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

41–50 of 333 posts

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

#41

Post by GrinningFool »

davidweatherall wrote: post #14
ObsoleteNerd wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 a…

Are you happy with services that have ads, but give the option to remove them for a subscription fee?

Not the OP but I'm coming from what sounds like the same place.

In theory yes but does the ad SDK used by the app still gather data on me, even though the ads are turned off/app is paid for? Without clear indication that it will not, the answer for me is 'no'.

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

#43

Post by sfifs »

tubularhells wrote: post #6
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.

Nope. WhatsApp can only potentially read your group messages since 1:1 messages are end to end encrypted. You shouldn't spread FUD

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

#44

Post by fernandotakai »

davidweatherall wrote: post #14
ObsoleteNerd wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 a…

Are you happy with services that have ads, but give the option to remove them for a subscription fee?

i have zero problems with this kind of monetization. i mean, that's why i pay for youtube and spotify -- i wanna support the services/content creators in some way, but i abhor ads.

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

#45

Post by thatguy0900 »

cyrksoft wrote: post #5
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. Som…

How much money does whatsapp actually get from people in those countries? I was under the impression that ad revenue from third world users was very low. How much would it be to charge them the same amount they would get from ads?

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

#46

Post by tubularhells »

sfifs wrote: post #43
tubularhells wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Nope. WhatsApp can only potentially read your group messages since 1:1 messages are end to end encrypted. You shouldn't spread FUD

This was in the news some months ago, they have backdoors for 1:1s that they use to comply with government agency and police data requests. Do go look it up.

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

#47

Post by davidweatherall »

GrinningFool wrote: post #41
davidweatherall wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you happy with services that have ads, but give the option to remove them for a subscription fee?

Not the OP but I'm coming from what sounds like the same place. In theory yes but does the ad SDK used by the app still gather data on me, even though the ads are turned off/app is paid for? Without clear indication that it will not, the answer for me is 'no'.

Cool! Thanks for the reply - so you'd feel much more comfortable with a subscription to opt out of all tracking and ads?

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

#48

Post by WilTimSon »

ObsoleteNerd wrote: post #4
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 a…

You're in the minority and pretty much exercising your first-world privileges to dictate what you think the service should do. It's intended to work for everyone across the world, no matter how poor, and I'm 100% sure people from India or Brazil would leave it completely if they had to pay to use the app.

Having non-targeted ads and, potentially, premium features that you can pay for is an optimal middle ground for an app of this size.

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

#49

Post by bombcar »

davidweatherall wrote: post #14
ObsoleteNerd wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 a…

Are you happy with services that have ads, but give the option to remove them for a subscription fee?

I prefer to word it slightly differently - have a paid service that offers a free ad-supported version.

The danger, of course, is that once you separate it out like that you quickly realize that the advertisers want the paying customers, not the freeloaders and so ads encroach on the he payment plans, too.

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

#50

Post by captn3m0 »

synthmeat wrote: post #12
csmattryder wrote: post #10

Please just let me pay for it. I pay 12EUR/yr for email, it's ad-free and works. Happy to do the same arrangement for a IM service.

Telegram has incredible and large cryptocurrency scene. I honestly think this would fly, if they would accept cryptocurrency as payment as well.

They tried an ICO, but that went nowhere.
Post reply on HN