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

Subscription Hell

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 610 posts

Re: Subscription Hell

#251

Post by coldtea »

usrusr wrote: post #166
open-source-ux wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The middle ground doesn't work The "middle ground" has been the most common model for desktop app pricing for decades. You buy version X of a product. When the next major version is released you pay an upgrade price. In fact, the "middle ground" has been the norm for the majority of software apps over the history of desktop computing. It's the SaaS subscription model for cloud-hosted software that is the new deviat…

> The "middle ground" has been the most common model for desktop app pricing for decades. You buy version X of a product. When the next major version is released you pay an upgrade price. Mobile app stores killed that model, when they made continuous, perpetual updates the norm. At the time, everybody was too busy pointing out the implications of going from 50$ to 50ct when the even bigger change was a farewell to ma…

>Mobile app stores killed that model, when they made continuous, perpetual updates the norm.

Continuous, perpetual updates are definitely NOT the norm in mobile apps.

Some get some bug-fixes and the occasional new feature, but any major update lands a version 2.0.

Far more (the "long tail") are just abandoned (like all those thousands of 32-bit apps being deprecated in the iOS store).

Re: Subscription Hell

#252

Post by maxxxxx »

wpietri wrote: post #240
techsupporter wrote: post #33

At the time of this writing, all of the comments here are focused on content, but I want to touch on the author's bit about software: > It’s not just Bloomberg and media — it’s software too. I used to write everything in Ulysses, a syncing Markdown editor for OS X and iOS. I paid $70 to buy the apps, but then the company switched to a $40 a year annual subscription, and as the dozens of angry reviews and comments ill…

A model I really like is the one IntelliJ uses. They encourage you to buy a subscription. But when you buy a year at once, you get a "perpetual fallback license" such that you can always keep using the version that is current when you buy: https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/en-gb/articles/207240845-What... That means I always will have access to my projects and to the level of functionality I start with. But I keep getti…

Developer Express has that too with their .NET components. We have dropped the subscription but are still using a version that's 3 years old but good enough for us.

Re: Subscription Hell

#253

Post by jgmjgm »

petra wrote: post #249
techsupporter wrote: post #33

At the time of this writing, all of the comments here are focused on content, but I want to touch on the author's bit about software: > It’s not just Bloomberg and media — it’s software too. I used to write everything in Ulysses, a syncing Markdown editor for OS X and iOS. I paid $70 to buy the apps, but then the company switched to a $40 a year annual subscription, and as the dozens of angry reviews and comments ill…

In general, software has zero marginal cost, so in theory, it's price should fall near zero due to competition. So why is the subscription market behave so different ? And what can be done about that ?

It's almost like the industry is not perfectly competitive...

Re: Subscription Hell

#254

Post by matmann2001 »

un-devmox wrote: post #181
DontGiveTwoFlux wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One con of the pay per article is that it siphons money into the money making kinds of stories. The sports and celebrity pages can do a lot of funding for the slow grind investigations that are important for holding those in power accountable. It’s not like an a la carte model couldn’t also fund profitless journalism, but I think it might push things even more in that direction. I think they do understand what people…

There's no reason why a publication can't charge more for an in-depth piece. I'd gladly pay far more for a comprehensive exposé.

How will you know it's a comprehensive exposé? How will you evaluate whether an article is going to be worth the price?

Re: Subscription Hell

#255

Post by sturgill »

nixpulvis wrote: post #235
sturgill wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me, those two points are inseparable. But I’ve also spent the last several years of my career focusing on maximizing profits within consumer subscribeables... There are only so many ways to make money: ads, once off charges, term payments, and recurring charges. A consumer license to use vs physical ownership is incredibly interesting. Buying a Mario Brothers cartridge for the original Nintendo vs games delivered…

The best example I have right now is with music... I am ALWAYS going to want to be able to listen to my library, it's not really fair to assume I should have to pay monthly for it for the rest of my life, but for every day I don't buy the album and I listen to it on AM or Spotify, I'm in effect paying for a redundant service. I get the difficulty finding ways to make money, but we are pigeonholing ourselves into a mo…

I’d disagree in that you can buy an MP3 and listen forever using whatever device. But Spotify isn’t required to sell you MP3s (or guarantee perpetual playback). And, it turns out, that people (in aggregate) really like the Spotify model. One fixed cost to consume all the music you want vs buying entire albums to listen to the 2-3 songs that were decent.

There are still two markets in music. That’s not the case with most online services, but I’m comfortable with that.

