Comments on: Twitter Hasn’t Made a Dime but Twitterrific Is Making Bank http://www.centernetworks.com/twitter-monetization-strategy-twitterrific Web 2 and Social Media News and Reviews Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:50:56 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Christian http://www.centernetworks.com/twitter-monetization-strategy-twitterrific/comment-page-#comment-13931 Christian Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-13931 SMS advertising seems to become the first real mobile content monetization play outside of tiny WAP ads. There are not many players in this market yet (besides http://4Info.net). The problem I see here is that the audience ultimately isn't going to be very targeted and will have extremely high frequencies from few users - not what advertisers are looking for. But it's definitely an interesting field! SMS advertising seems to become the first real mobile content monetization play outside of tiny WAP ads. There are not many players in this market yet (besides http://4Info.net). The problem I see here is that the audience ultimately isn’t going to be very targeted and will have extremely high frequencies from few users – not what advertisers are looking for. But it’s definitely an interesting field!

]]> By: Noel http://www.centernetworks.com/twitter-monetization-strategy-twitterrific/comment-page-#comment-14373 Noel Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-14373 I'm sure the folks at Twitter think it's great than someone using their API is making money. They have a great thing and I think the smart people there are working on monetization right now. Re: $15 Subscription vs. Ads I've always loved this idea. For starters, giving users a choice puts control in their hands (where it should always be). Secondly, showing advertisers that there are people willing to pay to support the site doesn't mean that everyone else hates it, it paints an even better picture, saying that they have users willing to pay for a pure experience. It's always better to offer something else for the money, of course, not just "no ads", but giving your users control is always the best move. I’m sure the folks at Twitter think it’s great than someone using their API is making money. They have a great thing and I think the smart people there are working on monetization right now.

Re: $15 Subscription vs. Ads
I’ve always loved this idea. For starters, giving users a choice puts control in their hands (where it should always be).

Secondly, showing advertisers that there are people willing to pay to support the site doesn’t mean that everyone else hates it, it paints an even better picture, saying that they have users willing to pay for a pure experience. It’s always better to offer something else for the money, of course, not just “no ads”, but giving your users control is always the best move.

]]> By: till http://www.centernetworks.com/twitter-monetization-strategy-twitterrific/comment-page-#comment-15067 till Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-15067 I just wonder how twitter really could make money? I guess whatever the people using the API do - twitter could do it themselves. Clients with or without ads, website with or without ads, etc.. If you are doing the "with or without ad thing", in my opinion, you are shooting yourself in the leg. Because you try to embrace advertisers, on the other hand you offer away to keep them out? Where is the sense in that. And where is the business relationship any sane person would get into? You let people bail out for 15 bucks. I just wonder how twitter really could make money? I guess whatever the people using the API do – twitter could do it themselves. Clients with or without ads, website with or without ads, etc..

If you are doing the “with or without ad thing”, in my opinion, you are shooting yourself in the leg. Because you try to embrace advertisers, on the other hand you offer away to keep them out? Where is the sense in that.

And where is the business relationship any sane person would get into? You let people bail out for 15 bucks.

]]>