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

WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 1001 posts

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#421

Post by account-5 »

parpfish wrote: post #356
leokennis wrote: post #7

At least in The Netherlands, WhatsApp could show a 60 second unskippable modal ad video on every launch, and still get away with it due to network effects. If you’re not on WhatsApp, no updates or news from your kids school, your sports team, your family, your car dealership etc. for you.

Here’s an advertising model I’ve thought about but never seen: The app itself is 100% ad free and runs on credits. You get credits through se other portal by logging in to watch ads whenever it’s convenient for you. Good app experience for the user, and potentially better experiences for the advertisers because they get the target audience when they are most open to ads (and not annoyed by them).

Pretty sure this has been done before but it didn't take off. Personally the hassle of doing this would lead to me just not using the app.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#422

Post by p0w3n3d »

crossroadsguy wrote: post #374

The frogs have been boiled enough by now gradually and very efficiently. They have been primed well. (In another news Signal still has focus on crytpo. Is this Firefox+Pocket level of stickiness and “we are right!”?).

in a few months:

    30m ago: Honey, buy me new Tampax Eraser Pro Black Night
           1m ago: There are only Day version, should I buy it?
     0m ago: What? What are you buying?
   . 0m ago: I didn't write this...

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#423

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

detaro wrote: post #94
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These numbers are actually kinda interesting, in that they're based on user location, not advertiser. So basically all global companies target the US first because it's a big market with consistent regulations and mostly one language (compare to the EU where you'd need English/German/French/Spanish/Polish and still would miss a lot). So, those numbers reflect a capital inflow to the US market rather than (as many peo…

> So, those numbers reflect a capital inflow to the US market rather than (as many people think) absurdly high conversion US users. But the capital inflow is also because there is a lot of consumer spending in the US to convert.

Sort of. It's more because of how ML models work. If you have an audience of 100mn then it's much easier to get enough conversions to optimize the models. It's much harder to do it with an audience of 3mn.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#424

Post by ornornor »

cocoto wrote: post #411
crossroadsguy wrote: post #374

The frogs have been boiled enough by now gradually and very efficiently. They have been primed well. (In another news Signal still has focus on crytpo. Is this Firefox+Pocket level of stickiness and “we are right!”?).

Criticizing Signal for its crypto payment system is ridiculous. The option is totally optional and completely buried as it is literally the last option when messaging. It’s better to criticize the rule against third-party clients.

I use signal every day and had no idea about their crypto

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#425

Post by nobody9999 »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #409
rhines wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of university students around me who will order a $8 boba tea and be disappointed that the boba is cooked poorly or the milk ratio isn't good, and then do it again a couple days later. But the difference is that food elicits cravings - you buy it because you imagine how good it'll be if it's done right this time and your body pressures you to buy it. Apps don't do that.

> Plenty of university students around me who will order a $8 boba tea Is this "University of Monaco" (I jest) or UCLA or USC or Harvard or what? What kind of normie uni student is buying 8 USD bubble teas? Ridiculous.

>What kind of normie uni student is buying 8 USD bubble teas? Ridiculous.

I can't speak to anywhere else, but these[0][1] are near Columbia University and $8 is pretty normal there, AFAICT. Presumably YMMV depending on where you are.

[0] https://order.gongchausa.com/

[1] https://www.trycaviar.com/store/tea-magic-new-york-841338/11...

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#426

Post by d3vmax »

Alice Newton-Rex, head of product at WhatsApp: “Alongside of private messaging, people were saying they wanted to hear more about topics, teams and organizations across WhatsApp.”

- I am pretty sure NO ONE asked to hear about more topics and organizations across whatsapp.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#427

Post by b0a04gl »

everyone saw this coming the day facebook bought it, but the real issue isn't ads in status . it's that the platform is now locked into meta's attention monetization engine. the founders explicitly said no ads. now not only ads, but paid channels, algorithmic exposure, and user segmentation creeping in. most people won't switch because of network effects, so meta can keep tightening the screws. this isn't about revenue, it's about control. they’re reshaping a private messaging tool into a broadcast platform with tracking hooks. and most users won’t even notice until it’s too embedded to undo

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#428

Post by signal11 »

leokennis wrote: post #7

At least in The Netherlands, WhatsApp could show a 60 second unskippable modal ad video on every launch, and still get away with it due to network effects. If you’re not on WhatsApp, no updates or news from your kids school, your sports team, your family, your car dealership etc. for you.

Apps are popular until they aren’t. Yahoo Messenger, MSN Messenger and Skype were all popular once.

Ads are one thing, but now WhatsApp is letting businesses message you in Europe, only with opt out. This is pretty frustrating. I suspect some users will seek alternatives.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#429

Post by ezst »

lurkshark wrote: post #393
mrtksn wrote: post #8

Does anybody have stats on how many people are O.K. paying for their core services, i.e. how many people pay for paid personal e-mail services? I just don't want to believe that our services have to be paid for through proxy by giving huge cut to 3rd parties. The quality goes down both as UX and as core content, our attention span is destroyed, our privacy is violated and our political power is being stolen as conten…

I have a pet theory that the world would be slightly better place if the United States Postal Service had launched a convenient and free (taxpayer-funded) email service before Google: 1. I think folks would be naturally more skeptical of the government than they are of big tech, ideally leading to E2EE for email that's usable by the masses. 2. Phishing and scams could have a dedicated law enforcement arm (Postal Insp…

> 1. I think folks would be naturally more skeptical of the government than they are of big tech, ideally leading to E2EE for email that's usable by the masses.

That is so weird to me. "Institutions that exist for the sole purpose of serving the people might end up having some power, so let's instead give it all to the literal oligarchs."

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#430

Post by obblekk »

Xenoamorphous wrote: post #131
mrtksn wrote: post #8

Does anybody have stats on how many people are O.K. paying for their core services, i.e. how many people pay for paid personal e-mail services? I just don't want to believe that our services have to be paid for through proxy by giving huge cut to 3rd parties. The quality goes down both as UX and as core content, our attention span is destroyed, our privacy is violated and our political power is being stolen as conten…

I remember when Whatsapp became a paid app, I can’t remember the details as I believe they varied by platform (iOS vs Android) but it was either €0.79 or €0.99, I’m not sure if one off or yearly payment, but it doesn’t matter. I, as the “computer guy”, had friends and family asking how to pirate it. This is coming from SMS costing €0.25 per message (text only!) and also coming from people who would gladly pay €3 for…

A lot of normal consumers pay $20 a month for ChatGPT. I think most software gets bid down in price bc the marginal costs are zero. Where it’s not (llm token generation) prices don’t plummet and consumers build a different expectation.
Post reply on HN