Subscription counts in G+ are only a problem (to me) if:
A) They are too low for a user to engage anyone, which is simply untrue (I have lots of fun and engaging conversations - with strangers, often - on G+)
B) The product relies on a massive user base.
You'll have to ask Google about point B as far as profitability goes, but for me, point B does not apply because I don't care if my Aunt is on G+.
To me, G+ is a much nicer Twitter, and a way to organize and meta-tag my contacts. Nothing more. I use it every day and I am happy with it like that.
I would be very sad if G+ ever became like Facebook (which, in my very cynical opinion, is basically a 'happy birthday' rotary club & dating service).
Don't take me wrong. But I think your comment reaffirms what everyone and the author of the post says about Google+. That Google+ is quickly turning out to be an elitist network where people don't want what they perceive as 'common' people to be part of. And it's not cool anymore for them once it's adopted widely. It's not much very different from how iOS app users reacted when Instagram launched their Android app and saw a flood of Android users coming in to the network or how Quora early adopters complained about when they opened up from the private beta.
A) They are too low for a user to engage anyone, which is simply untrue (I have lots of fun and engaging conversations - with strangers, often - on G+)
B) The product relies on a massive user base.
You'll have to ask Google about point B as far as profitability goes, but for me, point B does not apply because I don't care if my Aunt is on G+.
To me, G+ is a much nicer Twitter, and a way to organize and meta-tag my contacts. Nothing more. I use it every day and I am happy with it like that.
I would be very sad if G+ ever became like Facebook (which, in my very cynical opinion, is basically a 'happy birthday' rotary club & dating service).