Chris Anderson has added his voice to the many discussions of how the internet economy which is all about the free is facing cash shortages and reality checks as the economy tanks. He is optimistic that free will survive, yet not by itself. Just as Bernie Madoff’s run came to end, just as the lousy mortgages finally ran out of buyers, I too think the “everything must be free” mindset is ready for an upgrade. It’s not an all or nothing proposition – though I do think it is useful for those of who do appreciate value in the marketplace to speak up.
What about the oldest trick in the book: actually charging people for your goods and services? This is where the real innovation will flourish in a down economy. It’s now time for entrepreneurs to innovate, not just with new products, but new business models.
At least our darling software developers are creating things of wonder and efficiency and playfulness, and not robbing us in our sleep. But they too will have bills to pay as we consumers greedily consume all that we can byte while dreamy-eyed investors who have amnesia from the last bubble bursting still pony up the cash to run server farms.
Obama is asking each of us to step forward and take responsibility for how we affect change in our hearts and minds, our communities, our nation. It seems to me we also have the opportunity to mature in our understanding of energy transactions. To want to actually give back to a developer who has created something of value. To stop feeling one-down because we paid for something even if a poorer quality version is available at no charge.
Increasingly, I see this happening. (But then again I am an optimist so I seek out signals that support ideas I believe in.) As of today, about 43% of the respondents to Guy Kawasaki’s survey question, “What Would You Pay to Use Twitter?” would be willing to pay $5-$20 a month. You can folow the ongoing discussion about this topic on twitter directly, where many actually are willing to pay for this service.
Personally, I am flabbergasted that so many people would refuse to pay for Twitter, and so many services. I just don’t get it. I can see free trial periods. I can see free accounts with limits on followers/friends or # of tweets per month. I can see pro-rated accounts. I can see free accounts for non-profits. But all free all the time? I just cannot make sense of that yet.
I am blogging about this to put forth my wish that we as a consumerist collective continue to dismantle the chains of the old top-down commerce systems. However I don’t want us to end there – with a big pile of rubble that you can pick through for free, though sure there is treasure in that trash.
I really want to see innovative ways of sharing all the forms of value – attention, time, money, love – becoming more balanced and more granular in their transactions. I don’t see a whole lot of buzz and excitement around creating new business models the way there is around creating new iPhone apps. So this is one topic I am meditating on this year. Because as Thomas Friedman says about the economic crisis, “The fact that there is no single pill doesn’t mean there’s nothing to be done.”
I think it will take a combination of:
- Software tools (we are still waiting for more ubiquitous micropayment tools like Apple has built for the iTunes Music Store)
- Mind-shift in buyers (“No, paying for something does not mean you are always getting screwed.”)
- New business structures (“Where/What is the true value of what I am offering and how much is it worth?”) together with the next generation of business.
We have gone from buy-sell to buy-sell-share-steal. How much are you willing to change your buying-selling-sharing-stealing habits to create a broader base of sustainable wealth for companies and the individuals who both create them and use their products?
I am very willing, just not anywhere near as clear just yet as to how. So I leave with one of my current favorite Einstein quotes:
No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.
You can follow and connect with Roxanne on 
You can follow and connect with Shane on 
{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }
Well, while it may be true that people are saying they’re willing to pay for Twitter, the reality is it will lose it’s appeal when people will actually have to put up the money to use it.
Part of your model you allude to above, needs to include, getting fair market value. Charging for Twitter will make it like other sites that offer similar ad services, and will no longer keep it the unique thing it is….
Maybe another part of your model has to be, spend less. There comes a point where price points are too high, no matter what the product or service is. That’s when I find out that I can do without. Don’t let this happen with Twitter….
More from author
I always ask myself: Is it a “Want” or a “Need”?
I don’t spend a nickel online for anything I don’t “Need”
IMO – Nobody “Needs” Twitter.
Roxanne,
It’s so good to hear your voice of economic reason!
Fact: This nation was built and made great on the foundation of capitalism and free market enterprise implemented with integrity.
Fact: Charity is noble and worthy. Yet, abuse of charitable concepts steals food from the mouths of those with the innovation to make our country strong.
Fact: A sad thing happens if no one sells anything… NOTHING!
Let’s motivate the innovative to lead us out of this depressing recession! Let those with skills be paid for the value they provide.
I go so far as to say – STOP letting people steal from you! You can give a “freebie.” But, when it comes to items of value, do not “roll over” when someone tries to run you over. Earn your place. Earn your value. Be compensated.
As for Twitter? I am a Twitaholic – so yes, I’ll pay for it.
I’m also a business woman. I have created dynamic connections with brilliant minds on Twitter whom I have referred to others and some I’ve hired myself. I’ve also gained business on Twitter. So YES, I’ll pay for it!
Most importantly, I have developed amazing new friendships with the kindest, brightest, funniest, and most good hearted people on Twitter. Yes, I’ll pay for it! Three times over!
Keep ROCKIN’ Roxanne!
Mahalo for all you do for Hawaii and the netmosphere!
Arleen Anderson
Tweet Me: http://www.AlohaArleen.com
http://www.AlohaArleen.com
More from author
I would have to agree with Matches Malone on how twitter would lose its appeal if people had to pay for it, but i hope twitter stays how it is :)
and for software development I have seen that open source software is getting immensely better than it was 2 or even just a year ago so that also makes it harder for software developers to actually make something that is actually worth selling also some companies also over price software 100X more than the software was ever worth and that doesn’t help all to much and companies can give incentives to customers for having a legal licensed software from them (whatever it may be ) would cut down alot im sure
As a relatively new, but dedicated Twitter user, I do understand the desire to keep Twitter pure. However, where will the money to run the servers and the help staff, and the software development come from, long term? Really… Twitter has to evolve or it won’t survive.
More from author
I think eNoteFile notetaking and filing software has fair subscription values.
The offline version is no charge – but you pay for synchronisation and to share your notes with other users
@Matches Malone, @SpyGuy09, @Mandy Vavrinak – I am so curious about what it is that seems to “spoil” something once we pay money for it. I’ve thought it was partially a long legacy of being tricked into buying things we wanted that were not priced “fairly” (a subjective determination) or because of the notion that friends give and take without commerce being involved. But really there is something in the energy that changes for so many people. This is exactly the tipping point of consciousness that I am exploring here.
@Dave – want vs need is one of my favorite questions, though I am really strict with what qualifies as a need. There are many wants I have that I am thrilled to pay for, precisely because I want it so much! I agree that Twitter does not fall into the need category.
@Bear That sort of model makes sense to me – the more features a user wants, the more “value” on the table and the reasonableness of licensing costs.
My additional comments are going long so I am going to make a blog post Part 2.
More from author
I don’t personally think that paying for Twitter would make it somehow less pure. I PERSONALLY wouldn’t pay for Twitter, though. If they went to a fee-based system, I’d sigh and give it up. Same thing with Facebook. I pay for my blog. I pay a yearly fee for one forum I frequent, and I donate regularly to another. I get a lot of value from these two forums, and it’s worth it to me.
I also donate to podcasters that I like. I can do that when I have spare $$, but if I had to pay a repeating fee to get them, I’d sigh (again) and say goodbye to them. I just don’t have the money to spend on things like that, alas.
More from author
At some point, it becomes better to do profitable things for a smaller audience than not profit from a bigger audience.
The deployment of open source as the preferred platform for the internet has actually bred a mindset amongst site owners who want to profit from their sites, but want to get their services for free.
That is just unsustainable. Everyone has bills to pay.
More from author