A fun experiment. Altruistic idea. A similar model (far less altruistic though) is heavily explored in online/mobile gaming. It shows how adding small monetary cost walls off content from people and if stimulated creates a social game out of everything.
Most of the services you mentioned already have "social" attached to them. Adding a business model that provides spending in such abundance would in my opinion just create another social game out of every service/app you bring it in. Obviously, that has nothing to do with what you explore in the article. This is just me thinking of it being applied in a real-life scenario.
There are other factors too. If you forget about social there is also a satisfaction loop you attach to apps. People could have physical reactions based upon their spending and consuming of information that otherwise wouldn't be there if you don't see the "pay now" button attached to every page you ever visit on the web.
It also creates huge dissatisfaction in people that just want to do whatever without being forced to pay every step of the way. Even if it is such a small amount of money. People would flock to apps where this isn't a case and it would just result in further segmentation of the market.
Having better habits and consuming less content online is great. Forcing a business model like this (not that you mentioned something like it) on the other hand would surely hurt. Giving an option for choosing between a regular subscription and what you presented could be something really interesting I believe.
Not paying full price for something people don't need would make sense. May even prove to work once people start seeing the benefits of consuming less and paying less. It just doesn't bring as much money for companies, so...
This is a very interesting idea. I'd like to extend the concept and receive small payments for "good" behaviours and reinforce them. So ultimately, the goal would be to reach a net zero balance in cost and in personal toll on life.
A fun experiment. Altruistic idea. A similar model (far less altruistic though) is heavily explored in online/mobile gaming. It shows how adding small monetary cost walls off content from people and if stimulated creates a social game out of everything.
Most of the services you mentioned already have "social" attached to them. Adding a business model that provides spending in such abundance would in my opinion just create another social game out of every service/app you bring it in. Obviously, that has nothing to do with what you explore in the article. This is just me thinking of it being applied in a real-life scenario.
There are other factors too. If you forget about social there is also a satisfaction loop you attach to apps. People could have physical reactions based upon their spending and consuming of information that otherwise wouldn't be there if you don't see the "pay now" button attached to every page you ever visit on the web.
It also creates huge dissatisfaction in people that just want to do whatever without being forced to pay every step of the way. Even if it is such a small amount of money. People would flock to apps where this isn't a case and it would just result in further segmentation of the market.
Having better habits and consuming less content online is great. Forcing a business model like this (not that you mentioned something like it) on the other hand would surely hurt. Giving an option for choosing between a regular subscription and what you presented could be something really interesting I believe.
Not paying full price for something people don't need would make sense. May even prove to work once people start seeing the benefits of consuming less and paying less. It just doesn't bring as much money for companies, so...
This is a very interesting idea. I'd like to extend the concept and receive small payments for "good" behaviours and reinforce them. So ultimately, the goal would be to reach a net zero balance in cost and in personal toll on life.
Great thoughts on Mail and Shopping!
Thank you!