
Would you pay $1 a month for Facebook?  - peter123
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-18438_7-10222191-82.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20
======
mdasen
No.

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.

------
quoderat
I'd pay $10 a month if I never had to use Facebook -- if no one ever asked me,
"Why aren't you on Facebook?" etc. It has become such a social expectation.

But probably not many like me out there. Most people probably will pay.

------
brk
No.

Especially now that I've found some of the people I've lost contact with and
have their email addresses

------
ChrisXYZ
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.

------
coglethorpe
>Would you pay $1 a month for Facebook?

No.

------
jasongullickson
I would consider it if it meant no more ads and I could disable all third-
party applications (including notifications when my friends try to rope me
in).

------
catone
Probably. $12/year to have a nice address book for keeping in touch with old
high school/college buddies, and playing a couple of fun games (namely
Prolific and Lexulous) seems worth it.

Also, if enough people continued to use Facebook, it would be worth the
$1/month to have access to the marketing opportunities that exist there.

~~~
tptacek
That's my thought. I pay more than $12 a year on notebooks, and all I do is
doodle in those.

------
omouse
I'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.

------
mronge
Hell no.

------
bayareaguy
If only I could pay $1 a month to make Facebook articles go away...

------
jonknee
No.

------
mannicken
Like Classmates.com? I still have a couple of messages that I should pay to
view. I haven't paid for 4 years and will continue doing so.

------
herval
no way...

let me add a monetization option for facebook here: why not adding revenue
share with application providers? Block adsense, force their own ad engine,
get 30%...

------
benreesman
no but i'd pay ten times that much for twitter. with a little luck they'd
spend it whale hunting.

------
tptacek
Yep.

------
1010011010
No.

------
gojomo
Facebook 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.

~~~
tokenadult
Do I get a cut of the revenue when my friends pay up to see the other half of
my photo album?

~~~
gojomo
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.

~~~
gojomo
Or further -- once _either_ of you pay, you can each see all of each others'
photos.

Nonpaying people only see half the photos of other nonpayers, but all the
photos of other payers. This would be a little like the "at least one user has
to be paid for an introduction" policy I've seen on dating sites.

------
falsestprophet
I would, the very day they announced the fee, build a free Facebook clone.

~~~
jonknee
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.

~~~
eli
You make it up in volume, duh.

