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

Jimmy Wales has quietly launched a Facebook rival

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 587 posts

Re: Jimmy Wales has quietly launched a Facebook rival

#111

Post by INTPenis »

Now that people have seen how fun Facebook is (after all it does have its benefits) I would love to wipe the slate clean and start over with a payed model.

Maybe not as high as Netflix, because there would be no need for such heavy bandwidth use, but definitely yearly/monthly subscriptions.

I don't use social media myself but I hear from family members and friends how fun it is to connect with far away relatives and of course organize and attend various social groups.

But I'm skeptical as to whether wt.social will work with the big players still out there serving a majority of users.

Re: Jimmy Wales has quietly launched a Facebook rival

#112

Post by rconti »

yggda wrote: post #106

Like others I don't understand the pricing here. For comparison in 2017, FB made $84 per US user, and $27 per EU user. So you're already paying more than you 'pay' facebook. > He doesn't expect the social network to be profitable I'd expect it to be more profitable than facebook at this price [1] https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/120114/how-does-fac...

probably an issue of scale

Re: Jimmy Wales has quietly launched a Facebook rival

#113

Post by wtmt »

rolltiide wrote: post #90
wtmt wrote: post #62

I checked it out by creating an account. It detected my country as India, and showed the price to jump the waitlist (currently at 60k) as $12.99 a month or $100 a year. Contrast this to (using current conversion rates from INR to USD): * Netflix here starts at $2.8 for the cheapest (mobile only, single screen) plan and has its highest plan (4K, four screens) at $11.2 a month. Netflix is considered so expensive that a…

> seems like it's meant for some sections of first world inhabitants Perfect great! Imagine it’s intentional and a pretty effective way of doing business Now lets just critique why it isn’t a luxury brand

My general observation (anecdotal) is that people are more willing to pay a whole lot more for physical goods than for services (including apps, content and Internet connectivity).

Re: Jimmy Wales has quietly launched a Facebook rival

#114

Post by rocky1138 »

With things like GNU Social you can have your own social network effectively free and you 100% control it. How can this compete with that? The only real way is the network effect (all your friends are on it so you feel like you have no choice but to join because it's going to be very hard to get everyone to switch to your network). WT Social doesn't have that, so... ?

Re: Jimmy Wales has quietly launched a Facebook rival

#115

Post by cJ0th »

ddingus wrote: post #44

Why so much money? At scale, nowhere near $12.99 / month is needed.

i think it could actually work. a couple of messengers (slightly different product but still...) have tried offering good alternatives to whatsapp at a sensible price. It turns out, people aren't motivated to switch even if the price is low.

When you make it expensive, otoh, it feels exclusive. After some reputation is built you can somewhat lower the price and perhaps many people are thrilled that they can join a very exclusive club.

whether this works out remains to be seen. success in this area is hardly likely but I doubt pricing is the determining factor.

Re: Jimmy Wales has quietly launched a Facebook rival

#117

Post by woofcat »

rocky1138 wrote: post #114

With things like GNU Social you can have your own social network effectively free and you 100% control it. How can this compete with that? The only real way is the network effect (all your friends are on it so you feel like you have no choice but to join because it's going to be very hard to get everyone to switch to your network). WT Social doesn't have that, so... ?

The problem with all solutions to facebook (and this one) is getting a critical mass to join them. People use Facebook because _everyone_ is on facebook.

I don't need to think "Is my cousins boyfriend on Facebook?" you just know they are.

Without that assurance, you'll end up with two invites for a function, and that is more work for little gain.

Re: Jimmy Wales has quietly launched a Facebook rival

#119

Post by JohnFen »

windthrown wrote: post #100
rolltiide wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> seems like it's meant for some sections of first world inhabitants Perfect great! Imagine it’s intentional and a pretty effective way of doing business Now lets just critique why it isn’t a luxury brand

Expensive luxury prices are fine for certain products but can be detrimental to social and communication tools. I can easily afford this product myself but I don’t want to pay for a social network if a portion of my friends/contacts are priced out.

Yes, I can understand that.

But Facebook's model, for instance, also prices people out. I am entirely unwilling to use Facebook because I consider it far too expensive. True, I'm paying with data rather than cash, but it's still paying. From my point of view, $12.99/mo is actually cheaper (assuming that paying that means I'm not going to be datamined).

Re: Jimmy Wales has quietly launched a Facebook rival

#120

Post by jandrese »

jcomis wrote: post #33

I like the idea, but that price is going to keep out many, many people. I'd guess around $1/month would work, but even then, in the eyes of most you are competing with free.

100% agree. $12/month and you have to convince all of your friends to also shell out $12/month? Dead on arrival.
Post reply on HN