Creators are mistaking increased competition for platform decline. The answer is not a smaller Substack. It's a much larger, growing social media platform, underpinned by a world class Interest Graph.
This is what I was thinking: Pangram was Substack's way of appeasing the largest creators on here who were complaining about the platform's growth in new creators.
Totally agree John. Substack decided to become a social network, so now there's no way back. And the only way for a social network is up: it needs to be large. Grow.
My real concern is how do we stop it from enshitifying the user experience, once it gets big, like all other social networks did.
Agree on the funnel, and after three exits I read this as a balance sheet question. The feed is a rented asset, the list is an owned one, and businesses live or die on that difference the day the terms change. Your line between acquisition work and uncompensated platform labor is the sharpest framing of the trade I have seen. The attribution ask is the right hill.
Conversion falling while chances to convert rise is not decline. Where I land with you is attribution. I cannot plan a week around numbers I cannot trace.
Platforms inevitably go through different phases and cycles.
I think the most vocal complainers about Substack’s changes are those who profited from an earlier approach that no longer works.
But change is inevitable, and you have to continuously reinvent yourself, your content, and your business model if you want to keep pace.
As you say, John, that’s a feature, not a bug
Thanks, Mike! Couldn’t agree more!
This is what I was thinking: Pangram was Substack's way of appeasing the largest creators on here who were complaining about the platform's growth in new creators.
Totally agree John. Substack decided to become a social network, so now there's no way back. And the only way for a social network is up: it needs to be large. Grow.
My real concern is how do we stop it from enshitifying the user experience, once it gets big, like all other social networks did.
Sadly, I'm not hopeful here...unless Substack realizes what its ultimate power truly is.
I’m hopeful that its investors will help the team to see its value.
You mean it's not a giant?! 😳 Okay - maybe its in toddler mode and growing up fast 💪
Agree on the funnel, and after three exits I read this as a balance sheet question. The feed is a rented asset, the list is an owned one, and businesses live or die on that difference the day the terms change. Your line between acquisition work and uncompensated platform labor is the sharpest framing of the trade I have seen. The attribution ask is the right hill.
Thanks, Ruben! Appreciate you my friend.
Any time!
Conversion falling while chances to convert rise is not decline. Where I land with you is attribution. I cannot plan a week around numbers I cannot trace.
Perfectly put my friend. 🤓🙏🏻
Do we know how fast Substack is growing?
I think people are underestimating how much bigger the opportunity becomes if Substack wins discovery.
A newsletter platform competes for creators.
A social platform competes for everyone’s attention.
Those are completely different markets.
If you want to build a real business, you need top-of-funnel discovery.
A lower conversion rate on a massive audience almost always beats a high conversion rate on an audience of twenty people.