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

21–30 of 1001 posts

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#21

Post by blitzar »

mrtksn wrote: post #14
blitzar wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does anybody have stats on how many people are O.K. paying for their core services Rounded to the nearest meaningful number - 0%

I don't know, I expect it to be at least %3 as this is the general conversion rate for "free" users AFAIK. There must be some some number that makes it viable to have free users and paid users. For games, the free users are usually those who provide the "content". People usually demonize freemium games but IMHO its much more benign than extracting huge sums by artificially making it worse and sell attention.

Most of those are tricked into it by manipulative UI or nearly impossible to cancel trials or forgotten monthly subscriptions.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#22

Post by add-sub-mul-div »

angry_octet wrote: post #13
jraby3 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WhatsApp has long promoted itself as a safe alternative to apps like Telegram and Google’s Android messaging. Users flocked to the app globally, finding it a cheap and secure alternative to texting, particularly people in unstable political climates and authoritarian countries, since its messages cannot be easily intercepted without access to personal devices.

This reply screams LLM. Not really responding to the parent comment, nauseatingly anodyne in content. Not wrong, but not right. Will HN be overwhelmed with LLM trash?

With all the LLM enthusiasts here why would HN not be at the forefront of it?

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#24

Post by irjustin »

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…

This is only true if they introduce them. i.e. FB doesn't have a paid service, but obviously Youtube does.

The problem is Whatsapp is a closed ecosystem so unlike email we can't just buy a provider.

And I do pay for youtube. The experience is well worth it and I'm thankful I can afford it (it's not a lot but many can't).

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#25

Post by AlecSchueler »

jahnu wrote: post #16
andrepd wrote: post #3

Would be nice if these kinds of articles would at least take a paragraph to plug some alternatives, such as Signal.

Signal have a few things that make it a hard sell. It's really hard to clean up media. You have to go into every single chat and from there go about deleting stuff. At least they finally added a "select all" option in there recently. So the size of it just grows and grows and grows until it's using all the space on your phone. Not a good fit for non-technical types. Secondly, no web view. There is the desktop app yes…

> So the size of it just grows and grows and grows until it's using all the space on your phone. Not a good fit for non-technical types.

To be fair I've met plenty of non-techie types whose phones were "full" of stuff from WhatsApp or photos that had already been backed up, because the idea they could clear their local storage would never cross their minds. I've seen people buy new phones instead of clearing their cache.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#26

Post by doix »

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 WhatsApp costing money, 1$ per year or per lifetime or something. I paid for it, I think it was a WinRar situation though, where deleting and reinstalling the app gave it to you for free or something.

I'm guessing most people didn't pay though, since they scraped the fee (even before FB bought them). I guess it was just too little money to be worth the effort.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#28

Post by rootnod3 »

I think that kind of business model will screw them. Line has a more sensible one. For example if a business wants to message all its followers, they can only do so twice a month unless they start paying. So customers get an ad-free experience and can only receive ad messages from companies or accounts they follow.

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#29

Post by nottorp »

I remember paying 0.99 for ... something ... before Whatsapp was acquired by Facebook.

Wouldn't mind doing it again.

Unfortunately now they're owned by a Silicon Valley company so I guess 0.99 is too little for them, they'll charge the price of a SV latte... how much is that? 59.99? 99.99?

Re: WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

#30

Post by charles_f »

Whatsapp used to be paying (and pretty cheap) before it was bought out, and I was happy to pay for it. I'd much rather have that than starting to get ads. They're going to be hidden in a feature no-one uses, they're not going to use private data, but given Facebook's invasive behavior, how true is it and how long will it last?
Post reply on HN