Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Cost To 'Promote' a Facebook Post: $200 To $500

Posted by Unknown on from the really-expensive-syndication dept.

nonprofiteer writes "There's been talk in recent months of Facebook's 'promoted posts' option. In beta testing, it cost about $5-10 dollars to get more of your friends/fans to see your posts in news feeds. Now that it's live, it's a bit more expensive, at least for those with big followings. On the Forbes Facebook page, the cost ranges from $200 to $500 to get from 50,000 to 250,000 people to see a given post. Another lame attempt at monetization, or will Facebook users actually pony up?" This is what happens when everyone stops using RSS/Atom for syndication.

6 of 117 comments (clear)

  1. Poor marketing investment by gagol · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Many firms have publicly stated they were pulling from facebook ads because of lack or return on investment and intensive bot clicking.

    --
    Tomorrow is another day...
    1. Re:Poor marketing investment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But what about people who do what they do for fun rather than profit, like popular bloggers?

      And what about the people who come to Slashdot for fun and knowledge and instead have to wade through reams of astroturf?

      Why don't you ask how much it costs to moderate posts to +5 on Slashdot? Microsoft and Burson Marsteller should be able to give you a budget breakdown.

    2. Re:Poor marketing investment by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 4, Insightful

      what about people who do what they do for fun rather than profit, like popular bloggers?

      Maybe they should not be trying to get their message out on Facebook. We still have an Internet that allows people to run their own system; it is not as though people have to go through Facebook to get to the websites they are trying to view.

      Facebook is a big corporation now, and they need to make money -- which means catering to other big corporations. At least they are becoming honest about why they exist (advertising) instead of continuing to pretend that they are on a mission to connect people to their friends. Popular blogs should look into being paid for advertising impressions rather than clicks as well -- it is a much better model.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    3. Re:Poor marketing investment by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah...one little problem? Its THAT attitude that killed MySpace. That's the problem all these net firms, FB, Google,Twtter, have in a nutshell in that people can just decide its not worth the bullshit and suddenly there's a new company doing it better and you're the next GeoCities ghosttown. Remember when yahoo was all that and a bag of chips?

      They have to walk a damned fine line here because there is zero loyalty on the net, MySpace found that out quick.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  2. Writing on the Wall (no pun intended) by rodrigoandrade · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The writing was on the wall. Everyone saw it coming since FB decided to monetize the site with FB credits, in-app purchases, etc.

    Next: for a premium fee, select customers (i.e. advertisers) will be able to publish "stories" (i.e. ads) on everyone's wall, regardless of friendship status.

    For a super premium fee, they'll be unblockable.

  3. Re:Are you surprised? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The trouble with shorting is that you have to be confident about both the equilibrium state and the trajectory...

    Predicting that Facebook is presently hilariously over-valued is easy(and likely correct); but predicting how fast shareholders will give up holding on to hope and/or hype is a great deal trickier.