4 ms·
Not a fan and don't use the product, but giving away substantial money to highly engaged users on the platform is a very novel and interesting product idea whic
by ak_111 3y ago
Not a fan and don't use the product, but giving away substantial money to highly engaged users on the platform is a very novel and interesting product idea which I doubt would have ever seen the light of day in a public company, and has the potential to be a disruptive business model.
Imagine the discussion if the idea was presented in a public company with the CFO in the room "Rather than spend money trying to attract churned users, we decided to use it instead to reward loyal and highly engaged users even though we are pretty sure their engagement level would be high no matter what, and in fact they would happily pay us to use the platform".
- lolinder 3y agoIsn't this just what YouTube has been doing for years? It's just acknowledging that on Twitter there's an implicit division been content producers and consumers, and that the content producers are getting close to leaving and taking their followers with them now that there are viable competitors. Paying them to keep producing content is hardly novel.
- ak_111 3y agoI think there is a significant difference conceptually between the two. The novelty is that it was more like compensating users who are highly active in leaving popular comments on youtube, the more popular their comment the more they get.
- lolinder 3y agoNot really, because almost no one comes to YouTube for the comments, so paying people to comment would be stupid. In contrast, most people are on Twitter to read tweets produced by a tiny minority of Twitter users. These users are directly analogous to YouTube content creators (and indeed, many YouTubers are also active with large numbers of followers on Twitter). It doesn't take great business acumen to see the parallel, all you have to do is look at the distribution of follower counts.