YouTube disallowing adblockers, Reddit charging for API usage, Twitter blocking non-registered users. These events happen almost at the same time. Is this one of the effects of the tech bubble burst?

  • zos_kia@lemmy.fmhy.ml
    482·
    1 year ago

    No. I don’t mean to be rude but most of that message is wrong.

    VC Money is very much not drying up. 2023 has seen record rounds in most markets. What is drying up is “VC Money for early stage startups with no revenue, no traction, and barely a functional idea”, but even that is not new it has been going on since at least 2018. Remember that guy who raised 1.5M$ with an app that just let you say “Yo” to your contacts ? That was 10 years ago. Those times are dead and buried.

    Then the link between VC markets health and interest rates is… contentious to say the least. VCs don’t borrow money - they raise funds from family offices and individual investors, every 2 or 3 years. So every change to the financial landscape will have a progressive effect over 3 years, not a brutal one after a few months. Also you have to bear in mind that the people who bankroll VCs are looking for performance of at least 2X over 10 years. Interests would have to go up to 7% to even be in competition with VC investment. Of course there’s a psychological aspect to investment so the effet is not ZERO but it’s not as automatic as saying “interest go up => vc dry up”.

    Finally, the companies we are talking about are in vastly different situations and not necessarily looking for VC money. There is no explaining their behaviour with a single cause, what we’re seeing is probably a cluster effect, because executives are like fish they always follow the movement of the other fish in their field.

    • Youtube has been profitable for years and is part of Google which is massively profitable. VC Money has no bearing on their decisions - they are in a quasi-monopoly with no credible competition and want to squeeze their users out of greed
    • Reddit has a long and complicated cap table including some very powerful institutional investors so they are aiming at an IPO rather than more VC money. They’re in a pretty good place actually with 1.5 billion MAU, and in the process of shaking off the 10% of hardcore users who are super hostile to monetization. Their monetization is so low (<2$/month/user, when the competition is 10 to 20 times higher) that they could bear to lose 50% of their userbase and still make bank with the remaining ones. They don’t need VC money right now.
    • Twitter is… uh… well there’s no telling what Elon is up to but he is absolutely not raising any VC money especially after the shit he’s pulled off since the buy-off. I think it’s just a bunch of bad moves because he’s inept at the social media game.
    • dhork@lemmy.world
      14·
      1 year ago

      Their monetization is so low (<2$/month/user, when the competition is 10 to 20 times higher) that they could bear to lose 50% of their userbase and still make bank with the remaining ones.

      What’s left unsaid here (but I’m sure you realize) is that these same users whose monetization is so low also provide most of the content and moderation on the site. When you spread out the value of that among the (human) userbase, the total value returned to Reddit by each human is higher.

      Steve thought he was targeting the AI with this move, but in reality he has been charging his most engaged users. If he’s upset that Apollo has turned a profit, the correct move was to acknowledge that one guy has done a better job than Reddit’s team, not tell all the users that Apollo helped bring to Reddit that they were no longer welcome

      • zos_kia@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        11·
        1 year ago

        I think they’re operating under the assumption that there is no shortage of people willing to work for clout on a leading social media. They think the users they lose are replaceable and you know what it’s not an unreasonable expectation. It sucks but that’s just the way it is, there will always be people willing to post memes and delete nazi comments.

        Only time will tell, but it’s not uncommon to kick out power users when they get uppity and think they run your platform. Way easier/cheaper to fire unpaid volunteers than tech-bros with Silicon Valley salaries.

    • suspecm@lemmy.world
      6·
      1 year ago

      I’m not so sure about Google nowadays. What started out as an everyday product killing, ended up as the first of many. They killed Stadia from one day to the other, and then started to basically sell and kill everything that is not massively profitable to the point they sold their domain distribution as well to Squarespace. That does not seem like something a massive monopoly with no regards to investor opinion does.

      • zos_kia@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        3·
        1 year ago

        Well i don’t know about that. They still generate 15B$ in profit every quarter. Sure they’re losing some growth, but even amid a historic advertising budget bust they are still beating expectations.

        When i mentioned their monopolistic position i was talking more specifically about Youtube, but anyway buying and killing off products is standard operating procedure for a company this size on a market this mature. There’s nothing alarming about Google’s health.

        • BelEnd@lemmy.world
          4·
          1 year ago

          99% of their profit comes from their search engine ad revenue though. Google has only ever had one truly profitable product and the advent of chatgpt, driven by their only true rival in Microsoft, has them scared shitless. They are way behind in the AI department and it’s the only thing out their that fundamentally threatens Googles goose with the golden eggs: their search engine.

          • zos_kia@lemmy.fmhy.ml
            2·
            1 year ago

            I mean when you’re at that level of profit you’re not “scared shitless” of much. Sure they have some risk around AI but i think a global ad market collapse is higher in their list of stuff to be worried about.

            Coming back around to the original subject, they are publicly traded anyway so the VC market is not their problem.

    • cryball@sopuli.xyz
      4·
      1 year ago

      Couldn’t it be argued that it’s a mistake from reddit to think of themselves as being comparable to platforms that make more money per user?

      For example reddit and youtube are completely different in terms of the nature of the platform. Could attempting to monetize an average reddit user to the level of those using youtube might be a mistake? Keep in mind that reddit has much lower overhead for keeping the service running.

      The mental image I’m going after is a country that exports mainly wheat arguing that its’ exports should be valued the same as a country that produces complex electronics. The products are at a different realm of complexity. Commodities should be valued for what they are and not be confused with higly refined products.

      • zos_kia@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        2·
        1 year ago

        Couldn’t it be argued that it’s a mistake from reddit to think of themselves as being comparable to platforms that make more money per user?

        You’re right it could very much be argued. I mean isn’t that the whole underlying question ? I would imagine that anybody who invests in reddit has the assumption that yes, you can monetize comparably to other platforms. Or even cut the pear in half and sit comfortably at 10$/user which would already be a fucking money printer at >400M MAU.

        Now whether they are right or wrong in their thesis is anybody’s guess. Even after the recent debacle reddit is still in a very good position, but social media is such a clown world that you can never really tell.

      • zos_kia@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        3·
        1 year ago

        Google in panic mode cause they don’t know if they’ll be able to close their 10M$ round from local VCs 😱