Is Facebook to start charging subscriptions - the end of the 'free' web?
Rumours are sweeping the web, and indeed Facebook itself, that the social networking site is going to start charging at some point in the future.
Figures suggested include $14.99 per month, which would be quite a stiff fee.
It's already provoked the starting off of facebook groups protesting at the as yet unsubstantiated rumours. (this one has more than 800,000 members)
For me, the question really is that how long can people expect to be able to use quite sophisticated websites, which naturally have fairly high upkeep costs, for free.
Facebook has 300 million users worldwide. According to recent reports it is finally expected to go 'cash flow positive' sometime in 2010.
So a website which is a phenomenon with 300 million users currently loses money. And don't forget, going 'cash flow positive' doesn't mean making a profit - it just means revenues cover operating costs.
Will it ever be profitable? Well the internet is fairly transitory - today's phenomenon is tomorrow's Friends Renited. It's probably never going to do much better than 300 million users (how many active?) so it doesn't look like it's going to start printing money.
Twitter recently posted a $25 million profit - solely on the basis of payments from google and Microsoft, rather than attracting advertising or getting cash out of users, and it is unclear if this is a on-off pay out or not.
Like newspapers, companies who have been offering stuff for free are now considering whether charging for the content, be it user generated like Facebook, or by paid journalists is a viable business plan.
Don't forget that these companies don't exist for allowing people to communicate with each other for free. Or even to provide properly researched news reports for the common good.
Failing to turn a profit, and even making a loss will make any company take radical action - charging for membership or content are logical steps in these circumstances - and who could blame them?
Older/Newer
« Google ordered to pay up for breaching copyright | Festive fatties booted off dating site »
11 Comments
Profile
Ben Hurst
I think this is very unlikely! I think facebook will look into other options before resorting to getting the end users to pay, things like bigger advertising spaces will probably come in, in the near future.
I think facebook will also recognise the fact that if they start asking for money, the 300 million users will drop substantially, they don't want that to happen.
Do you pay to use Google? I suspect they have rather more users.
True enough Hardy - but google by it's sheer size and almost monopolistic dominance of search engines is very profitable - size makes it profitable, whereas size doesn't appear to be doing the same for Facebook.
You will have to excuse my ignorance, but it seems to me that if it is possible for size to make a website profitable then Facebook should be making sure it is so in their case rather than wringing a profit out of their website and reducing that size considerably.
Your article suggests that you think a fee would be understandable and feasible. On the contrary, the whole point of joining Facebook, from the user's point of view, is to be able to communicate with hundreds of people in one place. If many users refuse to pay a fee then there will be little lure for the remaining to continue paying when, because of the reduced size, the website has become near-obsolete.
Should Facebook introduce a fee, there will be several other websites perfectly willing to provide for free what they will not; Facebook are not indispensable just because they currently have so many users - as you so aptly put it, 'today's phenomenon is tomorrow's Friends Renited'.
If Facebook charge it will be the beginning of the end for them.
You will have to excuse my ignorance, but it seems to me that if it is possible for size to make a website profitable then Facebook should be making sure it is so in their case rather than wringing a profit out of their website and reducing that size considerably.
Your article suggests that you think a fee would be understandable and feasible. On the contrary, the whole point of joining Facebook, from the user's point of view, is to be able to communicate with hundreds of people in one place. If many users refuse to pay a fee then there will be little lure for the remaining to continue paying when, because of the reduced size, the website has become near-obsolete.
Should Facebook introduce a fee, there will be several other websites perfectly willing to provide for free what they will not; Facebook are not indispensable just because they currently have so many users - as you so aptly put it, 'today's phenomenon is tomorrow's Friends Renited'.
If Facebook charge it will be the beginning of the end for them.
Maybe they will, maybe they won't. If they do someone else will step in to fill the void. That's how Google, MySpace, Facebook et al got a start. It's what makes the web different to what has ever gone before. The world of information dissemination has changed forever. Pity the old thinking remains in so many places.
This is a stupid, rumor based off a speculative, pie in the sky "I wanna buy some stock so hurry up and charge" article written in Slate by Farhad Manjoo (http://www.slate.com/id/2203436/pagenum/all/)
I can't believe anyone is sill enough to believe it.
No wonder America is the stupidest nation.
bad really bad.....
If that is true, I'll would leave Facebook and go to friendster.com
The idea that facebook has to charge to keep it's highly sophisticated website up is just wrong. Facebook makes it's money through advertising. Consumers are savvy enough to know this and if FB starts charging there will be a new FREE social network come up right behind them.
i agree that people would leave the site and go looking for another free site, it happened with myspace-in the sense that something better came along so everyone left it, if facebook were even truly thinking of charging, everyone would leave and re-occupy another free networking site all over again.
Its so easy to change to another site they would lose so many of us it would prove a big mistake. A better site will be around the corner.