|
|
|
|
|
|
by trendia
2818 days ago
|
|
|
This sentence right here is incredibly vague: > Marcus also accuses Acton of “slow-playing” the implementation of a feature that would let businesses message WhatsApp users and ultimately help with monetization. What does "monetization" mean? Charging more? Ads? Selling user data? If it means ads or selling user data, then that would directly violate the contract that Acton and Facebook agreed to, and thus Acton would have zero reason to implement it at all. |
|
|
> For his part, Acton had proposed monetizing WhatsApp through a metered-user model, charging, say, a tenth of a penny after a certain large number of free messages were used up. “You build it once, it runs everywhere in every country,” Acton says. “You don’t need a sophisticated sales force. It’s a very simple business.” [0]
David is saying that Brian, though advocating for this model and against the alternative of monetizing data, didn't put in any effort to demonstrate this model was workable:
> During this time, it became pretty clear that while advocating for business messaging, and being given the opportunity to build and deliver on that promise, Brian actively slow-played the execution, and never truly went for it. In my view, if you’re passionate about a certain path — in this case, letting businesses message people and charging for it — and if you have internal questions about it, then work hard to prove that your approach has legs and demonstrate the value. [1]
[0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2018/09/26/exclusive...
[1] https://www.facebook.com/notes/david-marcus/the-other-side-o...