facebook Looking into how to charge users
- Thread starter SeerSGB
- Start date
I don't see the big deal. It's basically paying to advertise your posts. Unless you have some business interest in doing so, I can't see most people bothering, so regular users are unaffected. 
More than likey, it'll turn Facebook into a limited service: Oh you have 100 friends, well unless you pay only 25 will see this post. Or "25 friends free, then pay for "X" so many extra". More of less gutting the functionality (such as it is) the users have now. That seems to be the running concern at the moment.
What'll do is probably shank FB in the back and give things like Google+ a shot at the market place.
What'll do is probably shank FB in the back and give things like Google+ a shot at the market place.
Oh, so this is one of those things where people are whining about something Facebook might hypothetically do at some point in the future?
Facebook might also someday demand you sell them your firstborn child. Or perhaps a kidney. Or not.
These sorts of exercises are incredibly pointless. We won't know what Facebook intends to do until they announce it, and even then, they will backtrack if there is a big enough backlash.
Facebook might also someday demand you sell them your firstborn child. Or perhaps a kidney. Or not.
These sorts of exercises are incredibly pointless. We won't know what Facebook intends to do until they announce it, and even then, they will backtrack if there is a big enough backlash.
Well I only have 76 friends on FB anyway and I reckon there's only about a core of 25 who really pay that much attention to everything I post so I'd be ok with a limited service. That said I think Robert's right, it's nothing to worry about at present and likely the backlash would kick in if this became anthing more than a premium service for anyone daft enough to pay for it.
They're already doing tests with the idea in some markets
It just happened to be what was predicted in some tech discussion arenas when the IPO was announced. You'll see a bulk exodus from FB if the fees become SOP. People might bitch about ads, but they'd rather ads than pay-to-post
- the original article.
It just happened to be what was predicted in some tech discussion arenas when the IPO was announced. You'll see a bulk exodus from FB if the fees become SOP. People might bitch about ads, but they'd rather ads than pay-to-post
But the fee being talked about is optional and apparently only exists a way to make sure your post shows up to your friends, evidently regardless of their settings. Currently, your friends get to decide what level of importance your posts have to them.
If Facebook starts requiring people to pay in order for anyone to see their posts, no one will use it. And to think Facebook is that stupid is pretty laughable. There's very little I post about that I'd consider paying to ensure people see, and I suspect that holds true for the vast majority of users. People will either not use it or abandon Facebook entirely. Either way, who cares?
Unless you forward/repost to 10 friends this within 24 hours, this will happen. Facebook is tracking how many times you do this, and judging appropriately...
Or whatever every single crap chain email in the last 15 years has told us.
Well, this time it's not a scam-email, it's straight from the company
More info, IPO related.
So, yes, Facebook seems stupid enough to actually consider this Hey they want to fuck themselves doing this, I'll set back and laugh. Bad timing to roll this test out during the run up for the IPO.
More info, IPO related.
So, yes, Facebook seems stupid enough to actually consider this Hey they want to fuck themselves doing this, I'll set back and laugh. Bad timing to roll this test out during the run up for the IPO.
Ah, now I get it. This is because you hate Facebook.
No, I'm just an asshole that gets a bit of enjoyment from watching large media businesses crash and burn from their own poor business decisions.
Sort of like watching the MPAA and RIAA flail about to defend their outdated business model.
The situations are not at all similar, and in any case, whether or not Facebook fails has nothing to do with your feelings about them.
Personally, I don't care what happens to Facebook. Everything their service does, I could get elsewhere--except the large pool of people I can communicate with due to Facebook's unique network effect. If someone else takes over that mantle, I'll probably jump over to that.
I'm confident that if Facebook does something massively stupid, they will either fix it ASAP or hemorrhage enough users for another platform to take over. Either way, I'll get by. I don't understand people being so emotionally invested in a company's failure--at least when it's one you don't work for and apparently have no stake in.
