Comments on: A Missed Opportunity – Britney On Twitter

By: The Far Edge » Blog Archive » Paid Twitter Streams Are Here: Super Chirp

Tue, 09 Jun 2009 04:17:13 +0000

[...] right into. In fact, 83 Degrees CEO Narendra Rocherolle wrote a guest post here last year called A Missed Opportunity – Britney On Twitter where he talks about the idea. Twitter is mobile and it’s real time, two huge advantages over [...]

By: Kent

Kent — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 05:22:41 +0000

This is a no brainer, no fans will pay to follow celebs on twitter. Not even teenagers. The idea of twitter and social media is a closer connection with people you may not otherwise have been able to connect with. Paying to know what a celeb is doing kills that connection. Only people that will pay to follow a celeb are people that hope to make money off that celeb.

There are lots of other ways in social media for celebs to connect with their fans why would they want to enrich someone else doing it.

A level playing field between celebs, CEOs and everyone is what makes social media special, any site that kills it will be left in the behind.

By: Paid Twitter Streams « shankarsoma; Nothing is faster

Paid Twitter Streams « shankarsoma; Nothing is faster — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 04:38:05 +0000

By: Paid Twitter Streams Are Here: Super Chirp

Paid Twitter Streams Are Here: Super Chirp — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 03:32:40 +0000

By: Justin Berry

Justin Berry — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 18:53:06 +0000

I figured that it would only be a matter of time before something like this would happen with twitter.

By: Melissa

Melissa — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 18:46:34 +0000

I totally disagree here. COULD Twitter take advantage of Britney and other celeb-types and make some cash here, yes. Would the everyday Twitter user continue to use the service, heck no. If you actually use Twitter, you’d notice a diverse group of social media savvy people. Who in the heck would pay to follow Britney Spears, just to see her posts things like “drinking a Pespi?”

The only way this could possibly work, would be if the Britney (or insert other celeb here) Fan Club website had an Twitter API that had feeds only on her page. Maybe, then maybe, some 12-year-old fan would beg for daddy’s credit card to pay to follow Britney’s publicit’s assistant’s update every few hours.

By: John Flynn

John Flynn — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 13:26:27 +0000

Sorry I think charging people to follow people on Twitter would kill it.
As other posters have pointed out the social networking world is huge and there are many outlets for people to us.

Putting a price on Twitter would cause it to crash. It had a 500% increase last year. Why mess around with that?

By: Engago Team

Engago Team — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 12:57:32 +0000

The inverse model should apply:
Let the Britney’s pay for using Twitter.
They are the advertisers.
They can reach a mass audience through Twitter.

Thus businesses on Twitter should pay for spamming, getting attention and getting followers.
Twitter is 140 character advertising for businesses.

By: Tim

Tim — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 12:04:18 +0000

Notice that neither Fred WIlson nor the twitter execs are paying any attention to you or any of the other armchair CEOs about how to move the business forward? There is some “finkle kid” on SAI comments that posts how twitter can make money all the time. What is your point? You should lead the company?

Just start your own business that re-invents a communication medium. It’ll make you more money.

By: Is this mo fo smokin crack? | The Andrew Hillman Blog

Is this mo fo smokin crack? | The Andrew Hillman Blog — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 03:57:44 +0000

[...] successful ding dong thinks people would pay to follow twitters elite celebrities. Is he kinding me or am I not [...]

By: Phil Wolff

Phil Wolff — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 03:27:53 +0000

When there is asymmetric demand for updates on a relationship, or cluster of relationships (subscribe to feeds of your baseball or futbol team), you make opportunities to extract value from the consumer ($1/month for Britney, $1/week for your local congressional campaign, $1/day for the nurse that monitors your insulin levels).

There’s also a flip side to the business model. A consumer paying for services that help you manage the 5000 feeds you consume. Relevance scores, alternate delivery services, alerting, social relevance (your friend Bob may be interested in this tweet) could help you survive the spew.

By: Jon Kepler

Jon Kepler — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 01:25:40 +0000

Far from it. Fortunately, you will most likely walk away without experiencing any withdrawal.

