Content
@
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
There are 3 business models for apps. 1. Free with ads 2. Subscription 3. Transaction fee The common thread for all three models is the user—a person, business or AI—has money to spend. That’s obvious for 2 and 3 since the model involves spending money directly with the app. But for 1, if your user base doesn’t have money to spend, the ability to monetize via ads will be low.
25 replies
15 recasts
123 reactions
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Other notes Farcaster is still figuring out its business model. Experimenting with 2/3. Ads would be a client-level decision. Crypto today is really good for 3, bad UX for 2 but a bunch of smart wallet stuff can improve this, 1 is nascent (although a few examples like CoinMarketCap and Dexscreener). Subvariant of 1 “selling data” but less valuable than monetizing via ads. This is also increasingly limited because of regulatory (which ironically makes the at-scale web2 players more powerful).
2 replies
2 recasts
50 reactions
tomato
@tomatoxyz
Even though end-user/client basically has control of whether to show ads or not, is there not a middle ground where advertisers use parts of the protocol for a higher fee? And even if you went with an advertising model wouldn't you want it to be done via the protocol so that all clients/apps can use the same mechanisms and the value flows through the protocol instead of external ad networks and contracts etc?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
I have never seen a model that would work. Client control of UX is good thing imo, including whether or not to have ads
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
