3 ms·

I disagree with the siblings on the choice of napkin math parameters, but they’re not like objectively wrong. The bigger issue is that there is a different mod

I disagree with the siblings on the choice of napkin math parameters, but they’re not like objectively wrong. The bigger issue is that there is a different model for the granular micro-monetization of low-rent celebrity: it’s called being an influencer and it’s mediated by TikTok, not by Cameo. And the low rent thing isn’t a diss: it’s moving upmarket faster every year.

cjbgkagh 2y ago
Yeah that’s the way I see it, instead of trying to get traditional celebrities to ‘sell out’ without hurting their band it is easier to extend the existing monetization options of the new emergent celebrity class to include longer and more private sessions.
- gorlilla 2y ago
  Only for their fans though, right?
  - cjbgkagh 2y ago
    Yeah, that business model actually made sense. Though I do think they should have launched it under some other brand, much like how Match Group did with Tinder
chatmasta 2y ago
> it’s called being an influencer and it’s mediated by TikTok, not by Cameo. Now that you mention it, is it weird that social networks haven't moved into this form of monetization? Why does Instagram not have an influencer marketplace where you can pay for a post from a popular account? Is it because of some nebulous "ick" factor that would cheapen their brand? Or is it simply because they can make more money by selling advertisements in the middle of the feed?
- benreesman 2y ago
  When I say on the biweekly model card pre-launch review it was a common phrase “Kim’s people say …”. There’s nothing nebulous. Top-tier influencers get VIP treatment. This is the same as Sinatra’s crew in the 1950s.
- ablation 2y ago
  It kind of does: https://business.instagram.com/blog/creator-marketplace-discover-partnerships https://business.instagram.com/blog/creator-marketplace-disc...

3 ms·

I disagree with the siblings on the choice of napkin math parameters, but they’re not like objectively wrong. The bigger issue is that there is a different mod

by benreesman 2y ago

cjbgkagh 2y ago
Yeah that’s the way I see it, instead of trying to get traditional celebrities to ‘sell out’ without hurting their band it is easier to extend the existing monetization options of the new emergent celebrity class to include longer and more private sessions.
- gorlilla 2y ago
  Only for their fans though, right?
  - cjbgkagh 2y ago
    Yeah, that business model actually made sense. Though I do think they should have launched it under some other brand, much like how Match Group did with Tinder
chatmasta 2y ago
> it’s called being an influencer and it’s mediated by TikTok, not by Cameo. Now that you mention it, is it weird that social networks haven't moved into this form of monetization? Why does Instagram not have an influencer marketplace where you can pay for a post from a popular account? Is it because of some nebulous "ick" factor that would cheapen their brand? Or is it simply because they can make more money by selling advertisements in the middle of the feed?
- benreesman 2y ago
  When I say on the biweekly model card pre-launch review it was a common phrase “Kim’s people say …”. There’s nothing nebulous. Top-tier influencers get VIP treatment. This is the same as Sinatra’s crew in the 1950s.
- ablation 2y ago
  It kind of does: https://business.instagram.com/blog/creator-marketplace-discover-partnerships https://business.instagram.com/blog/creator-marketplace-disc...