<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Freemium and Fanatics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://informationized.com/2009/07/21/freemium-and-fanatics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://informationized.com/2009/07/21/freemium-and-fanatics/</link>
	<description>A blog by Phillip Baker</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 23:10:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=8761</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: phillipbaker</title>
		<link>http://informationized.com/2009/07/21/freemium-and-fanatics/comment-page-1/#comment-57</link>
		<dc:creator>phillipbaker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2009 23:59:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://informationized.com/?p=3284#comment-57</guid>
		<description>Thanks for your comment. I read your post and it&#039;s an interesting question. If there is strong network component, i.e. the overall service becomes richer or more useful for every additional user that joins, having more unpaid users could be more valuable (assuming the bills can be paid by some other means).&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I have tended to think of &#039;free&#039; as a cost of marketing but it can be more than that if free users are contributing to a central data asset. Contributions could come in the form of user-uploaded content like photos on Flickr, videos on Tube etc, that are part of the user experience/usefulness of the service. The data produced by users viewing, clicking, sharing etc is also a type of contribution because that data can be aggregated and analyzed to create something else. In these cases free users become more than potential customers, they become a valuable and necessary part of the service.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The point I was trying to make is that not all users are the same. Some users are always more valuable than others and can be orders of magnitude more valuable. In these cases, I think there might be some conflict between growing a huge user base and creating deeper offerings for a smaller number of hugely more valuable users.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for your comment. I read your post and it&#39;s an interesting question. If there is strong network component, i.e. the overall service becomes richer or more useful for every additional user that joins, having more unpaid users could be more valuable (assuming the bills can be paid by some other means).</p>
<p>I have tended to think of &#39;free&#39; as a cost of marketing but it can be more than that if free users are contributing to a central data asset. Contributions could come in the form of user-uploaded content like photos on Flickr, videos on Tube etc, that are part of the user experience/usefulness of the service. The data produced by users viewing, clicking, sharing etc is also a type of contribution because that data can be aggregated and analyzed to create something else. In these cases free users become more than potential customers, they become a valuable and necessary part of the service.</p>
<p>The point I was trying to make is that not all users are the same. Some users are always more valuable than others and can be orders of magnitude more valuable. In these cases, I think there might be some conflict between growing a huge user base and creating deeper offerings for a smaller number of hugely more valuable users.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin Thomas</title>
		<link>http://informationized.com/2009/07/21/freemium-and-fanatics/comment-page-1/#comment-56</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin Thomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2009 22:02:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://informationized.com/?p=3284#comment-56</guid>
		<description>Hi.. Your post got me thinking… What is more valuable for a software company (like facebook or flickr). 1,000 paying users or 100,000 non-paying users? What are your thoughts? View my blog post here: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.purlem.com/blog/?p=57&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.purlem.com/blog/?p=57&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi.. Your post got me thinking… What is more valuable for a software company (like facebook or flickr). 1,000 paying users or 100,000 non-paying users? What are your thoughts? View my blog post here: <a href="http://www.purlem.com/blog/?p=57" rel="nofollow">http://www.purlem.com/blog/?p=57</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: phillipbaker</title>
		<link>http://informationized.com/2009/07/21/freemium-and-fanatics/comment-page-1/#comment-41</link>
		<dc:creator>phillipbaker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:59:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://informationized.com/?p=3284#comment-41</guid>
		<description>Hi Martin,&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Thanks for your comment. I read your post and it&#039;s an interesting question.&lt;br&gt;If there is strong network component, i.e. the overall service becomes&lt;br&gt;richer or more useful for every additional user that joins, having more&lt;br&gt;unpaid users could be more valuable (assuming the bills can be paid by some&lt;br&gt;other means).&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I tend to think of &#039;free&#039; as a cost of marketing but it can be more than&lt;br&gt;that if free users are contributing to a central data asset. Contributions&lt;br&gt;could come in the form of user-uploaded content like photos on Flickr,&lt;br&gt;videos on Tube etc, that are part of the user experience/usefulness of the&lt;br&gt;service. The data produced by users viewing, clicking, sharing etc is also a&lt;br&gt;type of contribution because that data can be aggregated and analyzed to&lt;br&gt;create something else. In these cases free users become more than potential&lt;br&gt;customers, they become a valuable and necessary part of the service.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The point I was trying to make is that not all users are the same. Some&lt;br&gt;users are always more valuable than others and can be orders of magnitude&lt;br&gt;more valuable. In these cases, I think there might be some conflict between&lt;br&gt;growing a huge user base and creating deeper offerings for a smaller number&lt;br&gt;of hugely more valuable users.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Phil</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Martin,</p>
<p>Thanks for your comment. I read your post and it&#39;s an interesting question.<br />If there is strong network component, i.e. the overall service becomes<br />richer or more useful for every additional user that joins, having more<br />unpaid users could be more valuable (assuming the bills can be paid by some<br />other means).</p>
<p>I tend to think of &#39;free&#39; as a cost of marketing but it can be more than<br />that if free users are contributing to a central data asset. Contributions<br />could come in the form of user-uploaded content like photos on Flickr,<br />videos on Tube etc, that are part of the user experience/usefulness of the<br />service. The data produced by users viewing, clicking, sharing etc is also a<br />type of contribution because that data can be aggregated and analyzed to<br />create something else. In these cases free users become more than potential<br />customers, they become a valuable and necessary part of the service.</p>
<p>The point I was trying to make is that not all users are the same. Some<br />users are always more valuable than others and can be orders of magnitude<br />more valuable. In these cases, I think there might be some conflict between<br />growing a huge user base and creating deeper offerings for a smaller number<br />of hugely more valuable users.</p>
<p>Phil</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin Thomas</title>
		<link>http://informationized.com/2009/07/21/freemium-and-fanatics/comment-page-1/#comment-40</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin Thomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2009 17:02:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://informationized.com/?p=3284#comment-40</guid>
		<description>Hi.. Your post got me thinking… What is more valuable for a software company (like facebook or flickr). 1,000 paying users or 100,000 non-paying users? What are your thoughts? View my blog post here: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.purlem.com/blog/?p=57&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.purlem.com/blog/?p=57&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi.. Your post got me thinking… What is more valuable for a software company (like facebook or flickr). 1,000 paying users or 100,000 non-paying users? What are your thoughts? View my blog post here: <a href="http://www.purlem.com/blog/?p=57" rel="nofollow">http://www.purlem.com/blog/?p=57</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
