When thousands of subreddits went dark in protest, it exposed the tension at the core of Reddit. Is the web’s most reliably human forum a gold mine for investors, or an old-fashioned dumpster fire?
So Huffman’s strategy seems to be “Hey, I know, I’ll just follow that Musk guy’s lead; he seems to know what he’s doing!”
EDIT: Also, just because you can go public doesn’t mean you should. Why can’t tech bros just be happy with something positive they’ve created without ruining it and making people unhappy by cashing in and inevitability enshitifying it? Must be a personality-type issue. I’d rather have happy users (and I kind of doubt that Huffman was starving to begin with).
I don’t know the answer and I’m not taking a side, but considering how Reddit has never been profitable, I don’t understand how it even still exists. Where does the money come from to keep it running? This question applies to all non-profitable platforms. We know that the executives surely get their inflated paychecks, as do the employees, and the servers keep running (often better than sustainable alternatives), yet the company never makes a profit… How does that work?
Given that it’s obviously not sustainable, I can understand why “just be happy with that they’ve created” isn’t an option, but that’s the only thing I understand… Everything else is a complete mystery to me.
A business can be lucrative without being profitable. Profitable means the business itself is making a profit; that is, expanding its revenue. Reddit doesn’t need to do that in order to make everyone who works there money. They just need to keep the servers open and do a little maintenance. Reddit probably could be profitable as a business if it weren’t so lucrative for its CEOs, who presumably eat all the profits.
I agree, though. Profit and growth are poor measures of a business doing what it should be doing, which is providing a valuable product to consumers. Honestly, these days they’re probably a measure that a company has stopped providing value.
But, correct me if I’m wrong, the whole thing is operating at a loss. It’s spending more money than it receives, including advertising and all. That doesn’t add up.
So Huffman’s strategy seems to be “Hey, I know, I’ll just follow that Musk guy’s lead; he seems to know what he’s doing!”
EDIT: Also, just because you can go public doesn’t mean you should. Why can’t tech bros just be happy with something positive they’ve created without ruining it and making people unhappy by cashing in and inevitability enshitifying it? Must be a personality-type issue. I’d rather have happy users (and I kind of doubt that Huffman was starving to begin with).
Haha, I love your wording. This is awesome. And I 100% agree. These people do not know the meaning of the word “enough.”
I don’t know the answer and I’m not taking a side, but considering how Reddit has never been profitable, I don’t understand how it even still exists. Where does the money come from to keep it running? This question applies to all non-profitable platforms. We know that the executives surely get their inflated paychecks, as do the employees, and the servers keep running (often better than sustainable alternatives), yet the company never makes a profit… How does that work?
Given that it’s obviously not sustainable, I can understand why “just be happy with that they’ve created” isn’t an option, but that’s the only thing I understand… Everything else is a complete mystery to me.
I use Discord a lot and I think about this often.
A business can be lucrative without being profitable. Profitable means the business itself is making a profit; that is, expanding its revenue. Reddit doesn’t need to do that in order to make everyone who works there money. They just need to keep the servers open and do a little maintenance. Reddit probably could be profitable as a business if it weren’t so lucrative for its CEOs, who presumably eat all the profits.
I agree, though. Profit and growth are poor measures of a business doing what it should be doing, which is providing a valuable product to consumers. Honestly, these days they’re probably a measure that a company has stopped providing value.
The number one thing I don’t understand is, where does the money come from?
I’d imagine mostly advertising and premium accounts. I’d be surprised if there weren’t some shady deals going on for increased exposure too.
But, correct me if I’m wrong, the whole thing is operating at a loss. It’s spending more money than it receives, including advertising and all. That doesn’t add up.
Only if you count CEO pay.
Companies don’t even need to be solvent to make their C-levels money.
You’re seriously avoiding the question.