3 ms·
Why wouldn't Reddit charge end-users for the API access?
This whole situation around Reddit and 3rd party apps is based on the fact that they wanted to charge $$$ the app _developer_.
Why wouldn't they charge that app _users_ instead?
You download the app, it grabs a personal API key and starts using it. If you are a light user, you'll remain within free tier allowances. For heavy users the app would prompt to pay up a bit, just to offset the loss of the "ad revenue", to pay for the API infrastructure plus some profit margin. If the user numbers of 3rd party apps are as claimed, this should end up being a couple of bucks per month if that much. If Reddit feels greedy, they can eliminate the free tier completely and it will still be largely fair - you get to choose between free ad-based default experience and 3rd party apps.
Finally, those who use API to vacuum user content for their ML training needs, they will just fall into the super heavy consumer category and be billed accordingly.
This is a dead simple solution to all this circus. Why isn't this considered? What am I missing?
- poisonborz 3y agoThis was extensively discusseds by Apollo developers themselves, also in HN threads. There are technical hurdles on how to implement this (don't remember the details atm) but the more important point is that Reddit is not interested. They don't want money from subscriptions. Serving the API costs them nothing. They want the much bigger ad/tracking income -> having the userbase use 1st party apps.
- ggm 3y ago.... so the real fuck you.. is to... sign up for ad free experience?
- huhtenberg 3y agoWell, yeah, that's exactly what I don't understand - why the heck aren't they interested in user subscriptions. This is so incredibly short-sighted. The ad/tracking revenues can't be more than few bucks a month per user, can it? It's, of course, "easier" to do several large transactions than a boatload of small ones, but that "easier" is just a matter of respective backend scaffolding. For large volume retail transactions Stripe built it, many others did too. Given non-zero funding, it's not like it's a rocket science really. A lot of people are very firmly hooked into Reddit. You ask them to pay - they will pay. But you start changing Reddit - their hooks will come off and they will leave. How is it not obvious to Reddit is beyond me.
- poisonborz 3y agoThe same reason why FB was not interested in subscriptions. Few bucks/month/all your users guaranteed is much MUCH more than a bit more bucks/month a fraction of that userbase. Would the less money still be a good, and also fair business? Sure. But they will now have shareholders and they demand growth.
- huhtenberg 3y agoWell, fish rots from the head, so FB's choice has never been a shocker. On the other hand Reddit is in a _superb_ position to not go that route and try something different. One can hope, you know.
- a2800276 3y agoBecause it's much easier to charge Google a gazillion dollars for access to the reddit firehose than to nickle and dime the user base.
- edent 3y agoIt's easier to sell wholesale than retail. Retail sales come with chargebacks, customer support, dealing with hundreds of different consumer regulations, and different tax codes. Small customers churn unpredictably. Large customers give you guaranteed and reliable cash-flow. Look at the problems Twitter is having selling a $8/mo service. Do you want to deal with ranty customer complaints? Or do you want a direct client relationship between professional companies?
- huhtenberg 3y agoThe wholesale is easier IF they can find someone interested and IF they don't end up driving their user base away. > Small customers churn unpredictably. Large customers give you guaranteed and reliable cash-flow. Not if the user base is in hundreds of millions. There'd be ebb and flow, but nothing sudden. > Look at the problems Twitter is having selling a $8/mo service Their subscription offers no benefits, zero. It's basically a form of goodwill donation on users' part. > Do you want to deal with ranty customer complaints? Or do you want a direct client relationship between professional companies? It doesn't matter what I'd want, it's a question of if it makes sense from the business perspective and the retail business is very much worth it. The structure is different, but it works just fine even if there are chargebacks, complaints and what not. Look at WhatsApp before their acquisition - they charged $1/mo and they were awash in money.
- genezeta 3y agoNote that Reddit already has some "premium membership" in place and yet from those reddit makes about 1/25 times what it makes from advertising (2021). So what you're missing is that, in general, people are not that willing to pay just because "you ask them to pay" as you assume. The premium subscribers are already subscribed. So... should they include the "third party app API key" as part of that subscription? Then they would be making no money from it. Should they charge an additional amount? How would they justify that to people already paying? Also what you mention as people being "very firmly hooked in Reddit" actually means that redditors feel intensely that they already contribute, that it is their submissions and comments which brings value to reddit. When that's the prevailing feeling, making them pay is hard. It all indicates that this is a much harder sell than you make it appear.
- huhtenberg 3y agoTheir "premium membership" is a complete dud. It has literally no tangible benefits, so I'd argue that most people view this subscription as entirely optional goodwill gesture. It only makes sense to scrap it and replace with a general "platform access fee" and then wave it for official clients in exchange for ads. This is an inherently fair arrangement. If the fee is modest for medium and heavy users, say something like $5/mo, that'd be exactly the push needed to covert all existing goodwill into $. Moreover, if it's tiny, like $2/mo, this may also convert even light users. It's not as hard of a sell as you paint it to be. What's jarring is that they aren't even trying to discuss this option. > redditors feel intensely that they already contribute I don't think this is true. This is a flippant and selfish attitude, which may be vocalized often, but it doesn't mean that it's prevalent. Vast majority of users understand perfectly well that the company needs funding to go on and if it collapses, their online communities will go down with it. This all hinges on the assumption that users like Reddit, as a company. And what Reddit's been doing recently all but ensures that it's not the case. Another very puzzling move on their part. Almost as if there's a bunch of suits at the top fidgeting with spreadsheets and nobody else.
- genezeta 3y ago> Vast majority of users understand perfectly well that the company needs funding to go on and if it collapses, their online communities will go down with it. The vast majority of users understand about funding but largely prefer having some ads. That is the price most users are willing to pay. The exact benefit premium membership gives you is hiding ads, which is at the core of the discussion here. And as I said, it accounts for only 3% of what ads make. And again, you underestimate the feeling of participation as "contribution". Particularly for those users willing to "go further". The people that most invest on the community do so because it gives them as much of a feeling of belonging as one of "ownership". No, those feelings don't mean users "like Reddit", much less as a company; people have strong feelings towards "their" particular subreddits.