Facebook has been launching a number of campaigns for clients that provided branded integration with Facebook status updates. For example, CNN’s recent inauguration campaign included status update notifications which specified that they were posted from the CNN site. This feature is limited to those that have set up campaigns with Facebook. Having to work with Facebook directly can be a costly proposition on both ends (Facebook needs to provide resources and companies need to pay for that time).
What would be much easier is if Facebook simply charged for specific services. If brands could simply pay for each instance of a branded Facebook status update, it would help Facebook generate revenue, and it would reduce overhead. Clearly there would need to be limits to a paid API since companies with deep pockets could pay to spam the system but ultimately there could be a lot of value in an extended API with additional features.
Also, Facebook could open up their API for new components such as access to the news feed or shared stories (two of Facebook’s most valuable features) on a paid basis. Want to aggregate everything Facebook users are sharing? Pay for it! I know that I would definitely pay for additional features, and charging for a more robust API gives Facebook an incentive for developing a more robust platform.
Should Facebook Charge for Everything?
An instant way to reduce “spammy” applications on the platform would be to charge for all API calls. Most developers would instantly shun such an idea. Perhaps there could be a threshold for charging (such as all apps over 100,000 monthly active users, etc) but charging would reduce a lot of the noise on the platform. There are clearly downsides for charging for an API.
For starters, many companies will simply leave the Facebook platform and this is the last thing that Facebook wants. Secondly, developers would become paying customers and that means they would demand a lot more from Facebook. For example if Facebook decided to turn up limitations on the platform for paid developers, there would be even more of a backlash.
Finally, Facebook doesn’t want to get in the business of full-time developer support. While they already have resources allocated to helping developers, under a paid platform, Facebook would have to allocate a lot more resources to this area.
A Premium API Makes Sense
Regardless of whether or not charging for the whole Facebook platform makes sense, charging for a premium service is a logical extension of the existing platform. Rather than requiring Facebook to exhaust developer resources on each ad campaign, the company would benefit from letting developers build campaigns directly into a premium API.
Would you be willing to pay for a developer API?
![[Inside Social Apps 2012]](http://www.allfacebook.com/wordpress/wp-content/themes/allfacebook2/images/ISA2012_336x100_F_RegisterNow.gif)
![[AllFacebook Stats: Facebook Analytics for Your Business]](http://www.allfacebook.com/wordpress/wp-content/themes/allfacebook2/images/stpro_allfacebookstats.gif)
![[How can Facebook change your business?]](http://www.allfacebook.com/wordpress/wp-content/themes/allfacebook2/images/FMB_A_MAY2011_336x100_F.gif)
Applications help Facebook. There are far better ways of generating money than discouraging developers who are bringing people to Facebook and keeping them coming back. Whether there are charges all API calls, for only calls on applications with 100k MAU, or even just premium API calls that are more expensive – they'd all drive application developers away to the many other platforms that are available.
A payments platform with FB taking a cut would generate more income than charging developers, and wouldn't harm the platform.
Comment by David — January 30, 2009 @ 6:54 am
"An instant way to reduce “spammy” applications on the platform would be to charge for all API calls."
You have no evidence to support that assertion. Having managed multiple paid platforms, I can tell you that charging money does very little to avert bad behavior on the part of developers, particularly in situation where there's a profit motive. If anything, charging money creates more bad behavior because it fosters a sense of entitlement among third-party developers — the sense that we paid for this, so you should just get out of our way and let us do what we want.
Rather than charging them, Facebook should come up with a way to provide monetary incentives for its third-party developers.
Comment by Jeffrey — January 30, 2009 @ 7:50 am
As a dev,no I would not pay for a developer api.I would however pay for exposure.Facebook could easily sell virality.Increased notifications and invite limits.More presence on the news feed etc.
Comment by don — January 30, 2009 @ 8:22 am
Charging for API calls reminds me of the ideas of charging to send emails as a way to reduce spam. I like the idea of only charging for large usage, but spammers would always find a loophole (like the recent Pacman issue).
Comment by Ted Howard — January 30, 2009 @ 12:29 pm
Please don't charge for face book. it's a good way to keep up with family. thank ypu
Comment by Charlotte F. Farris — March 29, 2010 @ 12:29 pm