Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook wants up to 30% of fan subscriptions vs Patreon’s 5%

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 234 posts

Re: Facebook wants up to 30% of fan subscriptions vs Patreon’s 5%

#81

Post by kosievdmerwe »

duskwuff wrote: post #55
Deimorz wrote: post #11

I don't understand why people are acting like this is ridiculous and will obviously fail. 30% is the same cut that Apple and Google take for everything that goes through their app stores, including all in-app purchases. It's the same cut that Steam takes. It's the same cut that YouTube takes for channel membership. Twitch takes an even larger cut: 50% from subscriptions. It's extremely well-established that people ar…

Apple and Google provide significant added value in their app stores: distribution, discoverability, licensing, testing (at least in Apple's case)... etc. Patreon is not that. At its heart, it's primarily a service for collecting donations. There is some content hosting, but that's kind of a secondary feature.

What content can you host on Patreon? I only really have experience with authors and text is cheap to host. Can you host video?

Re: Facebook wants up to 30% of fan subscriptions vs Patreon’s 5%

#82

Post by nspkr »

DuckyC wrote: post #79
nspkr wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very careful with this option, as it's based in the EU which means free speech is not considered; that makes it a very dangerous option for podcast and youtube creators, opinion bloggers, etc.

Are you saying that there isn't free speech in the EU? What are you basing this statement on?

Many countries in the EU have blasphemy laws and the European Court of Human Rights says they are okay:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/its-not-fr...

If someone criticised Jesus Christ in their podcast (for example), they would be putting Liberapay at risk. I don't believe Liberapay would allow that, so they'd just ban the user. That's what makes Liberapay a risky option.

Re: Facebook wants up to 30% of fan subscriptions vs Patreon’s 5%

#83

Post by sametmax »

nspkr wrote: post #78
jelv wrote: post #52

Liberapay takes 0% https://liberapay.com/ It's European non-profit and open source. It's funded by the donation on it's own platform.

Very careful with this option, as it's based in the EU which means free speech is not considered; that makes it a very dangerous option for podcast and youtube creators, opinion bloggers, etc.

We still have Charlie Hebdo putting drawings of Mahomet on the cover so there is a still a lot of margin.

But it's good to stay vigilent.

Re: Facebook wants up to 30% of fan subscriptions vs Patreon’s 5%

#84

Post by ernesth »

nspkr wrote: post #78
jelv wrote: post #52

Liberapay takes 0% https://liberapay.com/ It's European non-profit and open source. It's funded by the donation on it's own platform.

Very careful with this option, as it's based in the EU which means free speech is not considered; that makes it a very dangerous option for podcast and youtube creators, opinion bloggers, etc.

Seeing as patreon, paypal, visa refuse clients because of their beliefs (alt-right) or their sexuality (which would be illegal in Europe), the US do not have free speech either

Re: Facebook wants up to 30% of fan subscriptions vs Patreon’s 5%

#85

Post by stale2002 »

pavlov wrote: post #77
mamborambo wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But once past initial audience discovery, the recurrent billing of patronage donations is just pure service. So logically creators should only use FB for access to new audience, build a relationship with the newly acquired audience, and pivot to direct billing or Patreon for recurrent collection.

By the same logic, YouTube creators should only use YT to build an audience, then switch to hosting their own videos. Yet they want to remain on the platform.

Video hosting costs a lot of money.

Sending an API request, to the credit card company, to bill the monthly payment, does not cost a lot of money.

Getting your audience to switch platforms for the monthly payments is a compartively easy thing to do, compared to setting up your own video hosting site.

Re: Facebook wants up to 30% of fan subscriptions vs Patreon’s 5%

#86

Post by dingaling »

michaelmrose wrote: post #74
agigao wrote: post #45

I miss those times when enthusiasm used to drive the net. Seeking profit in every corner of one’s life is demoralizing to say at least.

Most regular people call this behavior... survival. Anything else is an extreme luxury reserved for a minuscule fraction of the human race.

That mindset is only necessary if you intend the Internet to be your sole income.

I work a tiring manual job for three days to pay bills and buy nice things. The rest of the week I have some time to take photos and write other content which I share freely online.

I don't expect or demand that anyone else pay for my hobbies.

Re: Facebook wants up to 30% of fan subscriptions vs Patreon’s 5%

#87

Post by vetinari »

nspkr wrote: post #78
jelv wrote: post #52

Liberapay takes 0% https://liberapay.com/ It's European non-profit and open source. It's funded by the donation on it's own platform.

Very careful with this option, as it's based in the EU which means free speech is not considered; that makes it a very dangerous option for podcast and youtube creators, opinion bloggers, etc.

Do not worry; all these companies are private enterprises, so in US, freedom of speech doesn't apply anyway. Patreon/Paypal/Visa/Mastercard/Twitter/Facebook will drop you like a hot potato, once you publish something mildly controversial.

Re: Facebook wants up to 30% of fan subscriptions vs Patreon’s 5%

#88

Post by nspkr »

vetinari wrote: post #87
nspkr wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very careful with this option, as it's based in the EU which means free speech is not considered; that makes it a very dangerous option for podcast and youtube creators, opinion bloggers, etc.

Do not worry; all these companies are private enterprises, so in US, freedom of speech doesn't apply anyway. Patreon/Paypal/Visa/Mastercard/Twitter/Facebook will drop you like a hot potato, once you publish something mildly controversial.

So what? If Liberapay was based in the US, they could choose to continue hosting you if they wanted to. In the EU, they don't have that option.

Re: Facebook wants up to 30% of fan subscriptions vs Patreon’s 5%

#89

Post by Traster »

nspkr wrote: post #88
vetinari wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do not worry; all these companies are private enterprises, so in US, freedom of speech doesn't apply anyway. Patreon/Paypal/Visa/Mastercard/Twitter/Facebook will drop you like a hot potato, once you publish something mildly controversial.

So what? If Liberapay was based in the US, they could choose to continue hosting you if they wanted to. In the EU, they don't have that option.

That's a theoretical rather than a real objection since even if your platform doesn't get shut down the US payment processors such as paypal can shut you down and they're very difficult to get around - just ask subscribestar.

Re: Facebook wants up to 30% of fan subscriptions vs Patreon’s 5%

#90

Post by rjtavares »

nspkr wrote: post #82
DuckyC wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying that there isn't free speech in the EU? What are you basing this statement on?

Many countries in the EU have blasphemy laws and the European Court of Human Rights says they are okay: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/its-not-fr... If someone criticised Jesus Christ in their podcast (for example), they would be putting Liberapay at risk. I don't believe Liberapay would allow that, so they'd just ban the user. That's what makes Liberapay a risky option.

That's quite different from "free speech is not considered". Every country has free speech exceptions: for example, in the USA "there are several common-law exceptions, including obscenity,defamation,incitement to riot or imminent lawless action,fighting words,fraud, speech covered by copyright, and speech integral to criminal conduct"

In th EU:

> The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has been legally binding since December 1, 2009 when the Treaty of Lisbon became fully ratified and effective. Article 11 of the Charter, in part mirroring the language of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights, provides that

> 1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.

> 2. The freedom and pluralism of the media shall be respected. The European Court of Justice takes into account both the Charter and the Convention when making its rulings. According to the Treaty of Lisbon, the European Union accedes to the European Convention as an entity in its own right, making the Convention binding not only on the governments of the member states but also on the supranational institutions of the EU.

So, is speech in USA "freer" than in the EU? Yes. But in both cases free speech is recognized as a right.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_by_country

Post reply on HN