31–40 of 438 posts
Dear customers: we know. But our businesses are viable as subscription services, and not as one-off or ad-hoc puchase models. We know because we tried them. So we're catering to the people who are OK with buying a subscription because there are enough of them. Sorry if that doesn't suit you.
Dear customers: we know. But our businesses are viable as subscription services, and not as one-off or ad-hoc puchase models. We know because we tried them. So we're catering to the people who are OK with buying a subscription because there are enough of them. Sorry if that doesn't suit you.
Dear customers: we know. But our businesses are viable as subscription services, and not as one-off or ad-hoc puchase models. We know because we tried them. So we're catering to the people who are OK with buying a subscription because there are enough of them. Sorry if that doesn't suit you.
One thing that subscriptions have going for them is that they're a relatively fair way to charge for products that have continuous operating and development costs. With one-off payments there's the obvious issue that you're either overcharging in case the startup (which the article talks about specifically) fails or you're severely undercharging which I think is more common if anything. Just a few days ago I noticed…
You can see evidence of that in our general industry trends, where software is either "being worked on" or "dead", but can never be finished.
That's tolerable for pure software projects, but now we're increasingly seeing the same trend with physical devices.
Dear customers: we know. But our businesses are viable as subscription services, and not as one-off or ad-hoc puchase models. We know because we tried them. So we're catering to the people who are OK with buying a subscription because there are enough of them. Sorry if that doesn't suit you.
> But our businesses are viable as subscription services, and not as one-off or ad-hoc puchase models. Doesn't explain businesses that had been per-purchase for a long time and are now still switching to subscriptions though. (E.g. photoshop, jetbrains...)
Dear customers: we know. But our businesses are viable as subscription services, and not as one-off or ad-hoc puchase models. We know because we tried them. So we're catering to the people who are OK with buying a subscription because there are enough of them. Sorry if that doesn't suit you.
> So we're catering to the people who are OK with buying a subscription because there are enough of them. Are there enough of them? Many services seems like they can only exist because many people forget to cancel their subscription.
I have subscriptions that remain active despite not actively using the product: I could save money by unsubscribing and resubscribing but the money saved isn’t worth the effort to re-subscribe each time I want to use it.
Dear customers: we know. But our businesses are viable as subscription services, and not as one-off or ad-hoc puchase models. We know because we tried them. So we're catering to the people who are OK with buying a subscription because there are enough of them. Sorry if that doesn't suit you.
> But our businesses are viable as subscription services, and not as one-off or ad-hoc puchase models. Doesn't explain businesses that had been per-purchase for a long time and are now still switching to subscriptions though. (E.g. photoshop, jetbrains...)
Dear governments, I hate that I can't unsubscribe from services without going through the provider's dark-patterns first.
I make good money, but I can’t afford to have 10 subscription services for 9,99 per month. I have a few for 0,99 per month.
Dear innovative people: think of a better model. 1. Free = problematic with the lack of money 2. Freemium = looks good if the balance is right 3. Ads = Mostly works but the model is flawed and skewed 4. Subscription = Love/Hate currently trendy but too relied on 5. Pay-what-you-can = Fans provide the service for everyone 6. Premium only = Only what it's worth, when it's worth 7. Enterprise = S'ok because my company/o…
How about good old "pay for it once, then own it"?