Twitter says it's looking at subscription options as ad revenue drops sharply

Re:Twitter says it's looking at subscription options as ad r... by dstaley on Thursday July 23, 2020 @02:43PM (#23930760)

> "We want to make sure any new line of revenue is complementary to our advertising business,"

I know the above probably means this is a longshot, but here's what I want from a subscription:

1. No promoted tweets 2. Permanently disable algorithmic timeline (what Twitter calls "Home")

That's it. I pay $12/month not to see ads on YouTube, and I'd easily pay that same amount for an ad+algorithm-free experience in the Twitter native app.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Twitter says it's looking at subscription options as ad r... by jjeaff on Thursday July 23, 2020 @07:26PM (#23933941)

I suspect that the people willing to pay $12 to avoid ads are also the most valuable targets for advertisers. I suspect in aggregate, they are actually worth much more than $12 month.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Twitter says it's looking at subscription options as ad r... by dstaley on Thursday July 23, 2020 @11:41PM (#23935468)

I suspect many of those who are ad-averse like me use third party clients and ad blockers, and have an inherent distrust of ads, so I doubt I'm worth much to an advertiser considering my engagement rate is zero.

[ Parent | on HN ]