Here's the hard truth ...
Lesson learned: don't build your business on top of someone else's business, especially if you're not paying (under contract) to access that other service.
Lesson learned: don't build your business on top of someone else's business, especially if you're not paying (under contract) to access that other service.
These people built successful businesses for nigh a decade, and even if they were eventually shut off due to a change in ownership, they still presumably earned ample profit.
Personally, I've built a business on top of someone else's platform (Valve) and it was hugely beneficial for me even though I was very aware I could be cut off at any point. All businesses are a gamble, pick what gambles you want to take and be honest about their upsides and downsides.
It’s literally what the core service is and there’s a built in revenue share (contract) between the developers and Valve.
No such construct nor intent existed with Twitter.
Not necessarily. I'm not selling a game on Steam, I built my business providing a third party service around one of Valve's self-developed games. Generally speaking, Valve is friendlier to developers so it was a safer bet, but it was in no way a contract nor guaranteed.
Twitter actually used to promote third party apps in their sidebar. Even though they long ago made it clear that third party apps were being hamstrung, for quite some time they actually encouraged third party apps being developed and didn't bother them too much beyond limiting their access to the streaming API.
You make hay whilst the sunshines.
If you can make money from an App, then do so.
Of course you have to diversify; dont put all your eggs in one basket.
But if there is an opportunity to make money, then go make it.
You can build your name on a high profile popular product, even if the product is short lived.
Businesses and product lines dont generally last forever! :-)
The lesson is not that building on the services of others is bad. It was good. But you don’t get to choose when it will end.
Something like a Twitter client is not only not part of their core business of selling ads but diametrically opposed to it so you have a much higher risk of unexpectedly being out of business because their success is not directly linked to yours. Arguments about innovation, bringing in super users, etc. are good but they're more tenuous and exactly the kind of thing some executive will dismiss when compared to the money they can make right now with more ad sales.
In contrast, Twitter sees third-party developers as a cost.
As predicted here: [0] when a third-party Discord client had to shut down [1] because Discord Inc. controlled the platform, the same has happened to Twitter.