around Facebook. Combined with what Facebook has told me, his number sounds quite plausible. This kind of language used to show up when bloggers cited people in the mainstream media, or well-known consultants. It's interesting that, when they write about startups, the New York Times has to say "Trust me -- I heard this from a guy who is completely legit."

teej 18y ago
Regardless of the validity of his revenue claim, Justin is a pretty nice guy.