Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon

#941

Post by nottorp » Tue, Aug 13, 2024, 4:08 PM UTC

CivBase wrote: post #937

nottorp wrote: post #900

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Notifications. No thanks. > Performance. Responsiveness. Bandwidth. Offline access. Isn't Patreon basically a web site where you can pay a subscription to ... something? Why would it need all that? Does the subscriber content get delivered through Patreon?

You and I may not want notifications, but a lot of people do. > Does the subscriber content get delivered through Patreon? Yes. Many of creators deliver media content through Patreon. Announcements, updates, Q&As, early access to regular content, bonus behind-the-scenes content, and sometimes exclusive content. It all depends on the creator.

Ah so it's more like Steam than like just subscription management. Thanks.

Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon

#942

Post by ksec » Tue, Aug 13, 2024, 4:17 PM UTC

lapcat wrote: post #618

ksec wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont think, the customer, or in your example "you" does not even come into the equation. It is straightly Apple and Patreon. And in terns of Apple, they do think Patreon is accessing their customer base ( You ) and hence they want a cut of it.

This comment makes no sense to me and contradicts itself. First sentence: > "you" does not even come into the equation Second sentence: > Patreon is accessing their customer base ( You ) Of course I come into the equation. Apple does not and cannot subscribe me to a Patreon without my initiative and consent.

>without my initiative and consent.

You are acting as if someone is forcing you to do it.

>and contradicts itself.

To word it better, You the customer does not come between Apple and Patreon.

Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon

#943

Post by paulryanrogers » Tue, Aug 13, 2024, 4:35 PM UTC

kalleboo wrote: post #688

burkaman wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised to hear this, I thought it was the main selling point of Patreon. I have per-creation subscriptions to a few people on Patreon who produce very high-quality stuff very infrequently, and I will probably cancel if they are forced to switch to monthly billing. Their stuff is great, but not so great that I'm willing to sign up for a monthly fee that I forget about and then realize 3 years later that they've…

I don't follow one-off creators like that, to me the selling point of Patreon was that I could support 20 different creators each with $1-$2/mo, with 4000+ fans in aggregate it supported their lifestyle. And by billing monthly, it meant that the card fees were spread among all the creators so that 50% of the $1 didn't go to the bank/VISA, basically making microtransactions feasible. They're also killing the once-a-mo…

IIRC, Patreon now passes along full transaction costs to every creator, even if behind the scenes they may be consolidating transactions.

Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon

#944

Post by paulryanrogers » Tue, Aug 13, 2024, 4:47 PM UTC

HDThoreaun wrote: post #103

Rinzler89 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple users (I'm not one of them) seem fine with that arrangement.

Apple users mostly don’t know about the fee and almost all of them didn’t know about it when they joined the apple ecosystem.

When you're born into a cult, it's much harder to see it or the outside world objectively.

Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon

#945

Post by aftbit » Tue, Aug 13, 2024, 4:47 PM UTC

jobigoud wrote: post #629

genpfault wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'll just keep using the per-creation model. Until Patreon takes it away: > As a result of Apple’s mandates and in order to make sure that you can continue getting new members in the iOS app, we've started a 16-month-long migration process to bring all creators onto subscription billing by November 2025, supported by a roadmap of new features and tools to make sure the billing model works for you, your community, a…

Damn, that's really disappointing. I publish a Windows-only open source software, I don't care about the iOS app. Why should this have any impact on my project? I'm fine with my page not being available from the iOS app at all. Why do they have to remove this payment model from every other platforms? It makes no sense. OK I read this in their FAQ about this: > You will maintain control over how frequently your member…

As a per-creation consumer, yearly billing seems worse to me. Now I need to decide once a year if I am still comfortable supporting each channel, and I can't revise that based on whether the channel has decided to go totally idle throughout the year, or any other relationship.

So I guess I'm back to my original position - I will cancel 75% of my Patreon subscriptions when this lands.

Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon

#946

Post by tshaddox » Tue, Aug 13, 2024, 4:54 PM UTC

danShumway wrote: post #723

tshaddox wrote: post #705

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These are not the actions of a company that believes that its users can be trusted not to make a purchase elsewhere. Well yeah, the charitable interpretation is that of course Apple thinks their users will have a worse experience on average with subscriptions outside Apple’s ecosystem than inside of it. And it’s hard to disagree!

So... they would give Patreon money by going to their website? Is this a niche market that would never have been available to Patreon that Apple is helping Patreon access, or is this Apple needing to en-mass protect its users from themselves as a result of them being too.. I don't know, weak willed(?) not to pay for Patreon using another method? It's not both.

