|
|
|
|
|
by cercatrova
1225 days ago
|
|
> From a business perspective, you don't want to alienate developers who work to build your ecosystem. This does not follow, in Twitter's case. If Twitter's API made them money, they wouldn't have shut it down, but it's the exact opposite, it costs them money while providing no monetary benefit. So in this case, from the business perspective, it is correct to start charging for it. Now they could spend 3 months but with debt service payments of a billion dollars a year, I highly doubt that they have the patience to wait that long. |
|
But it provide monetary benefits by attracting and keeping users, which encourages ad spend.
Or at least it used to, until the big advertisers were driven away.
If someone is trying to run a business and doesn't understand how indirect income works they might want to consider something less challenging.
What this actually does is remove API access from small startups, solo developers, and other innovators, and reserves it for corporations.