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

Telegram is booming but needs advertisers and $700M soon

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 333 posts

Re: Telegram is booming but needs advertisers and $700M soon

#2

Post by tw04 »

Do they really need advertisers? I'm not sure why all these companies think the whatsapp route isn't possible. People are happy to pay a small yearly subscription for apps if they're truly doing something useful. While I don't personally use telegram, I'd argue it falls into the category of "useful enough to pay for".

Re: Telegram is booming but needs advertisers and $700M soon

#4

Post by ObsoleteNerd »

tw04 wrote: post #2

Do they really need advertisers? I'm not sure why all these companies think the whatsapp route isn't possible. People are happy to pay a small yearly subscription for apps if they're truly doing something useful. While I don't personally use telegram, I'd argue it falls into the category of "useful enough to pay for".

I’ve used Telegram for years now, along with almost all my family and friends. I’m a huge fan of it, and it’s basically the only IM I use anymore (other than Signal with some tech friends).

If Telegram adds ads, rather than offer us a chance to just pay them, I’ll delete it instantly and push everyone I know to do the same.

I absolutely despise ads of any kind, and go to a decent amount of effort to block them from appearing on any device in my household. I’m totally happy to (and do) pay for useful services/content but if you don’t give me the choice of paying and just stick ads in it then it’ll disappear off my devices instantly.

Re: Telegram is booming but needs advertisers and $700M soon

#5

Post by cyrksoft »

tw04 wrote: post #2

Do they really need advertisers? I'm not sure why all these companies think the whatsapp route isn't possible. People are happy to pay a small yearly subscription for apps if they're truly doing something useful. While I don't personally use telegram, I'd argue it falls into the category of "useful enough to pay for".

I use Telegram a lot and would gladly pay for it. However, that route is not so easy. People in Latin American countries can't really afford to pay for apps. If they have to choose between a free WhatsApp (who everybody uses) and a fee (which can be high in real terms for poorer countries) they will choose WhatsApp.

They can also do what companies like Steam and Netflix do, charge a differentiated fee by country. Some games which cost 20 US dollars might cost less than 2 US dollars in countries like Argentina (Steam)

Re: Telegram is booming but needs advertisers and $700M soon

#6

Post by tubularhells »

tw04 wrote: post #2

Do they really need advertisers? I'm not sure why all these companies think the whatsapp route isn't possible. People are happy to pay a small yearly subscription for apps if they're truly doing something useful. While I don't personally use telegram, I'd argue it falls into the category of "useful enough to pay for".

Not everyone wants to sell user data. Their business is in private communication. WhatsApp reads through all your shit, whether you like it or not.

Re: Telegram is booming but needs advertisers and $700M soon

#7

Post by thatguyagain »

tw04 wrote: post #2

Do they really need advertisers? I'm not sure why all these companies think the whatsapp route isn't possible. People are happy to pay a small yearly subscription for apps if they're truly doing something useful. While I don't personally use telegram, I'd argue it falls into the category of "useful enough to pay for".

I guess one threat in that scenario is if some other competing service actually does succeed in their ads driven model, they can attract a lot more users, because it's free? But I have no idea about running a company this size tbh, just thinking out loud.

Re: Telegram is booming but needs advertisers and $700M soon

#9

Post by fabiospampinato »

tw04 wrote: post #2

Do they really need advertisers? I'm not sure why all these companies think the whatsapp route isn't possible. People are happy to pay a small yearly subscription for apps if they're truly doing something useful. While I don't personally use telegram, I'd argue it falls into the category of "useful enough to pay for".

"some" people are happy to do that. Some people just don't want to pay for software regardless of anything else.

I have friends who had switched to other messaging apps instead of paying WhatsApp 1€/year or whatever it was, and by any measure I live in a rich country and paying 1€/year for my friends would have been pretty much completely irrelevant economically.

Post reply on HN