4 ms·

There's got to be an opportunity for Twitter to monetize that instead of fighting it and pissing everyone off. Agreed, and speaking personally, I would love to

There's got to be an opportunity for Twitter to monetize that instead of fighting it and pissing everyone off. Agreed, and speaking personally, I would love to pay Twitter $XXX/month, especially if it included some form of "we'll reply to X emails within an hour" support. The fact that they're not even charging $20/month for minimal API access is baffling to me. I'd expect it'd only help reduce spam as well!

Guvante 14y ago
> The fact that they're not even charging $20/month for minimal API access is baffling to me. The devs who experiment and make something cool are often worth more than the minimal charge. However I would agree that rather than having arbitrary limits using devs as a revenue stream makes sense (give everyone a portion of what you currently allow and allow payed upgrades)
- mootothemax 14y ago
  give everyone a portion of what you currently allow and allow payed upgrades Exactly - there are plenty of options available. The devs who experiment and make something cool are often worth more than the minimal charge. I'm just wondering how many such developers would be put off by such a relatively small charge? Obviously, the situation now is very different to when Twitter was still building momentum. I'm just confused that they don't come out and say "From the 1st of May, we will be charging all new API accounts for access."
  - Guvante 14y ago
    Making someone make a purchase decision to play around with your platform blocks some people from ever using your platform. You don't need to let everyone play for free, but allowing say 1,000 requests a month at no cost would get some extra people to try out your platform.
TylerE 14y ago
For $20/month they'd probably spend more on the accounting infrastructure and payment gateway than they'd generate. It's like (snail) mailing someone a bill for $0.25.
- umsm 14y ago
  This isn't accurate. The infrastructure is setup once they started billing people. I think the support side is what will eat at the profits... a million $20/month users can be very demanding until they figure out what they're doing.
- lucaspiller 14y ago
  Amazon seem quite happy to charge me $0.50 a month, and they seem to be doing alright.
  - TylerE 14y ago
    Yes, but that's Amazon's core business. It's not Twitter's core business.
    - saalweachter 14y ago
      Charging people money for goods and services is everyone's core business.
      - TylerE 14y ago
        No, it's not actually. You could maybe make the argument that it should be, but it isn't.
      - bifrost 14y ago
        It is, but only when it actually makes sense.

Guvante 14y ago

> The fact that they're not even charging $20/month for minimal API access is baffling to me. The devs who experiment and make something cool are often worth more than the minimal charge. However I would agree that rather than having arbitrary limits using devs as a revenue stream makes sense (give everyone a portion of what you currently allow and allow payed upgrades)

mootothemax 14y ago
give everyone a portion of what you currently allow and allow payed upgrades Exactly - there are plenty of options available. The devs who experiment and make something cool are often worth more than the minimal charge. I'm just wondering how many such developers would be put off by such a relatively small charge? Obviously, the situation now is very different to when Twitter was still building momentum. I'm just confused that they don't come out and say "From the 1st of May, we will be charging all new API accounts for access."
- Guvante 14y ago
  Making someone make a purchase decision to play around with your platform blocks some people from ever using your platform. You don't need to let everyone play for free, but allowing say 1,000 requests a month at no cost would get some extra people to try out your platform.

TylerE 14y ago

For $20/month they'd probably spend more on the accounting infrastructure and payment gateway than they'd generate. It's like (snail) mailing someone a bill for $0.25.

umsm 14y ago
This isn't accurate. The infrastructure is setup once they started billing people. I think the support side is what will eat at the profits... a million $20/month users can be very demanding until they figure out what they're doing.
lucaspiller 14y ago
Amazon seem quite happy to charge me $0.50 a month, and they seem to be doing alright.
- TylerE 14y ago
  Yes, but that's Amazon's core business. It's not Twitter's core business.
  - saalweachter 14y ago
    Charging people money for goods and services is everyone's core business.
    - TylerE 14y ago
      No, it's not actually. You could maybe make the argument that it should be, but it isn't.
    - bifrost 14y ago
      It is, but only when it actually makes sense.