Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's two or three weeks of groceries if you're on a budget. It can make a huge difference for some people -- especially the type of people who don't feel like they have any options but sex work. It's hard to blame them since OF is a relatively safe way to do it, too.
exactly. For people in HN who probably make at least 6 figures on average, it's easy to forget that for many people, an extra $1.5k a year reflects a significant pay percent increase, like 5% raise.
The Economics of OnlyFans: Most accounts make less than $145/mo
111–120 of 143 posts
Re: The Economics of OnlyFans: Most accounts make less than $145/mo
#112So... the punchline here seems to be the median revenue per content creator. Except: 1) The denominator is skewed by a large number of people who signed up but aren't seriously pursuing it, and may not even be active. 2) The numerator is skewed by the fact that this omits tips entirely, and much of the sample is missing the subscription price or the number of subscribers, so numbers had to be guessed. So in other wor…
It seems more like a Fermi estimate.
> Fermi estimate
It's more like a Fermi estimate, but the inputs still probably aren't good enough to be meaningful. E.g., on other set-your-own-hours platforms like doordash, MLM pyramid schemes, and uber it's expected that 99% of the workers won't work more than a few hours per month (this is also a bad Fermi estimate -- could be off by 10x either direction). As a corollary, just taking the $145 and multiplying by 100ish (based also on your definition of full-time) could be a much better estimate for the earnings potential for somebody looking to seriously pursue OnlyFans.
Pendantic note: the point here isn't that $14,500 is a better estimate; it's that the magnitude of all the unknowns in trying to compute such a thing is so great that we can't even reach the level of certainty a Fermi approximation provides without more data.
Re: The Economics of OnlyFans: Most accounts make less than $145/mo
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can confirm. I make my living on Patreon, but I am in the top 100 worldwide in the 'music' category (I write open source DSP plugins) and I make a bit over $2000 a month. It falls away very very rapidly: top ten worldwide is what people envision for 'making good money' and is competitive with say a career software developer in the 90s or 00s. Top hundred worldwide is 'getting by pretty comfortably if you don't live a…
@Applejinx, this is interesting. Hey, I manage a forum where someone asked a question about how much Patreon fans make. May I repost your answer? (and credit you)
With the following exception: I made a special effort to talk to Jack Conte at the second-to-last Patrecon, the one in California. I spoke to Jack and to Sam Yam, and tried to impress upon them the importance of consistently and reliably maintaining that 'tail' of $50, $100 a month.
I don't know if they heard me (they may have) but my argument was as follows: consider some single mother who is absolutely broke, but has a cell phone and is able to upload to YouTube or whatever. Let's say she is able to find a double-digit number of people, no better, who'll tune in as she reads bedtime stories to her kid. She is not going to become PewDiePie, but she can pull maybe $50 or $100 on Patreon, and it's relatively consistent, especially if she doesn't tie it hard to her performance and products, but keeps it low-pressure: it's very possible to create a steady and predictable income stream that way.
The Patreon guys have a stated but undefined goal to bring people to a 'life-changing' amount of income, but we are all finding that's not going to happen for 99.9% of the people attempting it. BUT, I've found from my experience that the 'life-changing' amount is around what I make: enough to build an actual business in the real world, support it, and grow. (if you're not growing in capitalism, you're gonna die). In other words, the single mom telling her kid bedtime stories on YouTube is going to fail by the terms they're predisposed to care about, 'seeding a business in LA or wherever, and getting traction to grow big'.
My argument to Jack and Sam, which I don't know if it was heard, was this: I have been homeless and seen very tough times. Being able to count upon fifty, a hundred dollars a month that is not dependent on your precarious job, keeping a roof over your head (as long as you have the phone and can upload), that is YOURS and sort of steady consistent bonus income no matter what other hell goes on in your life, is HUGE. The monetary amount is much less significant than the manner in which it is earned. It doesn't wildly vary from month to month, it's not tied to other obligations: anyone who has lived precariously knows the value of an extra fifty a month. This is at least an order of magnitude below what the Patreon guys assumed was 'life-changing', because I don't think they had the context to understand it.
So I pitched them on the importance of what they are doing, and of keeping faith with the 'tail' rather than getting too distracted by trying to create millionaires. I don't know if they heard, they may have, but that's the one time I talked seriously with 'the Patreon system'. Other than that I'm just another bozo on the bus, representing the tail end of the top 100 worldwide :)
Re: The Economics of OnlyFans: Most accounts make less than $145/mo
#114I'm sure similar income distribution applies to all user-generated digital content platforms like YT, Patreon, Twitch, etc. A few superstars that make crazy money, some professionals who use the platform as their main source of income and a long thin tail of amateurs. The market is supersaturated now, even with the obesity epidemic there are so many college girls with perfect figures willing to bare everything for $1…
Can confirm. I make my living on Patreon, but I am in the top 100 worldwide in the 'music' category (I write open source DSP plugins) and I make a bit over $2000 a month. It falls away very very rapidly: top ten worldwide is what people envision for 'making good money' and is competitive with say a career software developer in the 90s or 00s. Top hundred worldwide is 'getting by pretty comfortably if you don't live a…
Not at that point, though. The time to ask those questions was yesterday.
