Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021) • Hacker News Board

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#251

Post by tomnipotent » Sat, Jul 30, 2022, 1:21 PM UTC

marginalia_nu wrote: post #210

ben174 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. The software would get abandoned once they've cashed in on the bulk of people buying it. They can trickle in more sales over time, but that's not going to amount to nearly as much as the initial payload, and therefore the motivation to continue developing dwindles.

You can release new versions though. This is what a large chunk of the software industry has done up until recently. Photoshop has gone through a lot of version numbers through the years. Although it does sort of put pressure on the developers to actually refine their product and continue to deliver tangible improvements. Nobody is going to pay for a UI that's been re-arranged a bit.

Except a "new version" is arbitrary, and the decision to do so was made for financial reasons and not technical. Every new version of Photoshop had some percentage of people complaining "why can't this update just be a patch?".

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#252

Post by tomnipotent » Sat, Jul 30, 2022, 1:22 PM UTC

withinboredom wrote: post #102

chrisseaton wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the software requires continuous updates and a server component and storage and things, this doesn't make any sense.

There’s a ceiling, a point you can never pass, with a subscription model due to churn. There isn’t a ceiling with one-off purchases.

Subscription's exchange a higher ceiling for a higher floor, which makes running a business much easier.

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#253

Post by api » Sat, Jul 30, 2022, 1:23 PM UTC

nbzso wrote: post #208

SaaS model is applicable in some use cases. The VC like it, because they can give the investors comfortable idea of progressive growth and quick ROI. But I am patiently waiting to see what will be the consumer reaction when everything becomes compartmentalized and monetized to hell. Like the great ideas of geniuses in BMW headquarters:) https://www.thedrive.com/news/bmw-is-charging-a-subscription... https://www.wired…

It’s not even growth or ROI. It’s that reliably recurring revenue is valued at a much higher multiple than non recurring revenue.

VCs and other investors including public markets would rather see $1M ARR recurring through subscriptions with low churn than a single year with $10M revenue and no subscriptions. Even multiple years of growth in non recurring revenue will often be valued lower than less growth in subscription revenue.

This is why SaaS type models have taken over and why every other business is trying to desperately shoehorn in some kind of subscription revenue. The latter gives us car companies with subscription cloud unlock services, etc.

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#254

Post by gizmo » Sat, Jul 30, 2022, 1:25 PM UTC

The VC model is to blame, I think. The default VC calculation goes something like this. $100 million fund invested in 20 companies at $5 each. 18 or so go bust, break-even, get acquihired. The remaining two return maybe $100m each after 10 years. With this outcome the VC fund has a meager return, barely outperforms the S&P on a risk-adjusted basis.

What VCs are really looking for are big multibillion dollar exits. And you can't get there by selling $50 perpetual usage licenses to consumers.

It's a real shame, because most software I use can be written by a handful of good engineers in a couple of years. You can make great software that stands the test of time this way. But businesses that operate this way are not investible. And they now have to compete with free products dumped on the market by goliaths such as MS and Apple, and with free products made by venture backed companies that just want to gobble up market share, aiming for a monetizable monopoly down the road.

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#255

Post by civilized » Sat, Jul 30, 2022, 1:25 PM UTC

I assumed everything was going to SaaS hell and was pleasantly surprised to find I could still buy Microsoft Office when I recently got a new Mac.

Office for Mac wasn't great, especially in 2008 when I first got it, but it still gave me a good 13 years of use. Given a purchase price of $200 and a subscription price of $65/year for Office365, I'm very confident I get a better deal with the one-time purchase, even though I know I will probably eventually need to purchase again. (The fact that I don't get low quality add-ons like OneDrive is an added bonus.)

Constant maintenance of software is overrated. Most features being added these days bring negative value.

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#256

Post by BonoboIO » Sat, Jul 30, 2022, 1:25 PM UTC

I don't know anybody who pays for adobe products beside some professional photographers/artists.

The support is nonexistent and their pricing is consumer unfriendly. You can only make yearly subscriptions and even the student prices are high.

Acrobat for 180€ a year and it crashes one in 10 times when I convert some things and takes all the edits with it to the grave. Ridiculous.

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#257

Post by woodpanel » Sat, Jul 30, 2022, 1:28 PM UTC

nbzso wrote: post #208

SaaS model is applicable in some use cases. The VC like it, because they can give the investors comfortable idea of progressive growth and quick ROI. But I am patiently waiting to see what will be the consumer reaction when everything becomes compartmentalized and monetized to hell. Like the great ideas of geniuses in BMW headquarters:) https://www.thedrive.com/news/bmw-is-charging-a-subscription... https://www.wired…

BMWs test-balloon gets bad rep, but the PR kerfuffle just shows how much we're influenced by marketing, considering Tesla's offering of selling you a cheaper car that will be permanently disabled from receiving certain software enabled features and no such outcry happening at all.

