Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Reddit’s revenue per user is much lower than that of other social networks

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 67 posts

Re: Reddit’s revenue per user is much lower than that of other social networks

#21

Post by abrawill »

zrail wrote: post #13
swalsh wrote: post #7

Reddit has some valuable users, but its poorly monetized. For example, I dont trust political support reddits... after 2016 they all feel gamed. I think a paid sub, a sub that has a monthly subscription which added an extra level of scrutiny to the users and posts might be interesting. Alternatively, a revenue sharing model where I pay for a subscription to a sub, and I can read normally paygated links.

I participate in a forum with paid subscriptions and heavy moderation. The politics threads still feel gamed occasionally.

I would not think that having to spend a little money is an actual deterrent for those who want to game public opinion. So I wouldn't be surprised if it still happened.

Re: Reddit’s revenue per user is much lower than that of other social networks

#22

Post by huhtenberg »

Are there any sources on the split of per-user revenue between ads, reddit premium and reddit gold?

I would've normally expected ads to be the bulk of it, but now that we have Fortnite with its strictly vanity merch... you just never know.

Re: Reddit’s revenue per user is much lower than that of other social networks

#23

Post by z3t4 »

dominicr wrote: post #11

That makes me like Reddit more. I wish more social media would allow me to pay to access a version of the service that wasn't centred around advertising. Even with adverts Reddit doesn't feel like it's manipulating everything you see just to sell access to your eyeballs. Reddit has an ad-free premium subscription, although at $5.99 a month it's obviously a lot more than the $0.30 they reckon each user is actually wor…

Selling ad-free premium subscription is not a good idea if you rely on ads. As those willing to pay, is exactly those an advertiser want to target.

Re: Reddit’s revenue per user is much lower than that of other social networks

#25

Post by Vinnl »

abhiminator wrote: post #16
zeeed wrote: post #6

That’s a good thing folks. Talking about the user being the product, I’d try to choose a platform where my value is minimal since I think it’s fair to assume that there’s less data collection and profiling going on.

One good thing I commend reddit for is their business model centered around the user-funded 'gold system' (now called reddit premium [0]). Kind of like a win-win: You see a great post or a comment by a random user, you buy gold (or awards/coins as it's now called), reddit gets the money, post or comment's author gets the recognition in that thread via a special badge (aside from a host of other experience-enhancing b…

Their ad platform also, as far as I'm aware, only spans their own website. Admittedly, given the ungodly amounts of time I'm spending there, that's still a significant amount of profile-building they'll be able to do, but it's still far less invasive tracking than e.g. Facebook's.

Re: Reddit’s revenue per user is much lower than that of other social networks

#26

Post by emilfihlman »

zeeed wrote: post #6

That’s a good thing folks. Talking about the user being the product, I’d try to choose a platform where my value is minimal since I think it’s fair to assume that there’s less data collection and profiling going on.

Wot?

It means there's _more_ data collection and profiling since you can't otherwise make profit.

Re: Reddit’s revenue per user is much lower than that of other social networks

#27

Post by ashelmire »

zeeed wrote: post #6

That’s a good thing folks. Talking about the user being the product, I’d try to choose a platform where my value is minimal since I think it’s fair to assume that there’s less data collection and profiling going on.

That seems like a pretty dubious assumption. Who’s to say they aren’t more desperate for cash due to that? Reddit makes it painful to browse their site on mobile exactly because they want you to use the app so they can track you.

Re: Reddit’s revenue per user is much lower than that of other social networks

#28

Post by dageshi »

shaki-dora wrote: post #15
swarnie_ wrote: post #4

Not shocked honestly. A lot of Reddit users are against the idea of being advertised to or having their data sold. In addition to this semi-anonymous and throwaway accounts are common which must lower the worth of any data collected. I personally have 3 different accounts, One for work, one for politics and a final one for games. I'm more then happy to rotate (throw away and recreate) any of these accounts at any tim…

Populations are just different among the networks. Facebook is probably closest to “all people”. Twitter skews towards urban professionals. Instagram has the artsy/fashion-conscious crowd. Pinterest attracts more traditional women. Reddit, for its part, attracts the young, male underclass. Not exclusively, of course. I have an account myself, so don’t feel insulted. That demographic just isn’t as valuable, unless you…

I would say that was true until 2-3 years ago, my sense is reddit has broadened out a lot recently.

Re: Reddit’s revenue per user is much lower than that of other social networks

#29

Post by zozbot123 »

abhiminator wrote: post #16
zeeed wrote: post #6

That’s a good thing folks. Talking about the user being the product, I’d try to choose a platform where my value is minimal since I think it’s fair to assume that there’s less data collection and profiling going on.

One good thing I commend reddit for is their business model centered around the user-funded 'gold system' (now called reddit premium [0]). Kind of like a win-win: You see a great post or a comment by a random user, you buy gold (or awards/coins as it's now called), reddit gets the money, post or comment's author gets the recognition in that thread via a special badge (aside from a host of other experience-enhancing b…

The new "reddit premium" feature is a downgrade, though. The original "gold" model is a lot smoother - there is a single token of reward, the gold coin. If you want to increase your visible appreciation for the post/comment, just pay more and award them more gold. Yes, the new "premium" model is more palatable to investors, but it's still very clearly giving up a nice, win-win innovation.

Re: Reddit’s revenue per user is much lower than that of other social networks

#30

Post by mschaef »

dageshi wrote: post #28
shaki-dora wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Populations are just different among the networks. Facebook is probably closest to “all people”. Twitter skews towards urban professionals. Instagram has the artsy/fashion-conscious crowd. Pinterest attracts more traditional women. Reddit, for its part, attracts the young, male underclass. Not exclusively, of course. I have an account myself, so don’t feel insulted. That demographic just isn’t as valuable, unless you…

I would say that was true until 2-3 years ago, my sense is reddit has broadened out a lot recently.

I tend to agree with you. I joined Reddit back before the time they allowed sub-reddits to be created at well. My view of the site was more or less entirely /r/programming, which had a post celebrating 65,536 users. This was also around the time they switched from using Lisp to Python: https://redditblog.com/2005/12/05/on-lisp/

Then at some point, the site opened up sub-reddit creation and a vast new world popped up around 'me' that I was completely oblivious to. (And /r/programming is now at 1,700,000 users...) The site's changed a lot over the years, and not necessarily in ways that are immediately obvious. (But that lisp post is almost 15 years old, so maybe that shouldn't be a surprise.)

Post reply on HN