We have a similar model at Skillshare where we pay our teachers based on minutes watched. We found that both short or long content works as long as it’s engaging. If it’s short, it usually gets a lot more viewers but less minutes per viewer. If it’s really long, it gets less viewers but more minutes per viewer. In the end they end up netting each…
That’s a great point. I was really debating myself on the “winner-take-all” dynamic but I ended up going with how the Internet has typically behaved with power-law distribution. Bitcoin and Ethereum account for majority of the market. It’s not to say that they won’t be displaced but I think mainstream wants stability in a store of value.
Will take the under on 5 years too :)
Great insight here. Takes a lot of courage to disrupt your own product.
We define it as the trade-off between 10% vs 10x. Improving engagement (or any metric) by 10% is a huge win. But at some point when you hit diminishing returns, you have to disrupt your own product and take some bets on a 10x return.
Wouldn’t these incumbents (like Google) have to continue to provide real value or get displaced (like Nokia)? That’s the beauty of a bottom-up decentralized model. Once the value disappears, so does the network.