[ralferoo]

> Tbf, as much as people like whining they definitely get 12 bucks a month worth of entertainment off of Facebook and Instagram. People will easily spend 4-6h on social media daily.

I read this kind of argument regularly to justify any subscription service, and simply, it's bogus. Maybe you, as the commenter might feel you get $12 per month worth of entertainment or spend 4-6h on the site daily, but that's simply not true for everyone.

I deleted my facebook account over a decade ago, so it's value to me is exactly $0 per month, but I've seen this argument made for Netflix, Amazon Prime, Youtube, etc, none of which I have a subscription for. Now, all of those I perhaps would get some value from, but less than the minimum subscription value.

Currently, I can still enjoy Youtube for free, but their recent push to make advertising far more obnoxious will probably push me away entirely. When that day happens, even though I enjoy watching Youtube occasionally, it's simply not worth the price of the minimum subscription, so I will just stop using it. It's actually already pretty close to that point for me - recently, adverts seem to be far more frequent than before and I've noticed a few occasions when I've had two back-to-back 30-second un-skippable adverts every 5-10 minutes. When these tactics eventually force me off the platform, their revenue from me will go from a little per month from ad revenue to $0 per month.

[qeternity]

> I deleted my facebook account over a decade ago

Obviously implicit in GP comment is that _people who use these services_ derive great value from them.

Nobody expects someone who deleted their account to think $12 is a reasonable price.

[ralferoo]

That's why I continued talking about another service that I do use that is trying a similar move at a similar price point.

The point is that the poster I was replying to believes that because they think it's good value at $12 per month, it's necessarily the same for everybody. It isn't.

[_trackno5]

I’m not saying I believe $12 is good value. It’s not a matter of opinion. It’s just a fact.

Similar forms of entertainment cost the same.

You’re the one with the subjective opinion here because you personally don’t see value in it and make the assumption that is the absolute truth

[virgilp]

How is it a fact? I would argue that most people derive negative value out of Facebook. Is $150 per gram of cocaine "good value" just because some people enjoy it and come back to it?

[j4yav]

I had a Facebook account today, it definitely wasn't worth $12 in entertainment per month so I deleted it.

[ralferoo]

> You’re the one with the subjective opinion here because you personally don’t see value in it and make the assumption that is the absolute truth

I think you need to stop spending so much time on Facebook, and spend a bit more time reading a dictionary.

You firstly made an assertion that "they [in this context, everyone who is whining that it's too expensive] definitely get 12 bucks a month worth of entertainment off of Facebook and Instagram".

You secondly state that "I’m not saying I believe $12 is good value. It’s not a matter of opinion. It’s just a fact."

Both of these are subjective opinion, because it's what you believe and while some will agree with you, there are others who disagree with you.

You accuse me of making the assumption that what I'm saying is absolute truth, which is weird, because that's exactly what you were doing in your argument.

Read again what I wrote: "Maybe you, as the commenter might feel you get $12 per month worth of entertainment or spend 4-6h on the site daily, but that's simply not true for everyone."

That's not making any claim of absolute truth, rather it's saying that your claim that it's good value for everybody is false. And it's obviously false, because there's at least one person for who it isn't true.