People who want to pay needs to understand that:<p>A. You are the exception. I am willing to bet .1% of users would be a overestimation of Twitterers willing to pay.<p>B. Setting up premium accounts and a payment system would probably run fairly close to break even. Not mention the additional customer service that would be expected and the complications that arise from splitting the userbase.<p>C. You aren't the real money. Twitter wants Coca Cola's money, CBS's money, etc. They don't care about pocket change from Joe Blogger. They are selling a package of 200 million people straight up, not a package of 200 million minus the most engaged and loyal users.
As someone who runs a site that receives similar requests (I paid for reddit gold, why don't I get faster access), let me tell you, it just isn't that easy.<p>Their architecture, like ours, can't just be split into fastlane and slowlane.<p>So while I appreciate what the guy is asking for, it just isn't that easy.
Twitter can't let you pay them. That would immediately cap the market value of each user and Twitter's target valuation per eyeball is way more than you'd likely be willing to pay.
While this person would be willing to pay for twitter, giving a payable, better option, would make much of the user base feel like they're paying for something they should have and always have had for free. Blogging and microblogging have appeal in their universal availability, don't they? Either nobody would buy it, or everyone would and some twitter users not willing to pay will lose loyalty to Twitter inc for asking them to pay for the product which works. Creating pro accounts would be like handing out 600 sham-wows, and informing everyone that the sham-wows do not absorb properly, but they can pay for a working one. If the majority of the people liked it, why inform them that the product they are holding is sub par? And if one were to argue that this is a concern of the majority of users, then twitter would have to just fix the problem to hold onto such a huge percentage of their user base, not create fixed pro accounts and essentially ask people to leave if they're not willing to pay. Either way, loyalty and new accounts would drop, which would undoubtedly affect ad prices in the long term.
Also, why the hell would twitter spend time and money debugging and then apply the improvement to only a select few users? They found the problems, why not just increase the comfort and experience of their website for everyone and establish a larger and more loyal user base? That'd kick up their ad revenue far more than any alienating platinum account will. At this stage of the start up game, Twitter better focus on creating the most loyal and comfortable user base they can, and work on finding a stronger long term source of revenue. This would be a short term pay off for twitter, and they're definitely working to break out of fad status rather than make a quick buck. Twitter is the only product I've ever observed that most celebrities and news stations use regularly that I can't convince most of my friends to get into because "its stupid and pointless" (Besides exploitation of public sympathy toward third world countries maybe. MAYBE.) Until Twitter doesn't have a user base which loves them and general aggression from everyone else (probably within the next few years), they can only debug and look for sources of revenue which won't create discomfort.<p>(To the Y combinator people who read this as they evaluate my application:
Hey guys,
Love your work, I got pretty into HN. I'd just like to mention that this highly informed and apt internet user states that he gets all of his news from Twitter right now. Just sayin'.
Thanks,
Donny
P.s. I have a new twitter account, and its MrGreenbergMD. I listed a different account on my application.)
Vote with your cash: buy a 3rd party Twitter client and skip the ads altogether. Maybe Twitter will come back to their senses and provide an ad-free, paid Tweetie^W Twitter app again.
Bad idea for twitter. They can't get rich off a couple bucks a month for a tiny segment of their user base, I doubt they can even break even.<p>Worse, having a pro account would cause ad prices to plummet. Who's going to pay premium prices for ads when the people willing to spend money have opted out of seeing them?
I wouldn't mind to pay for a twitter pro account myself (although I'm on a tight budget momentarily). How would this option hurt the current free business plan? I think there is even a possibility that it would enhance the perceived value not only with current users but also for would-be users. Could it be that there is some kind of inferiority complex behind the lack of decisiveness by twitter management? It's not 2007 anymore, a lot of people "got it" till now. The problem isn't the monetization of the service which could drive people away, it is the potential incremental death of the culture which would. Twitter management just need to carefully observe successful services like github or flickr (pre & shortly post yahoo) which were magnets to mavens and spread from there. Examples for big mistakes in that regard recently were Sony (killing Linux support for PS3), Nintendo (generally too many "casual games" over the last couple of years, and now the 3DS region lock - first on a Nintendo handheld). I know those companies are highly profitable but I see their base crumbling already which always are the "power users". I know talk is cheap and things are not that easy but don't be stupid, think 2011 already.
I don't think that Twitter having any sort of paid service model would correct any of the beef that the author has got with them. I use Twitter on a pretty frequent basis just like the author claims, but have very few of the same arguements. The "Who to follow" section for me is always fairly accurate, suggesting individuals who are posting useful and cool information similar to what I already read. I've had very few UI problems with either the web client or the iPhone app. Kinda just sounds like the author either didn't really use it enough to find it useful, or just griping about simple problems that all social network sites will eventually face.
Economics of startups and ad industry is a lot like that of farmers and corn. Hard to find quality food without junk load of corn syrup in it, and farmers are always poor. Ads, like corn will keep winning unless tech crowd is able to think of equally innovative ways of monetizing their innovative ideas.
What is the actual issue?<p>What is the technical problem that Twitter are actually facing? Does it simply come down to something like processing power?