by Michelle Lentz
One thing I love about bub.blicio.us readers is that you talk to me. You’re not afraid to post comments or links. So I have a question for you – Would you pay for Twitter? Apparently the thought is being tossed around, although it’s worth mentioning it hasn’t come from the folks actually working at Twitter. It’s come from many of the power users.
Newmedia Jim had a thought-provoking post on this, all stirred up by Jason Calacanis. I posted a comment over on Jim’s blog, but then I started thinking a little more about this and I want to amend and elaborate.
My first instinct is no, I won’t pay for Twitter. After all, I don’t pay for Pownce, Jaiku, FriendFeed, or any of the other countless social networks I find myself a part of. Then I remember, I pay a small fee to Typepad every month to host my blogs and their images. I pay $25 to Flickr each year to upload as many photos as my heart desires. Why wouldn’t I pay for Twitter?
So my revised answer is sure, I’ll pay a yearly fee to Twitter if it goes that way. But I would see it as something similar to Flickr – $24.95/year for added benefits. I have no quibble with that. Make it easy to group tweet or send direct messages to multiple people, alphabetize my followers list, and more features. Possibly put a limit on how many messages per month a standard account can tweet. Twitter Pro and Twitter Standard would work, assuming the Twitter Pro account isn’t ungodly expensive.
As Jim points out in his blog, $60 is currently what it takes to fill up a gas tank. I can only imagine the gas prices in larger citiies – in Cincinnati we crossed the $4/gallon mark this weekend. I have better things to do with my money than pay Twitter. But I hold that if I can pay Flickr $25/year, I can pay it to Twitter as well.
Do I think this is coming? No, not yet, so I’m not overly concerned. But I found it an interesting question.
Contact me with new media, apps, news, and more at michelle[at]writetech[dot]net or via Twitter.