To play devils advocate:

- it streamlines production massively

- while still allowing the most affordable version to be bought

- but improves product options on the secondary car market

Im no fan of BMW's subscription model, but when you're leasing a car, it's effectively the same.

Edit: I'd rather have the option to opt out of this pricing scheme even if it would coust me more upfront

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#258

Post by nickjj » Sat, Jul 30, 2022, 1:29 PM UTC

biztos wrote: post #242

nickjj wrote: post #233

For technical learning material do you prefer a SAAS model where you pay $10-20 / month for all-in access to short isolated videos in a related subject (potentially ~4 new videos a month) or dropping $50-150 one time for a course that could be anywhere from 3-15 hours long? It's kind of comparing apples to oranges but as someone who has made courses for a while I've always thought about the idea of doing weekly scree…

I don’t see what’s SAAS about a content subscription but yes, I prefer that. Reason being that I’m often unsure how deep I want to go in a subject, so putting up say $20/mo gives me the option of only spending $20 if during the first month I decide it’s not what I want. If you want to see a very good (IMO) implementation of this model, check out Ray Wenderlich. Lots of free stuff to show you the style. Then $20/mo or…

> I don’t see what’s SAAS about a content subscription but yes, I prefer that.

Yeah that's a fair point. I boiled this down to paying per month or a 1 time purchase. It was coming from a more general angle where it could be content, a product / service or heated seats which when you think about it all have different tastes. Content and a service could be classified as different. For example I don't mind the idea of paying a one time fee for a photo editor but paying per month bothers me on principle because it doesn't feel justified, which is weird because in both cases you'd want or expect updates and if you're going down this rabbit hole of paying for 1 year's worth of updates this boils down to paying per month but on a different schedule with an added bonus of controlling if you want to pay for a major update or not.

Thanks for the feedback! Ray's site looks like he has hundreds of courses available, does your answer change if there's "only" ~30 standalone videos (not courses) on a specific topic with intent that more are being delivered every week? I guess the question there is at which point do you deem the catalogue large enough to pay? With one time course you at least know what you see is what you get with a possibility of there being more added over time in the form of updates.

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#259

Post by closewith » Sat, Jul 30, 2022, 1:30 PM UTC

julianlam wrote: post #227

closewith wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However, if your chair allows someone to rob your house, in most jurisdictions, the manufacturer will face enormous liability. Maybe we should introduce that expectation for software developers, too.

Where does it end? I'm liable for my client's laziness in not upgrading to a patched version?

This just reads to me that you don't want to have to accept any liability for the work you produce. Why shouldn't you be liable for the initial flawed software that you sold to an unsuspecting buyer? Why should you be able to suddenly shift liability onto your customer by releasing a patch?

In the United States, the landmark product liability case was Escola v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co.. In the majority decision, one of the judges wrote:

> Even if there is no negligence, however, public policy demands that responsibility be fixed wherever it will most effectively reduce the hazards to life and health inherent in defective products that reach the market. It is evident that the manufacturer can anticipate some hazards and guard against the recurrence of others, as the public cannot. Those who suffer injury from defective products are unprepared to meet its consequences. The cost of an injury and the loss of time or health may be an overwhelming misfortune to the person injured, and a needless one, for the risk of injury can be insured by the manufacturer and distributed among the public as a cost of doing business. It is to the public interest to discourage the marketing of products having defects that are a menace to the public. If such products nevertheless find their way into the market it is to the public interest to place the responsibility for whatever injury they may cause upon the manufacturer, who, even if he is not negligent in the manufacture of the product, is responsible for its reaching the market. However intermittently such injuries may occur and however haphazardly they may strike, the risk of their occurrence is a constant risk and a general one. Against such a risk there should be general and constant protection and the manufacturer is best situated to afford such protection.

There are some things to unpack here.

First, as a software developer, you are supposedly the expert and are in a far better position to evaluate your software and its potential hazards. Your customers are neither required to be experts in your software or how it might harm them, and realistically have no way to properly assess it no matter their skill level, so the responsibility falls on you.

Second, it is in the public interest to dissuade software developers from releasing faulty, broken, dangerous, etc software to the public. If a law which makes you responsible for the results of your software's failing makes you think twice about selling it, then that is a benefit to the public. If you aren't confident enough that you can accept the liability, why should your customers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escola_v._Coca-Cola_Bottling_C....

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#260

Post by tomrod » Sat, Jul 30, 2022, 1:32 PM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #220

projektfu wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but if my dehumidifier model causes fires it will be recalled and I'll get my money back to buy a new one. Although, I think some companies use recalls in a dark pattern, specifically baby product companies.

So you're talking about an unusually serious flaw and almost certainly for some bounded period of time--and assuming the purchasers even learns of the recall. Automobiles aside, I don't think in my 60+ years I have ever been aware of a recall on a product I purchased.

That may be the case, but a lot of people do pay attention to recalls. Whether a majority, plurality, or minority of the population I have no idea, but folks in my social circle do search for recalls when purchasing used.