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

How companies use dark patterns to keep you subscribed

pudding.cool

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 191 posts

Re: How companies use dark patterns to keep you subscribed

#41

Post by graypegg »

dclowd9901 wrote: post #36
graypegg wrote: post #3

I heard someone say a while back that “cancelled customers are just potential future customers”. Anyone that’s had an easy cancellation process will remember that flexibility if they ever need that service again. No idea why no large subscription service seems to understand that. Make me go thru annoying hoops and you’ve lost me for good!

I mean, just thinking through it logically, it _must_ be harder getting someone to sign back up for a service they quit right? I mean, they tried it and then they left it because ostensibly they didn’t think it provided value. How does that equation change?

The sample we’re talking about is people who want to cancel. It’s going to be hard to win them back no matter what, but it’s harder if the last interaction they had felt like being scammed.

Also a lot of people cancel for reasons like current finances, solving the problem they signed up to solve, or their usage is seasonal.

Re: How companies use dark patterns to keep you subscribed

#42

Post by madeofpalk »

ocimbote wrote: post #40

It's good some knowledge has been gathered as documentation (if not evidence), but these practices are even considered best practices internally, they're essential constituents to a subscription model. Even before the Internet, if you care to look.

It may be "best practice" to send cancelling customers to a retentions department to haggle with them to try and prevent them from leaving, but it's still a dark pattern.

Re: How companies use dark patterns to keep you subscribed

#43

Post by dclowd9901 »

eli wrote: post #13

"Deceptive patterns" is now the preferred term for what used to be called "dark patterns" It's both more descriptive and avoids equating "dark" to "bad". I've also heard "hostile patterns" as an umbrella term that covers deceptive patterns as well as careless UX problems like a design that isn't accessible.

I always took “dark” in this context to mean “subterfuge”, like they were trying to sneak something past you (like “going dark”).

“Deceptive” does seem more descriptive, if not exactly poetic.

Re: How companies use dark patterns to keep you subscribed

#44

Post by hutzlibu »

codetrotter wrote: post #10
pelagicAustral wrote: post #2

No shit! As an anecdote just yesterday I fell for the premium meme on LinkedIn... I could just not stand the idea of not knowing who visited my profile! (how weak of me), they literally charged me 20 bucks (half price) for a month of premium, I bet I will completely forget to cancel the sub next month and I will end up paying 40 dollars for a few more months until I finally decide its been enough... Also, fell for Sp…

> I bet I will completely forget to cancel the sub next month and I will end up paying 40 dollars for a few more months until I finally decide its been enough... Usually if you cancel now you will still get to enjoy the rest of the period you paid for, without having to risk auto renewal. With these kinds of things in general I mean.

Yes, that's how it usually works, even though all the dark patterns try to imply otherwise. ("Cancel now and loose everything")

It gets even better, you can get even rewarded, if you cancel early.

With midjourney there was a free trial (2 weeks) but only if you subscribed and registered payment.

I did this and then tried to cancel immmediately.

"Oh no, please don't go, we give you 2 more weeks of free trial"

Ok I don't go now and take it.

Got it.

Ok, now I cancel. Worked and still 1 month of free trial.

Re: How companies use dark patterns to keep you subscribed

#45

Post by madeofpalk »

ouid wrote: post #14
graypegg wrote: post #3

I heard someone say a while back that “cancelled customers are just potential future customers”. Anyone that’s had an easy cancellation process will remember that flexibility if they ever need that service again. No idea why no large subscription service seems to understand that. Make me go thru annoying hoops and you’ve lost me for good!

Well, exploiting brand loyalty is also a dark pattern. The better your brand, the more you can sell it for.

Presumably people have brand loyalty because they think they're recieving a good product they like. That's not a dark pattern, that's good!

Or maybe I'm being too idealistic as to what drives "brand loyalty".

Re: How companies use dark patterns to keep you subscribed

#46

Post by dclowd9901 »

pelagicAustral wrote: post #2

No shit! As an anecdote just yesterday I fell for the premium meme on LinkedIn... I could just not stand the idea of not knowing who visited my profile! (how weak of me), they literally charged me 20 bucks (half price) for a month of premium, I bet I will completely forget to cancel the sub next month and I will end up paying 40 dollars for a few more months until I finally decide its been enough... Also, fell for Sp…

It used to be that if you worked for LinkedIn, you got a premium subscription for life. That’s how I got mine. Could go that route.

Re: How companies use dark patterns to keep you subscribed

#47

Post by ssharp »

I use Spectrum for home internet and they ran a deal for a while where you could as like 15 streaming channels for $15. It wasn't a bad deal to get a few channels for live sports + local news. Eventually, they started adding in more in "fees" for the TV package than the TV package itself costs.

There's no way to cancel online, so I had to call in. I have to give my name and contact information to at least 3 people and wait on hold in between each time I'm passed between different departments / levels of support. By the time I get the person on the phone who can actually cancel my TV service, I've been on the phone for 30 minutes. That's when she told me "you still have 20 days left on this month's plan, if you cancel today, you'll lose access immediately or you can call us back in 20 days to cancel and still enjoy the service".

I'd never heard that one before. I'd assume I'd either 1) get a pro-rated refund if access is cut off today or 2) get access for the time I've already paid for. At that point, it wasn't worth squabbling over $15 or 20 days of access, so I just canceled.

Re: How companies use dark patterns to keep you subscribed

#48

Post by WWWWH »

pelagicAustral wrote: post #11
realjohng wrote: post #5

Canceling AOL back I’m the day was impossible. It took a phone call and they would bully you to not cancel. Thanks for the post- these tactics should be called out.

Cancelling my Times (UK) sub was almost impossible. They also make you call them, and then if you have enough will power you can get past the flurry of "N months free service", "half-price for the next year", and whatever else they can throw at you to make you reconsider your unquestionably hesitant stance.

That's a good reminder though. I subscribe and don't want to cancel but I would like a discount. Let's see how I get on.

Re: How companies use dark patterns to keep you subscribed

#49

Post by ezfe »

ssharp wrote: post #47

I use Spectrum for home internet and they ran a deal for a while where you could as like 15 streaming channels for $15. It wasn't a bad deal to get a few channels for live sports + local news. Eventually, they started adding in more in "fees" for the TV package than the TV package itself costs. There's no way to cancel online, so I had to call in. I have to give my name and contact information to at least 3 people an…

I switched from Spectrum to T-Mobile 5G and while I still have Spectrum on a $5/month holding plan I'm very much looking forward to cancelling after having a little more time with T-Mobile. It's been solid so far though

Re: How companies use dark patterns to keep you subscribed

#50

Post by madeofpalk »

azangru wrote: post #31
eli wrote: post #13

"Deceptive patterns" is now the preferred term for what used to be called "dark patterns" It's both more descriptive and avoids equating "dark" to "bad". I've also heard "hostile patterns" as an umbrella term that covers deceptive patterns as well as careless UX problems like a design that isn't accessible.

> "Deceptive patterns" is now the preferred term Preferred by whom though? The authors of the article preferred "dark patterns" — probably as something more commonly used in their circles.

Dark patterns is still a euphemism used to soften the blow of straight up deceptive and manipulative interfaces.
Post reply on HN