[steinsgate]

What's the value of WhatsApp? It is the scale of the product. I use it because most of my friends are on it. There are many other alternatives to WhatsApp as pointed out by many in this thread, but none of them have nearly the same traction.

The only business model that allows such scale is the ad supported model. If WhatsApp was subscription based, I am sure they could not have achieved this scale. And I wouldn't have found value in it.

I realize that the ad supported model is what indirectly adds so much value to WhatsApp. Therefore, it makes sense to me to support that model if the model is reasonable enough. They have end to end encryption, which means my content is safe from prying eyes. That's already huge. So I really don't mind if they share my number with Facebook.

[mercer]

I think the 'advantage' of WhatsApp is not as big as it seems. I already use Telegram with most people that I communicate with regularly who use WhatsApp for everything else.

Almost every one of those people grumbled at first about having to install another app. But because of how the dominant phone UI's work, it turns out to be almost frictionless.

I barely notice whether I get a message through WhatsApp, Telegram, or Facebook Messenger, because I either tap on the notification - and go right to the app and they all look basically the same - or I reply from the notification itself.

There's one friend who is so used to WhatsApp that he'll generally initiate conversations through that, even though I tend to initiate or further conversations in Telegram. Neither of us ever made a comment about it.

I hope I'm right, which means Facebook's stranglehold on communication and personal data might not be as strong as it appears. But I suspect they'll soon rollout more WeChat-like features such as payment, apps and bots that are a lot stickier.

For example, I've been playing around with a number of Telegram bots, and for the first time since I started using all these different chat apps, I am bothered when I have to use a non-Telegram app, because it doesn't support my bots (ranging from silly gif-search-bots to more useful poll-bots). Payment integration would be even 'stickier'.

[Aissen]

> If WhatsApp was subscription based, I am sure they could not have achieved this scale. And I wouldn't have found value in it.

WhatsApp dropped its $1 annual subscription fee just this year: https://blog.whatsapp.com/615/Making-WhatsApp-free-and-more-...

[sumitgt]

WhatsApp is Ad supported? I don't think so. I believe until last year they were subscription based.

[jcfrei]

They were and sometime last year turned everybody's subscription into a lifetime subscription. I think it's only a matter of time until WhatsApp will show ads. I see more and more content being shared through it - eventually it will rival Facebook.

[steinsgate]

It is a free service as of now (at least for me, initially they said I would have to pay after an year, but this never happened). Technically, they don't even have a business model till now. What they have is scale. I think they are afraid that a subscription model will make users churn and they would end up losing the scale. The only other alternative is an ad supported free model or a freemium model. I am wondering if a freemium model would make sense for WhatsApp.