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

New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 363 posts

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#11

Post by teaearlgraycold »

sxp wrote: post #5

It's unclear whether this junk fee law will have teeth. In theory, California has the same anti-drip pricing law, but restaurants have a specific carve out [1] which is bullshit because the drip pricing that most people complain about is the X% "service charges" and "lifestyle fees" that restaurants have at the bottom of their menu in small print. From what I can tell online, NYC rules won't have this carveout, but I…

At least in CA they need to disclose them now. Previously some restaurants would just hit you with a surprise mandatory tip.

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#13

Post by aioproductos »

I'm building a SaaS right now and made the "non-deceptive" choices this law wants: cancellation is one click from settings, no retention maze, no surprise renewal, 30-day money-back. What surprised me is how much the tooling assumes you want the dark patterns. Billing platforms ship "cancellation flow" templates that are really retention funnels — discount offer, pause offer, survey, guilt screen, then maybe the button. The default path is the deceptive path; you have to actively rip stuff out to be straightforward.

Which I think explains why this needs regulation at all. Every individual dark pattern is locally rational — it demonstrably improves net retention, so any PM optimizing a dashboard will keep it. The cost (people who feel trapped and tell everyone) never shows up in the same spreadsheet. Markets are bad at pricing "customers who quietly hate you."

The one-click-cancel requirement is the part with real teeth. Junk-fee rules die by carve-out (see California's restaurant exemption), but "cancel must be as easy as signup" is binary enough to actually enforce.

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#15

Post by Razengan »

Did a politician's kid rack up hundreds of dollars on some stupid game?

I still don't know why Apple, oft parading as the people's champion, automatically converts trials to subscriptions.

So many scummy apps exploit this by offering a 1 week trial and saying like "only $4/month!" but charging a 1 year's sub after the trial period ends.

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#17

Post by buzer »

wnevets wrote: post #10
sxp wrote: post #5

It's unclear whether this junk fee law will have teeth. In theory, California has the same anti-drip pricing law, but restaurants have a specific carve out [1] which is bullshit because the drip pricing that most people complain about is the X% "service charges" and "lifestyle fees" that restaurants have at the bottom of their menu in small print. From what I can tell online, NYC rules won't have this carveout, but I…

> which is bullshit because the drip pricing that most people complain about is the X% "service charges" and "lifestyle fees" that restaurants have at the bottom of their menu in small print. I don't think I go to the same restaurants as everyone else.

It's unfortunately somewhat common these days and personally I actively avoid any place which does this. At least it's only somewhat common rather than the standard so it's still possible. Couple of examples:

https://sushiconfidential.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/sc_... "3.5% Living Wage Surcharge added to each bill which allows us to provide the service you have always enjoyed!"

https://www.pacificcatch.com/menu/ "NorCal - A 3% surcharge (5% in San Francisco) will be added to all Guest checks to help offset the rising cost of wages and benefits. This is not gratuity."

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#18

Post by nkrisc »

wnevets wrote: post #10
sxp wrote: post #5

It's unclear whether this junk fee law will have teeth. In theory, California has the same anti-drip pricing law, but restaurants have a specific carve out [1] which is bullshit because the drip pricing that most people complain about is the X% "service charges" and "lifestyle fees" that restaurants have at the bottom of their menu in small print. From what I can tell online, NYC rules won't have this carveout, but I…

> which is bullshit because the drip pricing that most people complain about is the X% "service charges" and "lifestyle fees" that restaurants have at the bottom of their menu in small print. I don't think I go to the same restaurants as everyone else.

I tried searching for what a "lifestyle fee" is and all I could find is references to "living wage fee" which is essentially a forced tip added to the bill.

A service charge for large groups though is understandable as they typically will require much more attention and work from waitstaff than the typical small dining party.

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#19

Post by Rebelgecko »

teaearlgraycold wrote: post #11
sxp wrote: post #5

It's unclear whether this junk fee law will have teeth. In theory, California has the same anti-drip pricing law, but restaurants have a specific carve out [1] which is bullshit because the drip pricing that most people complain about is the X% "service charges" and "lifestyle fees" that restaurants have at the bottom of their menu in small print. From what I can tell online, NYC rules won't have this carveout, but I…

At least in CA they need to disclose them now. Previously some restaurants would just hit you with a surprise mandatory tip.

Usually by the time people are seated and you read the fine print on the back of the menu, inertia has taken over.

Re: New York City to ban deceptive subscription practices

#20

Post by patrickmay »

buzer wrote: post #17
wnevets wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which is bullshit because the drip pricing that most people complain about is the X% "service charges" and "lifestyle fees" that restaurants have at the bottom of their menu in small print. I don't think I go to the same restaurants as everyone else.

It's unfortunately somewhat common these days and personally I actively avoid any place which does this. At least it's only somewhat common rather than the standard so it's still possible. Couple of examples: https://sushiconfidential.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/sc_... "3.5% Living Wage Surcharge added to each bill which allows us to provide the service you have always enjoyed!" https://www.pacificcatch.com/menu/…

Because increasing prices by that percentage is too hard?
Post reply on HN