Recently we started building some small solutions on Whatsapp through BSP. Also use it as a primary comm channel. It’s abundantly clear the limitations of WhatsApp while even building simple stuff. And the cost of messaging has increased to 0.80 in India. With delivery rates reducing businesses will need to look for another solution like RCS. This almost mimics the path brand Facebook pages took. Organic reach used to be 100% and now it’s barely there
This is hands-down one of the best infrastructure analysis pieces I've read on Indian tech. The cosmetic store owner's WhatsApp-as-inventory-system story perfectly captures how consumer apps get hacked into business tools when proper B2B infrastructure doesn't exist. What really stands out is your framing of the incentive mismatch: Meta optimizes for trillion-dollar ad opportunities while Indian MSMEs need hundred-million-dollar productivity solutions. That gap explains everything - the API restrictions, the pricing volatility, the feature stagnation. The WeChat/WeCom comparison is especially powerful because it shows the solution exists and works at scale. The separation of personal and professional contexts isn't a technical challenge, it's a business model choice. Meta won't build it because unified identity metadata across contexts is more valuable than serving SME needs. Your ONDC-for-messaging proposal is the right architectural direction. Interoperability solves the 'network effects as moat' problem without requiring mass migration. Start with one vertical (construction contractors is a great wedge), prove the protocol works, let ecosystem diversity emerge. One addition I'd suggest: the protocol layer should include reputation/trust primitives from day one. WhatsApp's end-to-end encryption is great for privacy but terrible for platform-level spam control. A federated messaging protocol needs portable reputation that follows business identities across apps - otherwise every new entrant rebuilds spam filters from scratch and user experience suffers. The question isn't whether this gets built, but who builds it and whether it stays open. Government-backed infrastructure has different risks than VC-backed platforms. Both can succumb to capture. The governance model matters as much as the tehcnical architecture. Would love to see a follow-up on that.
Recently we started building some small solutions on Whatsapp through BSP. Also use it as a primary comm channel. It’s abundantly clear the limitations of WhatsApp while even building simple stuff. And the cost of messaging has increased to 0.80 in India. With delivery rates reducing businesses will need to look for another solution like RCS. This almost mimics the path brand Facebook pages took. Organic reach used to be 100% and now it’s barely there
This is hands-down one of the best infrastructure analysis pieces I've read on Indian tech. The cosmetic store owner's WhatsApp-as-inventory-system story perfectly captures how consumer apps get hacked into business tools when proper B2B infrastructure doesn't exist. What really stands out is your framing of the incentive mismatch: Meta optimizes for trillion-dollar ad opportunities while Indian MSMEs need hundred-million-dollar productivity solutions. That gap explains everything - the API restrictions, the pricing volatility, the feature stagnation. The WeChat/WeCom comparison is especially powerful because it shows the solution exists and works at scale. The separation of personal and professional contexts isn't a technical challenge, it's a business model choice. Meta won't build it because unified identity metadata across contexts is more valuable than serving SME needs. Your ONDC-for-messaging proposal is the right architectural direction. Interoperability solves the 'network effects as moat' problem without requiring mass migration. Start with one vertical (construction contractors is a great wedge), prove the protocol works, let ecosystem diversity emerge. One addition I'd suggest: the protocol layer should include reputation/trust primitives from day one. WhatsApp's end-to-end encryption is great for privacy but terrible for platform-level spam control. A federated messaging protocol needs portable reputation that follows business identities across apps - otherwise every new entrant rebuilds spam filters from scratch and user experience suffers. The question isn't whether this gets built, but who builds it and whether it stays open. Government-backed infrastructure has different risks than VC-backed platforms. Both can succumb to capture. The governance model matters as much as the tehcnical architecture. Would love to see a follow-up on that.
Very well researched post. Lots of insight to be gleaned
Just use wechat
Brilliant ; what perspective'!
Keep writing, it's was eye opening to learn about the simple things we ignore
Extremely insightful!
Thank you for making the effort to put this together🫡
This is a really insightful read ! I am sure that we will experience a platform shift in a couple of years due to the Whatsapp business restrictions
Well written, as always. Very informative.
Very interesting read. Actually faced same problems while building a product on whatsapp . Thank u for making this