Re: Subscription Hell

#256

Post by xbkingx »

JauntTrooper wrote: post #119
ChuckMcM wrote: post #18

I am not sure why it is so fundamentally difficult for publications to understand what people want. The issue many people, myself included, have with subscriptions are that you pay $x / month whether or not you read that month's product. And whether or not you read every article or just one. So for me, as a consumer, my "price per article" goes from small to literally infinity (pay but read zero articles). Now the pa…

I don't think that model will work, honestly. There's friction anytime you ask someone to spend anything, even if the price is de minimis. Look what happens whenever a city adopts a $0.05 plastic bag tax. When Washington DC did it, plastic bag use dropped by 50% - 70%. I'd see people that just spent $30 bucks at the store with their arms overflowing with stuff rather than pay that extra nickel. I'd expect prompting u…

And then you have those magical psychological effects at different price points. I remember when almost every piece of "shareware" was $20+ and most full "programs" were $100+. Now people balk at apps over $0.99 and even opt to have a ton of their personal information sent off to a stranger to avoid that price.

The tone of the engagement matters, too, because it works on psychological levels most people aren't aware of. It's essentially brainwashing. To me, "Buying" means assessing and confirming value, "Upgrading" means reassessing the value and how relevant the new features are to me, and "Renewing a subscription" means to keep the status quo and automatically remain up to date. Upgrade notifications feel like nagging, while subscription renewal notices are almost alarming.

Nag all you want because I can just use what I have now. Yay! I upgraded and now all the icons are in different spots. Maybe they added something interesting. I hope it still reads my old files.

End the subscription and who knows what happens. Yay! I renewed my subscription and now all my most precious files are no longer in danger of being wiped from existence. Subscribing sure saved my butt. I'm so glad I did!

Overall, though, I think the subscription model exists to take advantage of inattentive customers, which makes up the bulk of any user base. A person forgetting to cancel their subscription is as good as a new subscriber and there are all sorts of situations where that can happen to anyone. Hell, those are probably the same customers that didn't notice when a new version was released, so the company even makes up for missed upgrades. I have no real data to back that up, but it fits with a lot of personal observations.

Re: Subscription Hell

#257

Post by [deleted] »

wernercd wrote: post #78
techsupporter wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like that you mentioned Office 365 because I see that as "subscription done right." You can still buy perpetual licenses for the components of Office, you can easily store the data you created with those components locally, and if you stop paying for Office-as-a-subscription the same programs still let you view (but not edit) your data. Carrot Weather App is another good one. Pay $5 once to get a really polished we…

Jetbrains also has it done "right" I think... yearly license fee... and the version at the time of payment is "perpetual" while you get to continue getting updates as long as your license is "current". Stop paying? When you aren't "current" you can either pay up... or downgrade to your perpetual version "owned".

[deleted]

Re: Subscription Hell

#258

Post by matmann2001 »

FPGAhacker wrote: post #172
imh wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems counter to what makes moviepass so successful. I pay a fixed monthly cost, and now the incremental cost of each movie is $0. Decoupling the consumption from the payment changes how I think about going to see a movie. It seems like consumers may prefer this model, at least with regards to movies in theaters (moviepass), movies and tv at home (netflix), and music (spotify).

Moviepass is cratering. Why would you say they are successful? The are net negative on a per customer basis. They lost $150M last quarter. Their only positive income is investment rounds. Negative return on investment. It’s like subsidizing your company with credit cards. And having a business model of “apply for new credit cards”

Why do VC's invest in startups with large userbases but no revenue streams?

Re: Subscription Hell

#259

Post by siidooloo »

madeofpalk wrote: post #227
siidooloo wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except, if the only app you need is photoshop you can own Affiniy Photo for $30. Or, you can own Affinity Design for $30. And this one is the real kicker, Blackmagic is giving away most of what you need for free, and if you need more you can get a permanent license for a few hundred bucks. How long do you think it will be before Adobe starts really bleeding.

Adobe has had cheaper competitors for ever - basically the only move it’s competitors have is to be cheaper. Adobe still exists.

In the past Adobe’s competition wasn’t as good. Now, the competitors products are just as good. In the past PS competitors lacked features pros needed like PMS spot channels/CMYK/LAB. Not anymore. And Resolve is very compelling in the video realm.

Many of Adobe’s core products have languished at the same time as many of the features that set them apart in the past are become less differentiating. The photo editing/vector drawing space is becoming more commoditized.

Re: Subscription Hell

#260

Post by andyfleming »

rayiner wrote: post #118

I like software subscriptions. It’s a way to ensure that the software developer is going to have a predictable revenue stream to continue to improve features and fix bugs in the software. That is valuable to me as a user.

I agree. This is an often overlooked or under-appreciated aspect of these models. Especially for smaller teams or individual software developers, it can provide some consistency in income and allow them to budget time to continue to invest in the software. Additionally, pricing models that let you keep your current version of their software when the subscription expires are pretty reasonable as well. I believe the Jetbrains licensing works this way.

It gets a little more complicated with bigger companies and software though. For example, how can adobe price Photoshop fairly for a hobby user that uses it once a month and a production designer who uses it 8 hours a day?

Post reply on HN