Well, for a popular and somewhat mainstream service like Patreon, it likely would be both.

Patreon likely gets some users who first discover Patreon via the iOS app and who would never go to the Patreon website but who would be comfortable making an iOS in-app purchase.

And Patreon also likely gets some users who first discover Patreon via the iOS app and would be comfortable going to the Patreon website to subscribe if the iOS app didn't have in-app purchases.

I was referring to that first group, which I suspect is a small portion of Patreon's total userbase, but I suspect it's a niche that Patreon is very interested in (both because Patreon can't engage them through any other channel, and because they probably have above-average discretionary spending).

The whole "protecting users from themselves" thing is just a very tired argument. You might as well say that an operating system implementing memory protection is "protecting users from themselves." Or a software vendor offering security updates is "protecting users from themselves."

Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon

#947

Post by throwitaway1123 » Tue, Aug 13, 2024, 4:55 PM UTC

chokma wrote: post #678

cortesoft wrote: post #650

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> does anybody want to argue that Apple hosting the Patreon app on iOS provides more value to Patreon subscribers and creators than the existence of Patreon itself does? Well, there is a simple way to test this... just get rid of the Patreon iOS app and just use a web version. Why does patreon need its own app? Why can't it just be web based? I wish fewer companies had apps. I don't need an app for everything. I don'…

> Why does patreon need its own app? Wondering about that, too - I always use the website on my ipad since a browser allows me to enlarge the font size when reading novels on Patreon (a feature that the app does not offer).

Not only can you increase the font size, but Safari has an immersive "reader mode" where you can change the font and color scheme, and even have Safari dictate the page to you. A massive percentage of organizations that develop native iOS apps do so because:

* Users have been indoctrinated by years of marketing (e.g. the "there's an app for that" ads).

* Safari hides the "add to home screen button" deep within the share menu, and home screen real estate is incredibly valuable. Native apps have the advantage of Smart Banners [1].

* For several years Webkit didn't support notifications, and as much as I hate annoying notifications, it's undoubtably useful from a business perspective to be able to ping users and remind them to use your application. Even after allowing notifications in Webkit, they made sure to introduce Live Activities which are exclusive to native apps.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39181567

Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon

#948

Post by BobaFloutist » Tue, Aug 13, 2024, 5:02 PM UTC

inanutshellus wrote: post #861

jliptzin wrote: post #859

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then make an app whose sole purpose is to open a website in the browser

It wouldnt matter that your app is just a web view of your website, as accepting payments that bypass the ios payment system gets your app banned. ... Thus the conversation in the first place.

But browsers, which are apps, can accept payments that bypass the ios payment system, no?

Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon

#949

Post by jms703 » Tue, Aug 13, 2024, 5:04 PM UTC

cortesoft wrote: post #650

danShumway wrote: post #389

Another point that Patreon isn't really emphasizing here that seems relevant to any conversations about "fairness" is that Apple's fees on Patreon subscriptions in-app are now higher than Patreon's fees. It's important to recognize any time that we're talking about the market that services charge what they can, not what is fair. The market does not have a concept of fairness, only competition. This is why there is no…

> does anybody want to argue that Apple hosting the Patreon app on iOS provides more value to Patreon subscribers and creators than the existence of Patreon itself does? Well, there is a simple way to test this... just get rid of the Patreon iOS app and just use a web version. Why does patreon need its own app? Why can't it just be web based? I wish fewer companies had apps. I don't need an app for everything. I don'…

YES. So much this. Patreon doesn't even mention the web version in their blog post.

Stop making apps when a website will suffice.

Re: Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon

#950

Post by vanchor3 » Tue, Aug 13, 2024, 5:05 PM UTC

bloppe wrote: post #345

bluGill wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Patreon doesn't lose anything to Apple - they give creators on Patreon a choice - charge Apple users more to cover the 30%, or eat the loss. I don't know what Patreon's take is, they are going to take the same either way. However they know their customers and users will lose from this and it is good for them to look out for their customers (it doesn't costs them much)

Patreon's take will not be the same. Apple's fee is charged first. So for all the creators that don't raise prices, Patreon is also getting 30% less, because they charge flat fees. And every creator that does raise prices will probably end up with fewer patrons, or patrons donating less, and will probably have a similar effect. It also just kinda harshes everyone's vibe when they eventually realize they're being gypp…

I believe Patreon's fees are a percentage of the total cost. i.e. if the payment is $10 and Patreon takes 10%, they'll still get $1, Apple get's $3, and the creator gets $6.