Summary of Key Points
The claim that DouBao has 345 million monthly active users seems to be a solid basis for charging fees, but in reality, it represents the biggest obstacle. Most of these users came from free channels of distribution (embedded in TikTok, pre-installed on smartphones, and through social sharing), and they have never developed the perception that AI services require payment. Additionally, the difference between the paid and free versions is minimal (only additional data quotas and priority in queueing). With the brand's identity firmly rooted in "lifestyle and entertainment" while focusing on office-related features, the announcement of fees led to a loss of 6.1 million users. In contrast, with ZhiPu Coding Plan, since users (developers) were expecting to pay from the beginning, the product has continued to sell well even after three price increases, highlighting the core issues with DouBao's commercialization approach: a lack of user awareness about the need for payment and a mismatch between product value and customer expectations.
1. High Monthly Active Users Are "Pseudo-Powerful": User Acquisition Methods Do Not Encourage Payment
DouBao’s 345 million users are mostly acquired passively:
- Embedded in the TikTok ecosystem: Users click through while browsing short videos without even realizing they are using an AI tool.
- Pre-installed on smartphones: Available by default on OPPO and vivo devices, with users not actively seeking out AI features.
- Spread through family circles: Younger members help older ones install the app, treating it more as a novelty.
The common factor in all these cases is that no one has informed the users that the product is worth paying for. In contrast, with Kimi, users were aware of potential costs through opening-screen ads and Bilibili reviews. For DouBao, the concept of payment never even crossed their minds from the moment they started using the app.
2. The Announcement of Fees Drove Away 6.1 Million Users
In May, when DouBao updated its pricing model (before officially charging), it lost 6.1 million monthly active users. The reason is simple:
- Users had been "fed for free" for three years, and the sudden demand for payment met with resistance: "If it was free before, why should I pay now?"
- The switch to a paid model meant no change in cost for them; services like Alibaba's Qianwen and Baidu Wenxin remained free, so users simply switched to alternatives.
Many of these users had never even seen the payment option and uninstalled the app as soon as they heard about the fee increase. Essentially, their expectation of a free service was shattered without them having considered the product’s value.
3. The Paid Version Lacks Substantive Value
The paid version of DouBao promises "more data quotas and priority during peak times," but users are looking for features that the free version already offers:
- Free version keeps evolving: When the paid version was released, the free version was also updated to 2.1 Turbo, which still provided all the necessary basic functions.
- No significant difference: Customer service stated that paying does not equate to better performance, but users complained that there was no real difference between the two versions—no exclusive flagship models or unique features like large context windows.
- Unconvincing experience: Complex tasks (such as verifying multiple data points) still encountered issues, leaving users without a compelling reason to pay.
4. ZhiPu Coding Plan as a Counterexample
ZhiPu Coding Plan is aimed at developers, who were prepared to pay from the start:
- Continuous sales despite price increases: Even after three price hikes in 2026 (with discounts removed, model upgrades, and an overseas version that doubled in price), usage increased by 400%.
- Users willing to pay for value: The highest-tier plan is often sold out within days due to developers' need for a tool that is cheaper than Cursor yet still effective. They are evaluating the product based on cost-effectiveness, not whether it’s free or not.
- Contrast with DouBao: Users of ZhiPu came with an expectation of payment, whereas those of DouBao did not, leading to a stark difference in outcomes.
5. The Brand's Identity Is Misaligned
DouBao is perceived as a lifestyle and entertainment tool by users, used for activities like chatting, helping the elderly with smartphones, or taking photos with celebrities. Suddenly shifting to a focus on office tasks (using computers, accessing Office) doesn’t resonate with them:
- Fixed brand perception: Reviews categorize DouBao as an entertainment app, making it less credible.
- Comparison with ChatGPT: OpenAI keeps GPT-4 behind a pay wall, while the free version uses GPT-3.5, creating a clear difference that users are willing to pay for.
6. The Root of DouBao’s Challenges
The real issue with DouBao is not whether it can charge fees but whether users are willing to do so. Users acquired through free channels lack the awareness that payment is necessary. The brand’s identity does not align with its paid services, and the paid version does not offer anything truly unique or valuable. To overcome these challenges, DouBao either needs to re-educate users (at a high cost) or deliver something genuinely compelling (such as an exclusive flagship model). Whether the entire industry will eventually move towards charging is uncertain, but users who switch to free products may face similar issues in the future. However, DouBao, which has been treated as a casual tool for three years, should not be the one bearing this burden.