Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Maretus
@maretus
X has just unveiled a massive update to their creator revenue share program. What do you think of this? Me? I’ll take Farcaster & Moxie over this all day long. https://x.com/x/status/1844066291625361812?s=46
76 replies
26 recasts
95 reactions
wake
@wake.eth
been sifting through the actual details of this. there are eligibility requirements, but i can't tell if they're middle of the road or excessive. >must have premium sub... >5m or more organic impressions / 90 days >and 500 or more premium followers x users are compelled to shill x subscriptions to their followers (a shitcoin, basically) on the premise that /up to/ 25% of that revenue will get shared with creators. that "up to" will do a lot of work on behalf of X; it's a global ceiling, but permits them a lot of control over individual payouts. as with their ads program, i assume high profile x users will promote the service hard (like a shitcoin) by showing off their earnings. so it's a ponzu, basically. x users will shill the subscription shitcoin and it isn't likely to produce qDAU (as farcaster has learned the hard way).
8 replies
4 recasts
30 reactions
J Finn 🎩
@jdotfinn
I need to dig into this full thing this weekend, but love the summary. Ultimately I am not the hugest fan of X right now, but I am happy to see at least an attempt at a “creator model” around Ad/Sub revenue splits. This is where I think the ‘tipping economy’ starts to blossom in 2025 and beyond, and why I think this place is cool. 🎩
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
wake
@wake.eth
yeah my intuitive sense of things is: if their ad revenue sharing program worked, users wouldn't be quiet about it. we would know and be researching their successful model. pivoting to p2p engagement payments suggests ad revenue sharing did /not/ work and this alternative method won't work either.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
