Comments on: Pay for a Service? How Radical

By: AGORACOm - George

AGORACOm - George — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 23:41:24 +0000

JJ, let’s sum it up like the Web 2.0 ecosystem like this:

“Free begets free”.

The Greek

By: JJ

JJ — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 18:00:30 +0000

Oh my god! I’ve been saying and commenting that very same idea over and over again at almost any related website. And at last! I want to emphasize especially this:

“What’s somewhat surprising is how little attention these sales-driven companies seem to receive, especially compared with the enthusiastic coverage of new start-ups using a free business model that are trying to grab a foothold in competitive markets.”

I said that VCs and related-websites(techcrunch,gigaom,yours truly..) must be focusing on web services that have a business plan. But instead, free websites, most of which don’t even put ads, get all the attention and getting millions. And of course, people look up to them and create services just like them, with the same hope. It’s just wrong.

By: Chris Monaghan

Chris Monaghan — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 20:04:35 +0000

People get excited about FREE! FREE is a fun fantasy. Read all about it! Paying for something is boring. You can do that at the grocery store. Maybe that’s why the freebies get so much attention. That being said, I’m trying to take boring to the bank with Time59.

By: Mark Kaufmann

Mark Kaufmann — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:58:24 +0000

I couldn’t agree more that a few fewer “free” sites will be a good thing. Having a paid model at LingQ ourselves, we often hear from potential members that “x is available for free here and y is free there and why should we pay for your site?”. The fact is that nothing is free. Somebody is paying, whether it be advertisers, venture capital, self-financing, or the taxpayer. Well, why not the user? At least with a user pay model our targets are quite reasonable and don’t hinge upon being the next Facebook.

By: Agoracom: Small Cap Investment

Agoracom: Small Cap Investment — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:38:10 +0000

[...] Mark Evans has jumped into the fray with a great post that also refers to this post. You can read my comment and why I believe this needs to become a [...]

By: Agoracom - George

Agoracom - George — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:04:47 +0000

Good morning, Mark. I want to thank you for the mention but – more importantly – I want to thank-you for bringing this issue to light.

While Silicon Valley sleeps by focusing on free, “cool” but doomed models, I see an incredible opportunity for Canadian developers to fill a massive void. Specifically, building valuable services/products that business and individuals are willing to pay for.

This is an enormous opportunity that first requires changing the mindset of Canadian developers. We’ll first need to stop star gazing south of the border and recognize that Silicon Valley is just as flawed as Wall Street.

Then, we can begin building great products, services and companies to dominate the Web 2.0 space for years to come.

If this sounds like a stretch, then consider the example of AGORACOM. I showed up to the inaugural Mesh with little Web 2.0 knowledge but plenty of vision.

Today, we dominate our space, have major content partnerships, launching in Europe and China this quarter and – gasp – making a few bucks while we’re at it.

If I can accomplish this from grass roots, I know what my smart Canadian counterparts can accomplish if we all begin moving in the same direction.

This is truly a massive, paradigm shifting opportunity for Canada’s Web 2.0 space. I hope to see it as a Mesh topic. I’ll gladly lead the charge.

Regards,
George

By: Geoff

Geoff — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 15:59:18 +0000

I just received an email from Jott letting us know that their free service will come to an end Feb 2. Why? Economics.

By: K Srikrishna

K Srikrishna — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 14:11:39 +0000

Most recently David Hansson of 37Signals and of course Joel Spolsky of FogCreek for many years have been propogating this mantra of having folks pay for software (particularly). Even in the world of Free Software, the RedHats and other distributors of Linux have charged folks for service and support. The very narrowcasting power of the web, rather than the old world ad supported broadcast model of TV, makes it feasible to build businesses that cater to niches. The folks in these niches are prepared to pay for real value. Good reminder for the new year!

By: Emad Ibrahim

Emad Ibrahim — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:04:01 +0000

You are absolutely right about cleaning the ecosystem. As a user, I love getting free stuff (facebook, gmail, etc…) but I am also willing to pay for things I need (basecamp, gotomeeting, crowdsound, etc…).

As a business owner the free-model sucks, I launched a http://www.yonkly.com a couple of months ago following a similar business model as basecamp, ning and so on. So far so good and yes, people will pay for services they need/like.

Yonkly let’s you create a twitter-like network for your niche market, group, team, business or whatever. It is completely white label and there are different price plans including a FREE plan.

By: Drew

Drew — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 12:44:41 +0000

In the 90’s we would have called a web site that allowed you to search through BBS and forums, and had advertisements, a “tool” now people call them “businesses”. The developer would have likely put up an address for sending donations and he or she would have gone to work at McDonald’s every morning.

The problem isn’t the ad supported business model its that we’ve so watered down the criteria for what we call a business.