I'd move on to the next free network to come along.
Companies can try and charge money, but as long as there's a line up of free sites willing to take their place, it's easier for most people to migrate to the next thing.
Would you pay $1 a month for Facebook?
11–20 of 29 posts
Re: Would you pay $1 a month for Facebook?
#12I would, the very day they announced the fee, build a free Facebook clone.
Re: Would you pay $1 a month for Facebook?
#13I would, the very day they announced the fee, build a free Facebook clone.
While there would obviously be a market for one, what would your business model be? A free Facebook has proven to be a great way to lose money.
Re: Would you pay $1 a month for Facebook?
#14Re: Would you pay $1 a month for Facebook?
#15Facebook could easily launch a freemium model by just slightly impairing use of some of the most killer features.
Viewing a friend's photos? Only half of each album is visible until you upgrade.
Viewing friends in common or friends-of-friends? Only half are visible until you upgrade.
Enjoying the news feed? Stories are embargoed from you for an hour or two until you upgrade. (You're included, but always late to the conversation.)
Etc., etc.
These would minimize the reasons to migrate elsewhere while making it really tempting to make an impulse yearly subscription. The biggest issue would be community backlash to having anything that was once free taken away, but I think that could be managed, too, via gradualism and education.
They could also offer other ways to 'buy out' the small fee, like agreeing to watch a short targeted promotional video and then giving your feedback.
Re: Would you pay $1 a month for Facebook?
#16No.
Why? Because even if I paid $1/mo, many other people wouldn't. As such, Facebook's value goes down - without their contact information, postings, photos, etc. Facebook has no value. So, even if one is willing to pay for Facebook, by charging money Facebook would eliminate the reason why one would pay for it - namely that almost everyone is on it and creating lots of content you want on it.
That's part of the reason that it's so hard to monetize a site like Facebook - the value is being created by the users, not by you. You're just a venue. Should you want to change them for their own content, they'll just move to another venue. It's somewhat like trying to charge teenagers for loitering in your store. Sure, they're using your place as a venue and it costs money, but some definitely won't pay and as some start leaving, the crowd will follow even if a part of the group would be willing to pay for the venue.
Re: Would you pay $1 a month for Facebook?
#17I'd pay if they provided a bit more value. All of the functionality can be found on other free and better alternatives.
GMail does messenging much better than Facebook and Friendfeed makes dealing with the stream of info much easier. Flickr lets you post better quality photos, etc.
Re: Would you pay $1 a month for Facebook?
#18Facebook could easily launch a freemium model by just slightly impairing use of some of the most killer features. Viewing a friend's photos? Only half of each album is visible until you upgrade. Viewing friends in common or friends-of-friends? Only half are visible until you upgrade. Enjoying the news feed? Stories are embargoed from you for an hour or two until you upgrade. (You're included, but always late to the c…
Do I get a cut of the revenue when my friends pay up to see the other half of my photo album?
Re: Would you pay $1 a month for Facebook?
#19Facebook could easily launch a freemium model by just slightly impairing use of some of the most killer features. Viewing a friend's photos? Only half of each album is visible until you upgrade. Viewing friends in common or friends-of-friends? Only half are visible until you upgrade. Enjoying the news feed? Stories are embargoed from you for an hour or two until you upgrade. (You're included, but always late to the c…
Do I get a cut of the revenue when my friends pay up to see the other half of my photo album?
That could work too!
There are profitable businesses charging for photo hosting, so if Facebook -- the largest photo hosting site -- needs revenue to cover expenses, it would be a logical thing to charge for.
Riffing further on your idea: you could get a discount if more of your friends are paid up, to emphasize the sharing-the-costs-among-all-who-benefit theme. If you're the only person in your clique who upgrades, you pay full price; if everyone does, everyone pays less. This could ignite viral peer pressure for paying up.
Re: Would you pay $1 a month for Facebook?
#20[deleted]