Why I don't understand App.net

A lot of prominent technical blog figures seem to be raving about App.net. I still just don't get it.

1. $50 is well above my "just pay it" threshold. It's a new set of headphones, or a new graphics card or something. Given that I only give myself £100 a month 'pocket money', it's a considered purchase. 
2. I really REALLY want to ditch Facebook, but everyone I've ever known (just about) is on Facebook. Twitter is a smaller subset of people I'm actually interested in. Google Plus is by far the best platform, but so few people actually use it that it barely gets any attention from me. If App.net doesn't beat twitter in terms of penetration it will be basically useless. If people won't move away from Facebook for FREE alternatives, what chance does a paid option have?
3. People EXPECT online apps and services to be free. I know from experience that if 300,000 people will download something for free, only 24,000 will pay $1.60 for it. Increase that to $50, and make that a $50 per year subscription, I only see a small fraction of my twitter followers/followees to subscribe.
4. Right now, Twitter is just fine. I never notice any advertising, and clients work just ok. Maybe that won't be the case for ever, as it is clearly not sustainable. However, for now, it is just fine. If Twitter were to become Facebook, I would stop using it. Facebook is horrible, intrusive, plastered with ads and horrible crap that I'm not interested in (basically the Zynga stuff). 
5. No free tier. If I could pay $50 a year to turn Facebook into something more palletable - ie remove the ads, make it easier to use for me as a developer, and feel like I'm the customer, then I would pay that. However, there would need to be a free tier, because 90% of my friends would stop using Facebook if they had to pay for it. 

I understand that a lot of people are saying that this could be the next big thing, and they want to be part of that. Maybe I'm being naive about it, but how can I miss out? I'm not such an important internet figure that it's important to reserve my username now - my Twitter name is 'martinlong1978'. If this turns out to be the next big thing, then I'll subscribe as and when it becomes important for me to be a part of it. I have no doubt that this project will get 'funded'. This project isn't hosted on Kickstarter, it honestly wouldn't surprise me if they have rigged it to report success even if they fall slightly short of their target, or if key project members have pledged to 'make up' the difference at the last minute. Right now it is $467,000 of $500,000 - forgive me for thinking those numbers look slightly suspicious to me.

But what if it doesn't get funded?  Will social networks continue to spiral into the depths of evil? Twitter will become as bad as Facebook, Facebook will be owned by Beelzebub himself, and Google Plus will carry the motto "Do much evil".  Will I be blamed for not believing in it enough? Will I be chased through the streets by an angy mob with pitch forks, yelling "Hang him high, he ruined our last chance of salvation". I don't think so. If there is a space in the market for something like App.net, then it will happen, whether it is Dalton Caldwell behind it or not.

Then there is the proposal. It talks a lot about the concept, the idea of users paying for the service, the business model, motivations, and stakeholders. However, it doesn't really bring me any closer to understanding what I really get for my $50 in the first year. If I understand correctly, I get something like Twitter, with fewer people to follow, no ads, and use of any "app.net" clients that might pop up in the first year (which may not be many). Next, as a developer, do I pony of the $100 for the SDK? Well, how many of my users are going to demand App.net connectivity? I suspect this answer will be around the zero mark. Already the majority of my users post to Facebook, and a small proportion post to Twitter. I don't think App.net will have any effect on my sales whether I do or don't include it.

I have nothing against what Dalton is trying to do, and I hope it is successful. I really hope that App.net will allow me to ditch Facebook, though I have serious doubts it will. If Twitter increases sponsorship and removes client access, then I may have to ditch Twitter anyway, and App.net might prove to be a good alternative (I also think Google Plus could be a good alternative, but they need to add an API first). I just don't feel it is worth spending any money on yet, and that may be the overall problem.

I await the opportunity to be proved wrong.