Who would have ever though giving way your product for free would not be a good business model... odd....
It is not "social media" that is the problem is the Ad Supported business model in general, everything ad supported is having problems right now, look at "news", blog sites, etc
If it is ad support is has issue turning a profit.
That is because ad supported is a terrible business model, however investors keep trying it for some reasons... it is like socialism, this time it will work .. we just have to "do it right"
nope. ad supported will never work. google is the closest by control everything from the browser up, but as we see with YT they still struggle
The problem with social media is that it has to get a large userbase, and it's much, much harder to convince someone to pay than it is to use your free service. Especially if your service is social media.
Twitter seems to be trying to get people to pay, and it isn't going well for them.
No, in today's world in order to make a "profitable" social media, you have to get people to pay through other means. Like news.ycombinator.com, forum.bodybuilding.com, https://forums.tomshardware.com/, and other forums do by promoting the main site (ycombinator.com, bodybuilding.com, https://tomshardware.com/). The forums definitely help the main site so they are a net positive to run, but you don't pay by using them directly.
Alternatively, if you don't care about making huge profits, there are a lot of social medias out there which seem to run on donations and volunteer work alone. 4chan, letsrun.com, lemmy.world and mastadon.world, and (although they're invite-only) tildes.net and lobste.rs, don't seem to have an income source besides (at most) banner ads and a merch store.
Forums can be very cheap to run, especially if they're text-only: I imagine you can run a site with ~1 million daily users on <$100/mo, a few admins who work after their day job, and an army of volunteer moderators.
I would love to see your source for that? To my understanding since twitter is private now no one has any idea what their costs structure or revenue is currently and are taking huge assumptions that they have issues because of events like them not paying rent etc. But some of that is common tactics to force people to negotiate.
I am not saying they are doing well, but currently I have no evidence in either direction
>>you have to get people to pay through other means.
Which ironically is twitter/x over all goal I believe, to not just be Social media but to bring in some of the original idea's that first made Elon rich... Paypal. Money Exchange, ecommmerce, now AI, etc etc etc.
Perhaps (probably) Twitter was overvalued, perhaps they're lying, but there's no evidence suggesting that Twitter is doing better than it was before and a lot of evidence suggesting otherwise.
That being said, I do think Elon's other bad decisions and press have caused the greater share of loss, and maybe charging users is getting some of that back. And one of Elon's goals, having people pay for content creators and services, isn't necessarily a bad idea; it's just that right now most people go out of their way not to.
I think it's a good point, considering that in an example only meta products made money.
And Meta is huge advertising company that doesn't just sell ads in their apps, but also sell ads in other people apps with Audience Network.
So in attention economy the ultimate winners aren't advertisers or advertii but the ad brokers.
It is not "social media" that is the problem is the Ad Supported business model in general, everything ad supported is having problems right now, look at "news", blog sites, etc
If it is ad support is has issue turning a profit.
That is because ad supported is a terrible business model, however investors keep trying it for some reasons... it is like socialism, this time it will work .. we just have to "do it right"
nope. ad supported will never work. google is the closest by control everything from the browser up, but as we see with YT they still struggle