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

Nearly a third of new subscribers to news publications cancel in the first 24hrs

niemanlab.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 183 posts

Re: Nearly a third of new subscribers to news publications cancel in the first 24hrs

#121

Post by kippster »

njharman wrote: post #118

40% are "sleepers". Meaning nearly half of their subscription revenue is from people who forgot they had it, don't use it, and will keep getting auto-renewed until something reminds them they're paying for this thing they don't want. When your product is so worthless and uncompelling on nearly half customers don't use it and your business model relies on them forgetting they're paying for it, then your industry is DO…

> When your product is so worthless and uncompelling on nearly half customers don't use it and your business model relies on them forgetting they're paying for it, then your industry is DONE.

I think this is the model most commercial gyms operate on.

Re: Nearly a third of new subscribers to news publications cancel in the first 24hrs

#122

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

P_I_Staker wrote: post #64

The reason being: a single publication gives a vary narrow perspective

What publications are you subscribed to? Which publications do you read?

I find that high quality publications give quite an honest and objective view.

Re: Nearly a third of new subscribers to news publications cancel in the first 24hrs

#123

Post by linuxftw »

ascagnel_ wrote: post #94
colinmhayes wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can change Amazon video to only show free options. A subscription that made all the rentable movies free would be prohibitively expensive. You should basically be thinking of prime video and the movie rental service as different businesses.

Really the issue is that Amazon is trying to use a single app ("Prime Video") for both the Prime Video service (all-you-can-watch library of limited content) and their video storefront (a la carte purchases of a larger library). They should have split them out years ago, or at least done a better job of segmenting the two.

Completely disagree here. It's kinda like going into blockbuster used to be. You can spend $1 on the cheap movies (eg, the free ones on prime), or you want to watch a brand new major release, you spend more.

Cable has done the same thing for decades. Subscription includes a ton of free content, and you can pay more for PPV or on demand new releases.

Re: Nearly a third of new subscribers to news publications cancel in the first 24hrs

#124

Post by dymk »

kippster wrote: post #121
njharman wrote: post #118

40% are "sleepers". Meaning nearly half of their subscription revenue is from people who forgot they had it, don't use it, and will keep getting auto-renewed until something reminds them they're paying for this thing they don't want. When your product is so worthless and uncompelling on nearly half customers don't use it and your business model relies on them forgetting they're paying for it, then your industry is DO…

> When your product is so worthless and uncompelling on nearly half customers don't use it and your business model relies on them forgetting they're paying for it, then your industry is DONE. I think this is the model most commercial gyms operate on.

And with that let me plug the YMCA. It might vary by region, but the ones around here (PNW) are month to month payment, no sign up fees, far larger and cleaner than any LA Fitness or Planet Fitness. All around a wonderful gym option.

Re: Nearly a third of new subscribers to news publications cancel in the first 24hrs

#125

Post by auggierose »

AlwaysRock wrote: post #91
auggierose wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you prefer the movies you can rent were not there at all?

What an odd question. I would prefer the movies that are on the service I pay for to be included in my package. It's a different service, rentals, smashed into the service I pay for, prime "free" videos. That is what makes it frustrating. I do in fact sometimes end up renting those videos which is why they include them. But it's not a good customer experience by any means.

That's only an odd question if you assume it costs Amazon nothing to include videos in prime. So the alternatives are: a) Only free prime videos. b) Free prime videos + videos you can rent. There is no option c) All videos in the world available for free on prime. As much as you would maybe like it.

Re: Nearly a third of new subscribers to news publications cancel in the first 24hrs

#126

Post by CoastalCoder »

yesplorer wrote: post #112
CoastalCoder wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if we can (legally) fight using the same methods that the companies use. E.g., suppose their phone system can handle 1000 people in queue + 20 live conversations. Companies keep the callers waiting, with no regard to the cost to the caller, so the company can minimize their customer-service costs. So how about we even things up? Create company-specific automated services that call in using customer-oriented…

why will they wait?

I'm not sure about the legalities, but some possible answers are:

a) Because the automated system will continue to call them until they connect a real person to the customer.

b) If the law is silent about which party can impose bureaucratic hassles on the other, then perhaps this system would satisfy some legal obligations.

I.e., if the law allows a business to argue, "The customer who wanted to cancel their subscription never stayed on the phone long enough tell that to our customer service rep!", then perhaps the law also allows a customer to argue, "I tried to cancel my subscription, but they kept hanging up on my voice menu system!"

Perhaps I misunderstand the law, but my (potential) pet peeve is that businesses get away with imposing time-consuming, costly friction on their customers in the form of paperwork, call-waiting time, etc. I think it would be just for customers to repay that in kind.

Re: Nearly a third of new subscribers to news publications cancel in the first 24hrs

#127

Post by banannaise »

nerdponx wrote: post #113
ec109685 wrote: post #73

This is unethical: “It makes sense that sleepers churn: They aren’t getting much value from their subscription. Yet they don’t churn right away. In any given month, 90% of sleepers will simply continue to stay inactive. It’s only when they wake up again and come back that their cancellation rates soar, generally accounting for about 30% of active churn. This makes re-engaging sleepers difficult. How do you bring them…

> These are all tactics that hurt the overall subscription industry by making people not trust companies. The ethical thing to do is ensure each subscriber is subscribing by choice. Tragedy of the commons. See also: taxis. Uber succeeded in part because taxi cartels had become so incredibly unlikable.

And now Uber is its own unlikable taxi cartel, and so the cycle continues.

Re: Nearly a third of new subscribers to news publications cancel in the first 24hrs

#128

Post by CoastalCoder »

salawat wrote: post #102
CoastalCoder wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if we can (legally) fight using the same methods that the companies use. E.g., suppose their phone system can handle 1000 people in queue + 20 live conversations. Companies keep the callers waiting, with no regard to the cost to the caller, so the company can minimize their customer-service costs. So how about we even things up? Create company-specific automated services that call in using customer-oriented…

Your Call Center workers would be instructed to hang up immediately, and systems would be programmed to try to recognize that system. You have hit on something important though: Customer call centers are generally one of the first places to be aggressively ootimized, and if you hace a call center that has long queue times, this is a powerful signal about what management really thinks is important.

> Your Call Center workers would be instructed to hang up immediately, and systems would be programmed to try to recognize that system.

I'm curious if this has the potential to become an arms race similar to email spam generation / detection.

Although perhaps in the U.S., STIR/SHAKEN would mean more creativity is required.

Re: Nearly a third of new subscribers to news publications cancel in the first 24hrs

#129

Post by LaundroMat »

Someone1234 wrote: post #37
jwie wrote: post #6

This is just lack of auto renew protections. Consumers are wise to this, and they’re not really canceling. I bet if you could turn off auto-renew they wouldn’t cancel. But, to nobody’s surprise, the MBAs don’t like options where the user doesn’t give away money by accident. Auto renew is one of those things that should be illegal to default users into.

The harder a service is to cancel, the more unlikely I am to ever re-subscribe. That's something they need to start studying in business/MBA school. That SOME customer churn reduction strategies directly lead to indefinite loss of customers. To give a specific anecdote: Ooma offers a very interesting service, hassle-free "landline" (VoIP) turn-key phone service, the price is reasonable, and they have multiple offerin…

The customers they lost don't show up on any metric.

I've often wondered about how to measure aversion instead of conversion.

Post reply on HN