Meta launches Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp subscriptions

Post by tgma » Mon, Jun 01, 2026, 6:10 AM UTC

abdullahkhalids wrote: post #223

tgma wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who spew I'd rather pay, I'd rather pay often majorly underestimate how expensive Google and Facebook would have to be in the western world to offset the ad revenue per person. The irony is this is especially true for you if money is no object to you, as you'd be disproportionately valuable to the ad machine. It's not going to be ten bucks folks.

Why would you include the money required to pay shareholders, pay the humongous parts of the company doing ad tech, the lobbying money, the fine money, etc. What is the cost of running a social media site? I have previously calculated that Mastodon costs including development are on the order of 1 EUR/person/year [1]. Even if you 10x it, it's nothing. Facebook does nothing more technically complicated than the forums…

Post by bonoboTP » Mon, Jun 01, 2026, 6:13 AM UTC

joquarky wrote: post #253

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Meta isn't going to stop harvesting all your information just because you pay for a subscription, they'll harvest [and sell] your data AND take your money." (Meta sells access not data) Google has been doing this for a while with YouTube The data collection and surveillance will of course be used to support online advertising services. The ads can be delivered outside YouTube by other Alphabet business units or part…

What are they even doing with all of this data collection, especially considering that ads still are terrible at pertaining to my interests?

Post by ivell » Mon, Jun 01, 2026, 6:24 AM UTC

bigmadshoe wrote: post #182

tgma wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who spew I'd rather pay, I'd rather pay often majorly underestimate how expensive Google and Facebook would have to be in the western world to offset the ad revenue per person. The irony is this is especially true for you if money is no object to you, as you'd be disproportionately valuable to the ad machine. It's not going to be ten bucks folks.

You can actually look this information up! For example, Instagram makes approx $2-50 ad revenue per user per year, depending on the region. Apparently it’s highest in North America. So Of course this would get pretty expensive for all the services we use. But I personally would happily throw $100-$250 per year at my most used apps to stop being advertised to.

Post by chias » Mon, Jun 01, 2026, 6:34 AM UTC

qqtt wrote: post #98

I'm going to go against the grain here and say this is probably a positive thing for Meta products, and honestly every other "free" service to provide these kinds of revenue avenues. How many times do we hear things like "if the product is free, you are the product" - well, the consequence of that is development resources tend to be pulled into directions that benefit advertisers. By having material subscription reve…

Post by Freak_NL » Mon, Jun 01, 2026, 6:36 AM UTC

rtpg wrote: post #249

adjejmxbdjdn wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By having material subscription revenue coming in for things outside the advertising space, the product managers can justify investing in features that otherwise would be passed up due to lack of revenue potential from advertising. You’re a Meta decision maker presented with 3 options. Which one do you pick? (remember, you’re not you…you’re a Meta decision maker trying to justify a trillion dollar valuation). - Pos…

to put a finer point on this: I pay for certain newspapers (well, digital subscriptions). Still plenty of ads in the articles!