Blog Post

Are you ready for a paid Twitter?

Stay on Top of Enterprise Technology Trends

Get updates impacting your industry from our GigaOm Research Community
Join the Community!

Dalton Caldwell, the man behind failed startups Imeem and PicPlz, recently ruminated on what he wished Twitter could have become.  Now he’s moving ahead with his own paid alternative that promises to shun advertising and focus on customer trust.

Caldwell unveiled his big venture called in a lengthy blog post Friday and kicked off a month-long Kickstarter-esque pledge campaign aimed at testing his theory about the need for just such a platform. He’s looking to raise $500,000 from 10,000 people, which he thinks will be enough money to get started and also validate his idea. was originally envisioned as a paid service for mobile developers but has been repurposed to tackle this larger goal of creating a paid version of Twitter.

The product will offer a real-time feed and a social graph similar to Twitter available from a mobile application or website. Ultimately, will support third-party apps built on top of the ecosystem. Caldwell said the consumers aren’t given much choice right now in social startups, which are largely dependent on advertising for revenue. That leads to businesses that work to ultimately sell their users and their data to advertisers, he said. He believes there’s enough of a market for another business model that puts customer and their trust first.

Why isn’t there an opportunity to pay money to get an ad-free feed from a company where the product is something you pay for, not, well, you. To be clear: I’m glad there are ad-supported options, but why does that seem like the only option? For example, I have the option of buying a Mac if I don’t want to buy a crapware-infested PC, right? I have no interest in completely opting-out of the social web. But please, I want a real alternative to advertising hell… I would gladly pay for a service that treats me better. (Emphasis Caldwell’s) promises to never run ads or sell user data to advertisers. Users will be able to export, back-up or delete their data. The service will supposedly provide developers with a predictable business to build upon and will be focused on satisfying paying users and improving the experience.

Caldwell’s proposal follows a Kickstarter project from Penny Arcade, an online comics publisher, who is looking at replacing the revenue it currently gets from advertising with funding from fans. The two projects raise new questions about whether traditionally ad-supported services can build a viable model by charging users up front in exchange for a product that eschews ads.

I’d personally like to see new alternatives emerge though any competitor ultimately needs to get people in the door to work. 10,000 believers might be enough to get started but you have to recruit the masses to succeed and that can be hard when the experience on Twitter is still very positive for most people. People are increasingly aware that their “free” social networks are really making their money off users and their data. But for the most part, inertia, familiarity and data lock-in keep people from looking elsewhere. And ultimately can’t just be an ad-free alternative, it will have to be better somehow, more compelling, with some kind of killer features or such a radically better design, to get people to switch.

So I’m not very optimistic about’s chances. And the truth is, it may be hard for any big social network to become profitable, as Derek Powazek wrote today.  But I’d like to see Caldwell take a stab at shaking up the current dependence on ad-supported services.

5 Responses to “Are you ready for a paid Twitter?”

  1. webvex

    The model that will work is a combination: ads and privacy raping if you want it for free but not if you pay. That way everyone can use the same service. I know that would be tricky to implement, but it’s the only way to reach the privacy holdouts if they want growth. An alternative pay-only service will not work.

  2. I think the dominance of ad driven business models is related to the top heavy distribution of wealth. There is more money in the hands of investors trying to create demand for products than in the hands of consumers looking to buy. In the US, the top 5% controls about 83% of the wealth. When you try to sell a product you are going after the other 17%. Easier pickings trying to sell companies. A lot of www advertising is circular, i.e., for products that are themselves part of ad dependent www eco-system.