Whatsapp: ‘Why we don’t sell ads’

Whatsapp on why they don't sell apps

This is why Whatsapp charges instead of selling ads. A sound argument too. Fact is, when the service is as reliable as what Whatsapp offers, people are more than willing to pay for it. The following is taken from the Whatsapp blog (emphasis mine):

Brian and I spent a combined 20 years at Yahoo, working hard to keep the site working. And yes, working hard to sell ads, because that’s what Yahoo did. It gathered data and it served pages and it sold ads.

We watched Yahoo get eclipsed in size and reach by Google… a more efficient and more profitable ad seller. They knew what you were searching for, so they could gather your data more efficiently and sell better ads.

These days companies know literally everything about you, your friends, your interests, and they use it all to sell ads.

When we sat down to start our own thing together three years ago we wanted to make something that wasn’t just another ad clearinghouse. We wanted to spend our time building a service people wanted to use because it worked and saved them money and made their lives better in a small way. We knew that we could charge people directly if we could do all those things. We knew we could do what most people aim to do every day: avoid ads.

No one wakes up excited to see more advertising, no one goes to sleep thinking about the ads they’ll see tomorrow. We know people go to sleep excited about who they chatted with that day (and disappointed about who they didn’t). We want WhatsApp to be the product that keeps you awake… and that you reach for in the morning. No one jumps up from a nap and runs to see an advertisement.

Advertising isn’t just the disruption of aesthetics, the insults to your intelligence and the interruption of your train of thought. At every company that sells ads, a significant portion of their engineering team spends their day tuning data mining, writing better code to collect all your personal data, upgrading the servers that hold all the data and making sure it’s all being logged and collated and sliced and packaged and shipped out… And at the end of the day the result of it all is a slightly different advertising banner in your browser or on your mobile screen.

Remember, when advertising is involved you the user are the product.

At WhatsApp, our engineers spend all their time fixing bugs, adding new features and ironing out all the little intricacies in our task of bringing rich, affordable, reliable messaging to every phone in the world. That’s our product and that’s our passion. Your data isn’t even in the picture. We are simply not interested in any of it.

When people ask us why we charge for WhatsApp, we say “Have you considered the alternative?”

Advertisements

Facebook: Colonising the interwebs one ‘Like’ at a time

Facebook's like button colonising the internet one like at a time

Facebook’s “Like” button. Does not look like much does it?

This little feature is one of the catalysts that propelled Facebook to verb-like (as in ‘I’ll Facebook him’) prominence on the internet today. Not convinced? Hear me out.

Sometime in 2008, many users were lamenting that Facebook was a “walled garden”, that it did not allow interaction beyond its monochromatic blue boarders. Conventional wisdom in the technology industry was that, and it stands true yet, that walled garden type technology will eventually see their users leave and seek greener pastures.

Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s CEO and his team were well aware of the problems that walled garden technologies present, but they did not seek to tear down those walls. Oh no, that was way too much trouble. Instead in Febuary 2009, they simply expanded those walls and invited the rest of the Web to come in and play.

They introduced the “Like” feature.

That was an ingenious move, from there onward, users will be interacting with Facebook even when you are not at Facebook.com. To web developers, this was a win-win. For years and years, they have wrecked their brains thinking up ways to make their content more “social”, fully knowing that it was a sure way to create traffic (comments on blog posts and web forums literally operate on this principle). Suddenly, they could potentially have the entire Facebook population within their reach. 190-million

Now, we all know that Facebook was not the first to create plug-ins like these. Yahoo, Twitter and Digg have tried, with only budging success. What makes the idea tick was the staggering growth of Facebook. It currently has 500 million users, and that number is growing at a faster and faster rate. If we were to look at a graph plotting Facebook’s user population anuclear chain reactiongainst time, it would resemble that of a nuclear chain reaction before reaching critical mass (Fig. 33.3).

One of the founding principles of Facebook was to be useful, and in this respect, they have fulfilled it through and through. Not only have they enabled web developers to extend their reach, they have also allowed themselves to easily track user preferences, which is key to advertising. It is their ability to sift out such win-wins that will surely drive the company to further success.

At the point of writing, Google is still the undisputed king of the internet search and information profiling. Google, the one that everyone turns to in order to make sense of diarrhea of information that is the internet. Will Facebook overtake Google in that respect? It is not unlikely, but it would take a lot of effort on Facebook’s part, but when they do, it would be with astonishing, even horrifying personal accuracy.

What Facebook has succeeded in doing thus far is priming itself to be as ubiquitous and essential as Google, which in itself is no mean feat. The world’s biggest social network won’t be going away, and you, the Facebook user, are going to see to that, one “Like” at a time.

This post was originally posted on tptptp.wordpress.com