← Back to context

Comment by paxys

5 days ago

> "This isn't just about a fine; the Commission forcing us to change our business model effectively imposes a multi-billion-dollar tariff on Meta while requiring us to offer an inferior service."

Meta complaining about getting tariff'd is objectively hilarious.

> the Commission forcing us to change our business model

This is total, utter, complete 100% grade A organic nonsense.

I worked at FB (but the same is true of basically all action driven advertising systems). Only a tiny proportion of users ever click, but they are incredibly lucrative for online advertising platforms.

The whole subscription was a really transparent attempt to get people to accept the tracking and it's honestly profoundly depressing that this is what they're reduced to.

  • Ads work even if nobody clicks.

    At least, old school ads. Sensible ads. Like Coca-Cola. I have no idea how these ridiculous online gaming things stay in business but I'm sure it's much stupider.

    • > Ads work even if nobody clicks.

      Correct, but those ads (brand) are much, much less common online because Google (first) and Facebook (second) pushed DR advertising, which is what most SMBs and smaller businesses do.

      Like, some of this is because they're easier to measure which makes it easier to sell, but lots more of it was due to smaller businesses that couldn't afford brand spending money on something more connected to their business outcomes.

      > I have no idea how these ridiculous online gaming things stay in business

      Mostly whales. A really small proportion of users spend absurd amounts of money on these games, and much of the competitive games just advertise for free users to get crushed by the whales.

    • Did you buy coca cola because santa clause was drinking it or did you buy it because it was at eye level by the register in every store in America?

      2 replies →

No, like the rest of these power games it should be worrying. It's not about whether it's actually a tariff or not - it's not about objective truth. It's about getting the orange guy to do things that are beneficial for Mr Sugarhill's money pile. It might or might not work in this particular instance, but it should be very concerning that this sort of thing is the way to get money now.

Mr Sugarhill's ploy is presumably to get Mr Mango enraged about the tariffs so he tariffs them back 200%, and they back down to avoid the 200% tariffs.