Message from discussion
New project idea: Bringing back Twitter SMS
Received: by 10.214.44.5 with SMTP id r5mr1606630qar.15.1218715763581;
Thu, 14 Aug 2008 05:09:23 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <elias.bizan...@gmail.com>
Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com (rv-out-0708.google.com [209.85.198.244])
by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 39si3589845yxd.2.2008.08.14.05.09.22;
Thu, 14 Aug 2008 05:09:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of elias.bizan...@gmail.com designates 209.85.198.244 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.198.244;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of elias.bizan...@gmail.com designates 209.85.198.244 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=elias.bizan...@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header...@gmail.com
Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b17so341066rvf.36
for <silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com>; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 05:09:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to
:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
bh=6+HF1rME9h6L48ftHs19oXtfFUBeW/m4pyMf6+0S3LU=;
b=ezmUoqdz8VXdmI7jjpU1HFscCudbG+I9WmXazi2A7dUt2X1vS6AG7GnW9EBHnwJjtq
L+XNzGwqv8WKBKyt5MTscu2hLeE1+0uP5g7QA1RF7Zho/LFSXMNlZqyvyJddrezwO6YU
NBVIrB/S8DDuGWm0I40Q6I5HF8d/EgUz9jvfE=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version
:content-type:references;
b=Ne9umT3ZiuLY3TaQwJjeaP3ZXlwWgJ32eZTD3ZHYGAw1gxjRhVj4x31XQx1unt+hvQ
i43b9CW7r0ZpEF0I0PT0Za+KtxjrLa05KVqkU1nJZd5vrqm6jpl4mUhByXE4myQY7DJ4
HXyFlfNjxMyXtckNdnZzTASIPdy1AYdtuSetQ=
Received: by 10.141.116.17 with SMTP id t17mr579784rvm.251.1218715762666;
Thu, 14 Aug 2008 05:09:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.141.91.16 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 05:09:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <be77b7e70808140509q55d25995ra54a5cefa381cbb7@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 22:09:22 +1000
From: "Elias Bizannes" <elias.bizan...@gmail.com>
To: silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [SiliconBeach] Re: New project idea: Bringing back Twitter SMS
In-Reply-To: <D8D25AE89091A348AF840CCAC9BB1EE14F7665D...@win2k3.local.internetrix.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_Part_97593_9191777.1218715762658"
References: <ecf61834-df56-4423-9c64-c90bca61e...@s1g2000pra.googlegroups.com>
<9764bcf2-6690-433a-a43f-dcd02972f...@z11g2000prl.googlegroups.com>
<5e01c29a0808140457q4b17fcckaab7cc99f790...@mail.gmail.com>
<D8D25AE89091A348AF840CCAC9BB1EE14F7665D...@win2k3.local.internetrix.com.au>
------=_Part_97593_9191777.1218715762658
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Let's not forget, you can only opt into the programme which I think is the
point being missed. No one is forcing you to pay to use twitter; but you
have an option to use a service that satisfies your twitter addiciton, but
also helps a greater cause. ersonally, I am willing to pay to receive SMS's
from Twitter. A 55 cent message times a few dozen is not a big deal on my
phone bill, given the value I get from twitter.
Ivo's startup is one of any gateways we could use, I just know about his in
detail. And yes, I made two [2]'s - apologies for the confusion.
So Geoff, your analysis is more or less right. However it's the user that
pays, because they are the ones that want the benefit. You can choose to use
the service, not forced to.
On 8/14/08, Geoff McQueen <geoff.mcqu...@internetrix.com.au> wrote:
>
> Silky,
>
> Agreed. The only way would be for someone other than twitter to foot the
> bill, and search for a great price on international GSM gateway access
> through the likes of South Africa (where currency differentials make this
> sort of thing remotely possible).
>
> Given the carriers make something like $1m profit on 1GB of SMS, the fact
> they haven't been more amenable to working with someone like Twitter (it is
> their spare wireless bandwidth after all!!!) is a disgrace.
>
> Perhaps the answer is to abandon SMS as the channel?
>
> Geoff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com [mailto:
> silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of silky
> Sent: Thursday, 14 August 2008 9:58 PM
> To: silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com
> Subject: [SiliconBeach] Re: New project idea: Bringing back Twitter SMS
>
>
> the main problem i see with this is that making people pay for
> incoming sms' *sucks* majorly. they can't control it (except by
> incuring a cost).
>
> you're free to ignore this and do it, but what it will result in is a
> backlash against twitter itself. people will start to associate a cost
> with it's use.
>
> big mistake, imho.
>
> --
> noon silk
>
>
>
> >
>
--
Elias Bizannes
http://liako.biz
------=_Part_97593_9191777.1218715762658
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
<div>Let's not forget, you can only opt into the programme which I think is the point being missed. No one is forcing you to pay to use twitter; but you have an option to use a service that satisfies your twitter addiciton, but also helps a greater cause. ersonally, I am willing to pay to receive SMS's from Twitter. A 55 cent message times a few dozen is not a big deal on my phone bill, given the value I get from twitter.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Ivo's startup is one of any gateways we could use, I just know about his in detail. And yes, I made two [2]'s - apologies for the confusion.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>So Geoff, your analysis is more or less right. However it's the user that pays, because they are the ones that want the benefit. You can choose to use the service, not forced to.</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span> </div>
<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span> </div>
<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span> </div>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 8/14/08, <b class="gmail_sendername">Geoff McQueen</b> <<a href="mailto:geoff.mcqu...@internetrix.com.au">geoff.mcqu...@internetrix.com.au</a>> wrote:</span></div>
<div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid"><br>Silky,<br><br>Agreed. The only way would be for someone other than twitter to foot the bill, and search for a great price on international GSM gateway access through the likes of South Africa (where currency differentials make this sort of thing remotely possible).<br>
<br>Given the carriers make something like $1m profit on 1GB of SMS, the fact they haven't been more amenable to working with someone like Twitter (it is their spare wireless bandwidth after all!!!) is a disgrace.<br>
<br>Perhaps the answer is to abandon SMS as the channel?<br><br>Geoff<br><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: <a href="mailto:silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com">silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com">silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com</a>] On Behalf Of silky<br>
Sent: Thursday, 14 August 2008 9:58 PM<br>To: <a href="mailto:silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com">silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com</a><br>Subject: [SiliconBeach] Re: New project idea: Bringing back Twitter SMS<br>
<br><br>the main problem i see with this is that making people pay for<br>incoming sms' *sucks* majorly. they can't control it (except by<br>incuring a cost).<br><br>you're free to ignore this and do it, but what it will result in is a<br>
backlash against twitter itself. people will start to associate a cost<br>with it's use.<br><br>big mistake, imho.<br><br>--<br>noon silk<br><br><br><br><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Elias Bizannes<br><a href="http://liako.biz">http://liako.biz</a>
------=_Part_97593_9191777.1218715762658--
|