By: Mo Kakwan

Mo Kakwan — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 00:43:36 +0000

The accessibility and persistance and value of data (tweets) on twitter drops off so quickly that it’d be difficult for a new user to start a conversation or connection. It was difficult for me to ramp up on that service. I disagree that it’s a disruptive service. It doesn’t matter if I use the service or if I don’t. I can walk away without any withdrawl unlike services like facebook or youtube.

By: larry

larry — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 00:30:27 +0000

dude who wrote this better not quit his day job. and i sure hope this wasn’t his day job.

By: larry

larry — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 00:29:33 +0000

THIS.

By: Arfan

Arfan — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 21:30:08 +0000

So what is this Twitter thing I hear soo much about it… I made an account I still don’t get it. Is this another facebook or something?

By: tc-pathetic

tc-pathetic — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 19:39:30 +0000

who is paying whom for publishing this garbage?

Twitter? TechCrunch? Narendra?

My 5 year-old could give better analysis of the internet scene.

Taking this blog out of my reader, you suck

By: Dave

Dave — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 19:30:56 +0000

As an avid Twitter user I have to say that segmenting the service is not a great idea, *but* using it as a lead generator for more “premium” content is a good idea (i.e. she offers private “chat” sessions on her blog or something of that sort).

Tough to see how Twitter wins in that scenario, but if they go down the road they suggest they will destroy what is a simple, clean and easy-to-use service.

By: ZiZi

ZiZi — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 19:10:59 +0000

This is not a bad idea at all, like some of you already stated some posters are fixated on Britney/pepsi scenario.. imagine Jim Cramer starts a premium account and only charges $2.99 to follow a month.. imagine he gets between 100 to 500 thousand followers (He could easily get by the way) thats $299,000.00 to 1.5 million dollars a month.

many people can use this.. celebrities would IMO be the least profit generators.

By: silicon valley dropout

silicon valley dropout — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 19:05:28 +0000

yeah many folks would be suckers to pay to follow someone. twiiter implement this feature and you may have a revenue model

By: Osama Bin Laden Joins Britney Spears On Twitter. We Found His Profile : tinyComb

Osama Bin Laden Joins Britney Spears On Twitter. We Found His Profile : tinyComb — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 19:02:31 +0000

[...] TechCrunch, VentureBeat, Silicon Alley Insider, TechCrunchIT, Twitter Technology Blog, Podcasting News and [...]

By: Tom @ Badger Hair Shaving Brush

Tom @ Badger Hair Shaving Brush — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 18:48:49 +0000

I do believe that people would pay to follow celebrities around on twitter, absolutely. As Narendra says, it’s real time and you take it with you through your so-called life…
But I also believe that Britney and every other celebrity out there would outsource the job!

By: reader123

reader123 — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 18:48:11 +0000

I agree. So many posters here don’t see the big picture. They are fixated on the Britney/Pepsi example and seem to easily get angry about it.

By: Narendra

Narendra — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 18:44:22 +0000

This is a remedial clarification for people fixating on Britney or this would somehow kill Twitter’s growth.

Let publishers have the *option* to choose to build a business.

Users will always have the choice about who they follow. That is the beauty of Twitter.

Most people wouldn’t buy Koi Pond for the Apple iPhone, but a ton of people do. By letting developers charge for apps, Apple has generated a ton of usage. Would it be more if all apps were free? I don’t think so. Would the quality of apps be as high? No.

By: jason@tinyCrunch

jason@tinyCrunch — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 18:43:15 +0000

Narendra,

Subscriptions will not work on Twitter, plain and simple. Unless it is Britney herself updating what she is doing and where she is exactly for paparazzi to follow, it’s a pipedream. Here is what I wrote in response to Dave Winer’s comparison of Twitter to Netscape:

“Personally, I think that Twitter will keep the stronghold in the personal micro-blog space. I forsee them launching ‘groups’, an embed API for blogs/websites to use, and real time updating text ads with words typed. These developments can help bring advertisers and will please users looking for a place to belong inside Twitter. As for enterprise, Cisco or Oracle will take the micro-updates space to a new level. Twitter and Yammer will never be able to successfully compete in that arena on their own”