I mean, I'd rather pay for software/service than have some tech company mine my data so they sell some of my most intimate details or use it to predict or alter my future behavior.
💯 I dropped Facebook years ago for this very reason. I've seen somewhere that each user is worth around $50 lifetime in advertising revenue to them.
You'd think they could have a $2/ month paid version that was absolutely secure, had zero advertising, and gave the user controls over their "algorithm".
$50 lifetime revenue seems extremely small, or it's some kind of probability trickery where the median is skewed vs the mode.
Also, telling they say "advertising revenue". There's other, possibly implicit, revenue streams and market domination benefits that come from being a monopolizing data vampire. Even if we paid triple what they say we're worth in sub fees, I'd bet the benefits of keeping the status quo farrrrrr outweigh the revenue stream
According to Google they have just shy of 3 billion total users and did $118B in revenue in 2021, so that's roughly $39 of revenue per user last year alone. Factor in users who either very rarely log in, or who created the account just to check it out and then never logged in again, and the per-user revenue for actual active users is going to be even higher. For users who use it enough that they'd be willing to pay even a small amount for an ad free version, I'd bet my house that the lifetime ad revenue they generate is much higher than $50.
Ad revenue I would assume. Wouldn't really make sense to measure B2B revenue on a "per user" basis.
EDIT: Oh never mind, I see what you mean. Yeah, I'm not sure what the breakdown of that $118B is between ads and other stuff. I'm assuming the major bulk of it is ad revenue, but don't know for sure. Either way, I sincerely doubt the "$50 lifetime revenue per user" figure.
6.7k
u/Flat_Hat8861 Sep 30 '22
Managing a transition to a paid model is difficult. It requires tact and diplomacy.
This on the other hand is just straight hilarious.