Re: The Economics of OnlyFans: Most accounts make less than $145/mo
#115I'm sure similar income distribution applies to all user-generated digital content platforms like YT, Patreon, Twitch, etc. A few superstars that make crazy money, some professionals who use the platform as their main source of income and a long thin tail of amateurs. The market is supersaturated now, even with the obesity epidemic there are so many college girls with perfect figures willing to bare everything for $1…
Can confirm. I make my living on Patreon, but I am in the top 100 worldwide in the 'music' category (I write open source DSP plugins) and I make a bit over $2000 a month. It falls away very very rapidly: top ten worldwide is what people envision for 'making good money' and is competitive with say a career software developer in the 90s or 00s. Top hundred worldwide is 'getting by pretty comfortably if you don't live a…
Anyway some friends are convinced deepfakes and "nudify" websites will compete with OnlyFans but I'm not convinced, at least in the short term.
Re: The Economics of OnlyFans: Most accounts make less than $145/mo
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I can't believe I've been subjected to the level of abuse I'm getting from people who are on average making less than $145 a month. Can you unpack this sentence and explain what it is about "people who are on average making less than $145 a month" that makes the abuse you are getting from them specifically unbelievable? (edit: Wow, -3 after only 20 minutes?... I guess people on HN apparently really hate the idea th…
The point isn’t that they are ‘only’ making $145 a month. It’s that people are willing to be abusive to other humans over it. It’s like those annoying relatives that are willing to throw away any authenticity in their relationship with you in order to hustle their shitty MLM product that is making them next to nothing.
It's worse than that. 99% of people in MLMs lose money.
https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/public_com...
Re: The Economics of OnlyFans: Most accounts make less than $145/mo
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
Due to stigmatization policies they can't use the normal ad channels to advertise their patreon, so it only makes sense to go the "organic content" route. And from their PoV they are sticking to the rules of the relevant subreddits, yet still get their content deleted or banned. I don't find it surprising people get upset when viewing the situation from their side.
I’m a moderator. Very likely you’re wrong. Anything systematic like that is probably generated by a system where someone wrote a script of common phrases and handed it off to low wage labour to write. Highly doubt any actual creator is doing that. The payoff of untargeted spam is so low! Only makes sense if it’s outsourced at scale like any garden variety spam ring. The usual and profitable way people promote their o…
Re: The Economics of OnlyFans: Most accounts make less than $145/mo
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
Due to stigmatization policies they can't use the normal ad channels to advertise their patreon, so it only makes sense to go the "organic content" route. And from their PoV they are sticking to the rules of the relevant subreddits, yet still get their content deleted or banned. I don't find it surprising people get upset when viewing the situation from their side.
I’m a moderator. Very likely you’re wrong. Anything systematic like that is probably generated by a system where someone wrote a script of common phrases and handed it off to low wage labour to write. Highly doubt any actual creator is doing that. The payoff of untargeted spam is so low! Only makes sense if it’s outsourced at scale like any garden variety spam ring. The usual and profitable way people promote their o…
I happen to agree with formerly_proven . When my OF friend described how she submitted topical stuff to subreddits in the hopes that others would follow up on her profile, I was like, "what's wrong with that? Isn't that how people are supposed to promote themselves? Giving out free, relevant stuff in the hopes you'll want to know more about them?"
I mean, isn't that how ethical self-promotion is supposed to work? Join a community, obey their norms, contribute, and if they like you, they'll follow up? How do you expect it to work?
Re: The Economics of OnlyFans: Most accounts make less than $145/mo
#119I did similar analysis for Upwork and results were much much more drastic. Like, vast majority of accounts never earning anything, and a bunch of multimillion dollar accounts (most of them probably suggesting scams or money laundering - that was before i became a $2M account myself lol), and majority of money made by people who make very little, <$1000 per month, but stubbornly trying for years and years, probably ha…
What's the story of you becoming a $2M account yourself?
Re: The Economics of OnlyFans: Most accounts make less than $145/mo
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m a moderator. Very likely you’re wrong. Anything systematic like that is probably generated by a system where someone wrote a script of common phrases and handed it off to low wage labour to write. Highly doubt any actual creator is doing that. The payoff of untargeted spam is so low! Only makes sense if it’s outsourced at scale like any garden variety spam ring. The usual and profitable way people promote their o…
How systematic are you talking? I happen to know an OF creator who promotes herself that way and she doesn't do anything in an automatic fashion, just creates her own submissions to subreddits and gets burned by such moderators. I happen to agree with formerly_proven . When my OF friend described how she submitted topical stuff to subreddits in the hopes that others would follow up on her profile, I was like, "what's…
Puns not intended (seriously).