4 ms·

I think you are completely missing the point of snapchat. Right now they do have network effect because there is no other way to anonymously send disposable pi

I think you are completely missing the point of snapchat. Right now they do have network effect because there is no other way to anonymously send disposable pictures. Everything op is talking about would completely ruin the value of snapchat. You have to look at it more as a product like Kik, BBM or skype, which has none of those terrible features you suggested and look at it as a alternative communication platform.

rrhoover 14y ago
You're right, Snapchat has network effects which _does_ create a commitment effect; however, as Nir Eyal points out, network effects aren't enough (http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/04/the-network-effect-isnt-good-enough/ http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/04/the-network-effect-isnt-goo...). The rapid growth of Snapchat (without use of Facebook/Twitter integration) exemplify this. Users are willing and able to switch services much more easily today than ever before.
- angryasian 14y ago
  Everything is moving much faster than it once was.. so its very hard to say what does have commitment effect especially when it comes to social thats so much more incredibly fickle .. friendster, myspace, even facebook to an extent you see people using Path and other niche services. Utilities are the only thing that has any lasting commitment. You keep on wanting to point out Nir Eyal as an example, while the mechanics he speaks are true and relevant, most example he uses is a piss poor example of a true commitment. Really Slashdot/metafilter/fark/Digg/ and Reddit is the true commitment or Quora - the struggling QA platform. Really taskrabbit and airbnb. Lets be serious none of these are good examples. Like I said previously Snapchat is a communication utility that people commit like BBM or whatsapp or kik or skype or even aol messenger. When it comes to a communication platform, people will commit to a few of them. Snapchat will be fine because its anonymous and provides a very specific community and has first movers advantage.

rrhoover 14y ago

You're right, Snapchat has network effects which _does_ create a commitment effect; however, as Nir Eyal points out, network effects aren't enough (http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/04/the-network-effect-isnt-good-enough/ http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/04/the-network-effect-isnt-goo...). The rapid growth of Snapchat (without use of Facebook/Twitter integration) exemplify this. Users are willing and able to switch services much more easily today than ever before.

angryasian 14y ago
Everything is moving much faster than it once was.. so its very hard to say what does have commitment effect especially when it comes to social thats so much more incredibly fickle .. friendster, myspace, even facebook to an extent you see people using Path and other niche services. Utilities are the only thing that has any lasting commitment. You keep on wanting to point out Nir Eyal as an example, while the mechanics he speaks are true and relevant, most example he uses is a piss poor example of a true commitment. Really Slashdot/metafilter/fark/Digg/ and Reddit is the true commitment or Quora - the struggling QA platform. Really taskrabbit and airbnb. Lets be serious none of these are good examples. Like I said previously Snapchat is a communication utility that people commit like BBM or whatsapp or kik or skype or even aol messenger. When it comes to a communication platform, people will commit to a few of them. Snapchat will be fine because its anonymous and provides a very specific community and has first movers advantage.