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

Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

indiehackers.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 277 posts

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#251

Post by mountaineer22 »

jonknee wrote: post #33
hiou wrote: post #14

Nothing like exploiting people to make a living. Maybe the people doing the actual paintings should get that $32/mo? Gross US imperialism at its finest. So embarrassed to be from this country. FYI: Exploiting artists isn't some kind of disruptive innovation. Ever wonder why the arts are much less likely to adopt open source licensing? People like this jerk. Oh wait, I forgot. They aren't real artists because they hap…

It's not like there is one artist who is doing all the work and is in the dark about how much their talents are worth. Painting is a skill, but it's not a super valuable one unless you're one in a million and create original pieces. Making a photo into a painting is valuable, but only to the person who has memories wrapped up in the photo.

If the artist is 1 in a million, in China that would be over 1,300 people.

That is still less than the number of current NFL players in the US.

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#252

Post by jgorn »

chrischen wrote: post #2

I can answer any questions, whether about how to get a great Christmas present, or questions about the article!

Hi Chris, question about a very minor part of your sales funnel.

The question about sharing the customers photo & painting on your site defaults to YES (which is 'free') and offers a NO option at +$3 extra charge.

Pricing theory, I'm particularly thinking of loss aversion, would suggest you'd get more customers selecting your preferred option of YES if you offer a discount for making this selection (-$3) and leave the rate unchanged for those declining to share.

I'm curious if you A/B tested this pricing option and found the +$3 charge more successful (assuming you are trying to maximise customers opting to share their photos)? Anecdotally I'd be more inclined to pick the option that gives me a discount, if it existed.

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#253

Post by ska »

graeme wrote: post #225
ska wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would it? Or would it slowly decrease? Nearly all businesses have some momentum, after all. If you can walk away for say a year without touching it at all and the revenue remains basically steady, I'll agree it is passive. Anyway, it doesn't really matter - it sounds like you are working at growing a business you enjoy and that's great.

There can be middle ground. I have a very similar situation to the OPs. If I stopped working for over a year, eventually there would be complaints, competitors, etc But within a one year timeframe, there's very little I have to do. And I could get away with working a couple months of the year only + maybe three hours a week maintenance, and the business would grow, slowly. But, I work consistently, adding new things,…

That might work, yes. I like the term much better than passive.

If you need to [edit regularly] respond to SEO changes, or payment provider issues, or maintain your relationships somehow it just isn't passive. It's not a lot of work, hopefully, but it is not passive. You need to stay engaged enough to know how to do it.

Reacting to the environment changes and modeling absolutely is not passive, and I wish people would stop calling it that. I also suspect people underestimate the amount of time they actually spend on this stuff.

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#254

Post by Normal_gaussian »

qwrusz wrote: post #96

Congrats on the success. Thanks for sharing the business story too. Disclaimer: this is not a paid endorsement. I don't know Chris. But I happen to be a customer - having bought a painting as a gift. It is framed on the wall at this moment. My only feedback. Your prices felt too inexpensive. Knowing something was handmade I would have paid more than I did. I'm sure you have researched the market and margins and all t…

If the price was higher I would

A) Probably not do it

B) seek out artists myself

As it is I will be ordering two for Christmas presents now

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#255

Post by hiou »

patio11 wrote: post #189
pierrebai wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The connected economy does have aspects that can be concerning: * Many see bartering as a grey business. Profiting from a disparity in pricing between buyers and sellers is always a touchy subject. The usual justification is the service of connecting sellers and buyers. One can honestly wonders if buyers and sellers really would not have found each other otherwise. * How much is the match-making worth. One person doe…

Middlemen exist because it is not obvious to middle-class Americans that they need to know what the relevance of Dafen is to getting a painting done and because most middle-class Americans do not speak excellent Chinese, and most Chinese painters presumably do not dream at night of putting down their brushes and opening up an SEO consultancy. Instapainting captures customer demand and transforms it into a servicable…

Cost over COGS is exactly my point and why this is exploitation. What do you think the cost over COGS are for the artists actually doing the work? I'll give you a hint, it's often in the negative.

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#257

Post by oDot »

singold wrote: post #205
oDot wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a great bit by Dan Ariely (behavioral economics) that might answer your question: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOhb4LwAaJk And while I'm sharing Dan Ariely links, here's another one (but I can't tell you what it's about, just watch and wait for it): https://vimeo.com/63062967

Wow the second video is really great, can't recommend it enough. Do you know what tool did he used for the text? (I know this sounds weird, I'm trying not to spoil here ;)

No idea, sorry :(

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#258

Post by baccredited »

baccredited wrote: post #256

Nonsense. Creating a startup is the opposite of 'passive'. Also the word passive doesn't appear in the article title or text.

Also I can think of at least one employee - the founder! This title is cringe-worthy.

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#259

Post by mseebach »

jfoutz wrote: post #102
qwrusz wrote: post #96

Congrats on the success. Thanks for sharing the business story too. Disclaimer: this is not a paid endorsement. I don't know Chris. But I happen to be a customer - having bought a painting as a gift. It is framed on the wall at this moment. My only feedback. Your prices felt too inexpensive. Knowing something was handmade I would have paid more than I did. I'm sure you have researched the market and margins and all t…

Reminds me of one of my favorite "jokes" about scale. If you're a one in a million, there are 1357 of you in china.

In a similar vein, I really like this line from "Try this at home" by Frank Turner: "If you’re oh so fucking different then who cares what you have to say?"

The entire song, while nominally about making music, is pretty fun and inspiring and I feel applies very well to other kinds of entrepreneurialism as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66knvY3vxsA

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#260

Post by 6stringmerc »

dkrich wrote: post #94

The hardest part was actually conveying that it wasn't just some print or photo filter, and this is something I still have difficulty with today. Curious about whether people care about this. As somebody who takes a lot of pictures, if somebody could produce one of my photos as a painting using Photoshop that was indistinguishable (or close to it) from a person, I really don't think I'd care. From a business perspect…

That's why I made the Thomas Kinkade reference above - basically Kinkade charged a high premium for "hand painted" works that were for the most part mass produced but touched up by a human in some places. Thus it wasn't really a true painting, but not a simple print either.

From an artistic market standpoint, both the Kinkade "hand painted" works and any work from Instapaint will have an inherent value of barely anything. Maybe $5, $2.50 at a garage sale. Thus this business opportunity, Instapaint, is a very intelligent way to take nothing of intrinsic artistic value - a family portrait - and create a demand whereby there is a worthwhile profit margin.

Art is a high "perception value" type of gambit. Instapaint is successful in its avenue, I can see that and appreciate it for what it's worth. Customers feel like they're getting a good deal, so hey, who am I to tell them what they're paying for is really worthless in the long run? That's sort of the lesson within Thomas Kinkade's success though. That dude cleaned up before his less-appealing business practices and habits eventually caught up with him. There's a line between satisfying a market and kind of becoming a shady operation. Kinkade's model absolutely proved demand for a "hand painted" type of thing.

Post reply on HN