3 ms·
I think it's actually because people don't like spending money, even very small amounts, for things they have decided fall in the 'free' category. As previous p
by idiotsecant 3y ago
I think it's actually because people don't like spending money, even very small amounts, for things they have decided fall in the 'free' category. As previous poster said, it's a monkey problem, not a tech problem.
- Teever 3y agoNah, people used to pay buskers with pocket change. That happens less because they don't carry cash anymore. It's the same thing here. If it was easier to do, more people would do it. Look at Onlyfans. People pay good money for what you can get for free.
- yuuuuuuuu 3y agoDifference is that the examples you gave don't have the expectation of being free. Online news articles do.
- jabradoodle 3y agoI don't think so, the media has been pretty resistant to providing this kind of model. If they allow you to read a single article cheaply it would mean a lot of lost subscriptions and it isn't easy to price individual pieces of content.
- diffeomorphism 3y agoYet, "free to play" games are ludicrously profitable. Surely a large part of that is addiction, but there also is a tech problem here. If paying for a newspaper article has lots of friction (sign up here, confirm email, credit card, 2 factor confirmation, now you have a subscription instead of just buying; cancelation only by carrier pigeon at midnight), then no way. That is also why the Google and apple appstores can charge such large fees. Sure, buying on websites and sideloading are possible but much higher friction -> many customers simply won't bother.