The going money on who's going to benefit from Facebook failing is Google+. It might, it might, but Google has its own problems right now. That's not to say I think Google is going anywhere, but they're another that's going to end up making so big changes to their business model. If Google can weather what it's going through, I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Google is buying out Facebook in the next year or two.
I think the days of large social-media might be coming to a end. The "bubble" has burst, so to speak. The novelty as worn off and people are seeing no real use to it. It's not going to go away, but it's not going to be as important as it is or used to be.
Why do people invest themselves into sports or politics but don't run for office or play sports? Same thing: spectator sport.
I think the days of large social-media might be coming to a end. The "bubble" has burst, so to speak. The novelty as worn off and people are seeing no real use to it. It's not going to go away, but it's not going to be as important as it is or used to be.
Why do people invest themselves into sports or politics but don't run for office or play sports? Same thing: spectator sport.
G+ is nice except for the fact that nobody uses it, and also that Google is perhaps more evil than Facebook. (I use both, but I also pay attention to what I'm getting into there.)
I find that equally retarded.
I think that if they want to start charging people, it will be the end of them. I think they're overestimating their worth and taking things for granted. It happened with Myspace. Everyone flocked to facebook when they made big changes that pissed off a lot of people, and now it's pretty much a wasteland of what it used to be. The same thing could happen to facebook if they're not careful. In the online world, people don't have to be loyal to a service or site. They'll easily flock to what's the next best thing, which could be Google+.
I knew the IPO thing would be bad news from the moments they had announced that they would be doing so. I don't think an IPO is cohesive with how a social network works. Now that it's a public company, they'll have to find new ways of satisfying investors, hence why they're thinking of charging users. It will be all about money now.
Then again, I might be overreacting.
I'm guessing this will apply only to the media or people who have facebook pages, such as bands, magazines, newspapers, etc, which post things on regular schedules. I could see the media being required paid access, as it's somewhat aready a form of advertising.
I knew the IPO thing would be bad news from the moments they had announced that they would be doing so. I don't think an IPO is cohesive with how a social network works. Now that it's a public company, they'll have to find new ways of satisfying investors, hence why they're thinking of charging users. It will be all about money now.
Then again, I might be overreacting.
I'm guessing this will apply only to the media or people who have facebook pages, such as bands, magazines, newspapers, etc, which post things on regular schedules. I could see the media being required paid access, as it's somewhat aready a form of advertising.
Last edited:
Google, probably more so than Facebook, has a shite-ton of Privacy Policy and Copyright policy issues. Their TOS on both is bascially: Bend over and hope we use lube. But how many people really read a TOS through and through, versus clicking "I agree" just to get it over with.
Google is likely be the next bubble to pop. They offer a lot of great freeiminum features (I use G-Mail and Voice), but they've stretched themselves thin and now the lawsuit over Android. Plus they have a bad habit of rolling out stuff, then just killing it without warning--leaving subscribers boned. Google-Drive is a good example: They closed Docs (which was wickedly popular) and migrated all the files to drive. Didn't even let people decide if the wanted to move or not, just "Oh your files? They're on Drive now...and you can't get to them cause the server load is too high right now." And Drive is just doing what companies like DropBox did years ago.
Google has more problems than Facebook, and they know it. They've been trying to make their services more "sticky" for years. Docs is probably their biggest non-search success. I'm not overly bothered that they folded it into Drive, apart from the copyright issues. Good thing I don't keep anything important on there.
I'm telling people that are using drive the same thing I tell them about DropBox: encrypt and/or passworded .rar/.zip file. I never load anything onto a cloud-storage service without encryption and/or passwording in in a compressed-container.
Google's problems all come from buying into their own hype and the hype of their customers. Which got them to thinking they can do no wrong.
Google's problems all come from buying into their own hype and the hype of their customers. Which got them to thinking they can do no wrong.
Yea charging everyday users is just downright insane
. It's one thing to have to pay yearly -- if you have x amount of friends, like over 100 or so, but doing so in the fashion that is mentioned here sounds rather rediculous.Another reason for me to get rid of my FB account.