3 ms·

What If Everyone Makes Money Except Twitter?

11 points by buckpost 17y ago

arfrank 17y ago
I think the poster answers his own question of how twitter will make money. He says "In other words, what happens if hundreds of businesses are created using Twitter’s API but the entity supporting them – Twitter – can’t make revenue or, at least, enough revenue to be viable." Why not monetize the API, and do it to the extent that heavy users pay a heavier burden. Give away some free access every month, but once an app hits some critical mass and hopefully becomes profitable, then start sharing in the money. Twitter is at the point that if it were to do this, there would be some backlash, but it certainly wouldn't be an end for them. It would just drive all the "Feeder" companies to figure out how to make money quicker.
- ankeshk 17y ago
  Exactly! In olden times, this is how new villages popped up. Someone would dig a well and find water. But if he tried to sell this water, a village wouldn't grow over there. But if he gave away the water for free, a lot of people would show up. And he could then sell the land surrounding the well to these folks and make the money. So the best way to make money off twitter is by charging for API access.
neovive 17y ago
This sounds very similar to Sun and Java. Many companies profited greatly from Java -- except Sun. Where is Sun today?
jessep 17y ago
The article misses the point of the original techcrunch article. Techcrunch never questioned how much/if twitter could/would make money. Rather, the original article made a genuinely interesting point that choosing to turn on revenue generation mechanisms (which is obviously possible for twitter) poses a risk for twitter if they're seeking an acquisition. That risk comes from the fact that real revenue gives acquirers something concrete to base their purchase price on, rather than a speculative guess at revenue potential. I don't know if this is actually influencing twitter's thinking, but I certainly found the idea interesting. This article I simply found annoying, because the tone is almost haughty while the content demonstrates the author didn't understand (or maybe care about?) the point of the article he referenced.
dpcan 17y ago
Acquire the revenue makers. Maybe Twitter is just waiting to see which API user makes the most money, and they'll just BUY them.

11 points by buckpost 17y ago

I think the poster answers his own question of how twitter will make money. He says "In other words, what happens if hundreds of businesses are created using Twitter’s API but the entity supporting them – Twitter – can’t make revenue or, at least, enough revenue to be viable." Why not monetize the API, and do it to the extent that heavy users pay a heavier burden. Give away some free access every month, but once an app hits some critical mass and hopefully becomes profitable, then start sharing in the money. Twitter is at the point that if it were to do this, there would be some backlash, but it certainly wouldn't be an end for them. It would just drive all the "Feeder" companies to figure out how to make money quicker.

ankeshk 17y ago
Exactly! In olden times, this is how new villages popped up. Someone would dig a well and find water. But if he tried to sell this water, a village wouldn't grow over there. But if he gave away the water for free, a lot of people would show up. And he could then sell the land surrounding the well to these folks and make the money. So the best way to make money off twitter is by charging for API access.

neovive 17y ago

This sounds very similar to Sun and Java. Many companies profited greatly from Java -- except Sun. Where is Sun today?

jessep 17y ago

The article misses the point of the original techcrunch article. Techcrunch never questioned how much/if twitter could/would make money. Rather, the original article made a genuinely interesting point that choosing to turn on revenue generation mechanisms (which is obviously possible for twitter) poses a risk for twitter if they're seeking an acquisition. That risk comes from the fact that real revenue gives acquirers something concrete to base their purchase price on, rather than a speculative guess at revenue potential. I don't know if this is actually influencing twitter's thinking, but I certainly found the idea interesting. This article I simply found annoying, because the tone is almost haughty while the content demonstrates the author didn't understand (or maybe care about?) the point of the article he referenced.

dpcan 17y ago

Acquire the revenue makers. Maybe Twitter is just waiting to see which API user makes the most money, and they'll just BUY them.