X (Twitter) to soon begin charging $1 annual subscription in order to tweet and interact.

Next move must be to charge users deleting their accounts $1. And Elon can sell your data to make more money.

  • Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    83
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sounds more like a way to ID everyone on the platform. And perhaps normalize this practice for other platforms going forward.

      • stormtrooper@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah this is a high possibility.

        People might think he’s just a bad businessman, but I think they’re overlooking the fact that he’s an evil businessman relentlessly pursuing his dreams of dictatorship based off of actual dictatorships… that is also very bad at business.

      • bstix@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, your identity is worth negative $1. You’re paying to give it away. He didn’t offer $1 to get it.

  • Ech@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m gonna call it. This is an (obvious) attempt to squeak in monetization for everyone on twitter that is as unobjectionable as possible, and once everyone’s locked in the price will increase, and tiers will be introduced, etc etc., and it’s going to work. Nobody still on twitter is gonna care about $1/year to keep access. They’ll lap it up and thank Musk for the opportunity to be fleeced.

    Musk could still fuck it up by being overly greedy and ramping up too much too fast like he tried to do last year (or this year? I’ve lost track), but I’d say this has reasonable odds of working out.

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      for everyone on twitter that is as unobjectionable as possible, and once everyone’s locked in the price will increase, and tiers will be introduced, etc etc., and it’s going to work.

      I’m not so sure about that. The internet is littered with companies that gave away their product for free hoping users would pay for premium features. When they didn’t and the companies then had to charge a minimum entry fee for everyone, people dropped the product. There’s a barrier to putting in your credit card. Lots of people just aren’t interested.

      • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        There are also a whole lot of governmental, health and official bodies where putting through an invoice is a real pain in the bum. It forces a decision whereas previously if had been a simple business as usual process

      • Ech@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re definitely right about that being the general result to these sorts of moves, but I don’t think it’ll apply as harshly to this situation. Like I said, anyone still on the site has already faced numerous insults and abuse at the hands of Musk. They want to be there despite all of that, or maybe even because of it. I do think a $1/month or something higher would be pretty likely to fail, but $1/year is such a low-level ask and will gently push the users there past the barrier to where the price can be raised higher later.

    • GenEcon@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Musk wants Twitter to become a ‘platform for everything’. Having a payment system in place everyone uses already is key for that.

      Not going to say that this is a good idea, but thats the rational.

    • bob_wiley@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The hardest part of getting people to pay for a site is that first sign up and getting the credit card. If $1 feels like a deal and gets them in the door, he can then add micro-transactions and all kinds of stuff, and all of that will feel more fluid, because they can charge the card on file. Imagine paying to give a tweet a super-like, or paying to promote your reply to a post so the person is more likely to see it. He doesn’t even have to raise the yearly fee, he can nickle and dime everyone to death once he has their card and makes it easy.

      If he wants to be extra shitty, he can hide all that stuff behind some kind of point system, so people don’t know how much they’re spending and don’t feel like it’s real money.

      • dannoffs@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        We can just organize on open platforms like mastodon instead!

        Yeah we’re fucked lol

        • gohixo9650@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          twitter is/was not doing that on purpose but twitter had been used for political organizing and quick news spreading during mass protests in multiple countries. There are cases that it was the main means of communication of the people protesting bypassing censorship or downplay of the local news agencies.

      • Ech@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        What’s stopping him from just pulling the plug if that’s his goal?

        • Hotzilla@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          He lost so much money, and he is badly in debt. His wealth is still on bloated Tesla stock, which he cannot sell without destroying the company value. Business genius.

    • gmtom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well he has millions of sycophants that would fucking kill someone of Elon asked them too.

      It’s the exact same gift Trump has been pulling off, except instead on constantly begging for donation, hes just “selling” features on twitter.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Unfortunately, if you’re a U.S. taxpayer, you’ve given him a lot of your cents whether you want to or not in the form of subsidies for Tesla and SpaceX.

      • foggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Some of my cents. I wouldn’t say a lot of my cents.

        I’m doing mediocre financially but it’s not that bad.

  • the_q@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’d be real cool if folks would just stop using Twitter. You can live without it, y’all.

    • StarManta@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      For once, the money is genuinely not the point, from any point of view.

      The stated purpose, and I think it will accomplish this, is that no one running a bot network will pay this for their bots, so spam reduction.

      The likely ultimate purpose is to have the user’s payment info saved to reduce friction for giving Twitter money later on.

      The problem though is that they’re adding this friction on to the beginning, so as a result I think the most prominent actual effect is going to be 80% of free users (real ones) are gonna kill it then and there.

      • orcrist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        What are you talking about? Will the spammers pay a dollar to reach an audience of 20,000 or 50,000 or a million people? Of course they will.

  • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Why?

    That’s such a bizarre amount of money it’s not enough to dissuade scammers and it’s not really expensive enough for anyone to care about, except in principle.

    He really is a massive twat isn’t he.

    • Ech@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      and it’s not really expensive enough for anyone to care about, except in principle.

      That’s why. Because once people spend some money, they’ll be less likely to object to paying more later.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not really opposed to spending money to access social media in general (although even before Musk took over, Twitter in particular could get lost) but if I pay money they have to promise to not advertise at me, or sell my data, otherwise what am I paying for?

  • misterwu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I bet it will go like this:

    1. First, it’s 1$ a year.
    2. If X survies this, they will eventually change it to 1$ a month
    3. Wait a year or so
    4. Increase to 6$ a month
    5. ???
    6. Profit

    Keep in mind that this prediction requires enough stupid people to actually stay on X and pay

  • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    X would like to collect a very large amount of payment information from a lot of users to then store in their incredibly mismanaged infrastructure.