(no title)
hackersword | 2 years ago
Making a wild claim about how much 3rd party apps "cost them", is not the same as actually seeing revenue once those 3rd party apps are closed.
As most people have been saying, the majority of 3rd party app users are the more advanced technical savvy ones.
There may be SOME percentage of the 3rd party app users who transition, but if the 3rd party traffic is as trivially small as Reddit has claimed, not sure how that will overnight magically transform them into being profitable.
I've never seen an Ad on reddit with use of old.reddit.com , RES, and adblockers. I was a primary user of Apollo, and I certainly won't be using the reddit mobile app. I deleted the app off my phone once the writing is on the wall (rip the bandaid off now and detox vs in 9 days), my phone reported my usage is down 19% this week, so that is a plus.
Absent any business plan on how those actions will actually drive profit, everything they've done has had sole effect of alienating their power user, mods, etc. and I don't see how that helps profit.
weaksauce|2 years ago
he said 97% of users are on the reddit app. he also said there is a significant opportunity cost to having those 3% of users not on the app. so for both of those statements to be true that 3% of users must be very active and providing a lot of content and value.
philistine|2 years ago
A competent CEO would have found a way to keep them in the family.
pcthrowaway|2 years ago
Like, I can type 20 comments on my laptop in the time it would take to type one on my phone, and they'll be more well-thought out too
unknown|2 years ago
[deleted]
michaelt|2 years ago
Perhaps they mean a non-financial opportunity cost, like they could modify their API if they didn't have third parties depending on it, and they're missing out on the benefits such modifications might hypothetically provide.
Or perhaps "significant cost" means, say, $100k per year. Significant at a human scale, insignificant at the scale of a multi-billion-dollar company.
HDThoreaun|2 years ago
Which is why they're trying to force everyone onto their first party app. If you're not contributing to revenue they do not want you on the site.
They have much more data than we do which leads me to think they have reason to believe most third party app users will switch/the ones that won't arent worth having anyway.
tester457|2 years ago
mcmcmc|2 years ago
gbear605|2 years ago
The cost of the third party apps themselves was trivial, and if they just wanted to recoup those costs they could have proposed a much more reasonable cost per user for third party apps.
It’s about control, not about profit.
tensor|2 years ago
It's one of those typically short sighted "oh lets remove this thing costing us" without understanding the long term impact to value.
ryathal|2 years ago
KallDrexx|2 years ago
You don't over burden one single entity with large recurring payments (the app developers themselves), your power users provide revenue, and you can slowly work on your value proposition of "hey we have updated our app to not be as crappy, you can browse reddit for free if you switch back".
that_guy_iain|2 years ago
I think you assume that the only people using it are shutting down while obivously there are lots of profitable companies using the API who will obivously be fine with paying $0.24 per 1,000 API requests.
Then there is obivously OpenAI and other AI based companies that are really the main reason for the change.
Realistically, having Apollo, etc not there drives people to use the main app. Saying that people won't switch over seems naive. There will be some that won't be realistically the vast majority probably will. And those users then go back into monetization drives. Which will increase revenues.