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

Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

petapixel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 784 posts

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#491

Post by maccard »

KurSix wrote: post #436
55555 wrote: post #363

Adobe runs what must be one of the largest deceptive rebills. The vast majority of users signing up for a monthly plan do not realize that it is actually an "annual plan, billed monthly" and thus that if they cancel after one month (for example) they'll be billed for the remaining 11 immediately. I honestly don't know how they haven't faced FTC action for this, as it's been their primary model for 5-10 years now.

Yeah, that whole "annual plan billed monthly" thing feels intentionally shady

Should adobe only offer an annual subscription up front and a monthly rolling bill? Should they not offer a discount for people who want to make an annual commitment but don’t have the cash flow for the annual spend all in one go?

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#492

Post by Symbiote »

maccard wrote: post #488
55555 wrote: post #363

Adobe runs what must be one of the largest deceptive rebills. The vast majority of users signing up for a monthly plan do not realize that it is actually an "annual plan, billed monthly" and thus that if they cancel after one month (for example) they'll be billed for the remaining 11 immediately. I honestly don't know how they haven't faced FTC action for this, as it's been their primary model for 5-10 years now.

I don’t get it, honestly. It’s very clear. You get a discount for an annual commitment and they let you pay monthly. It’s super clear which you’re signing up for when you do it. I’m in the UK, and there’s a 14 day cooling off period on the plans too, unless you buy the full blown annual one. I’m no adobe supporter generally, and sure they could do more, but they take an awful lot of flak for people who won’t read two…

Shown by the video embedded in [1] (which has a screenshot at 2:00), Adobe changed their sign-up process and added those clear options after being sued by the US for deceptive subscription fees.

https://www.geeky-gadgets.com/adobe-sued-over-subscription-f...

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#493

Post by Jarwain »

maccard wrote: post #491
KurSix wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that whole "annual plan billed monthly" thing feels intentionally shady

Should adobe only offer an annual subscription up front and a monthly rolling bill? Should they not offer a discount for people who want to make an annual commitment but don’t have the cash flow for the annual spend all in one go?

From what I recall, it's difficult to figure out how to just pay for the non-discounted monthly, which is the biggest part of the problem.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#494

Post by Taek »

croes wrote: post #486
reisse wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it's highly unlikely they'll go in court for a single user, but if everyone starts doing this, they'll sue. It doesn't matter the payment failed, you still legally owe Adobe (or any other service) money.

They could lose because of unfair business practices.

Elaborating on this, it's almost certainly a civil case that goes to arbitration, which really means that the arbitrator has to feel like Adobe is in the right. It's quite informal relative to typical legal settings, and if the arbitrator doesn't feel like siding with Adobe... they won't.

Furthermore, it's going to cost Adobe a minimum of $1500 to even bring the case to arbitration, and probably $15k more in legal fees to actually win.

So yes, it's actually a difficult battle for Adobe to win and the costs will be much higher than the payout.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#495

Post by maccard »

Symbiote wrote: post #492
maccard wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t get it, honestly. It’s very clear. You get a discount for an annual commitment and they let you pay monthly. It’s super clear which you’re signing up for when you do it. I’m in the UK, and there’s a 14 day cooling off period on the plans too, unless you buy the full blown annual one. I’m no adobe supporter generally, and sure they could do more, but they take an awful lot of flak for people who won’t read two…

Shown by the video embedded in [1] (which has a screenshot at 2:00), Adobe changed their sign-up process and added those clear options after being sued by the US for deceptive subscription fees. https://www.geeky-gadgets.com/adobe-sued-over-subscription-f...

ok so the problem is they _used_ to do this.

I’m not suggesting we just forgive and forget, but warning people against abusive billing practices that aren’t in place any more is a bit silly. If your argument is we shouldnt support a corporation who requires being taken to court to treat their users fairly then there’s probably a very long list of companies that fail that test much harder than adobe do, especially now.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#496

Post by maccard »

Jarwain wrote: post #493
maccard wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should adobe only offer an annual subscription up front and a monthly rolling bill? Should they not offer a discount for people who want to make an annual commitment but don’t have the cash flow for the annual spend all in one go?

From what I recall, it's difficult to figure out how to just pay for the non-discounted monthly, which is the biggest part of the problem.

When you click buy now there’s three options. Annual, monthly, annual paid monthly. They could put the cancellation fee for annual paid monthly, I agree. But short of that they’ll run into the “how can anyone ever be expected to read all that information when they just want to sign up to a service” problem.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#497

Post by schrijver »

sureIy wrote: post #360
jmclnx wrote: post #7

Charging a subscription fee is crazy for a product that is very expensive. I do not know why they are still around.

I hate it too (and never had to use it) but $20/month is peanuts for people who use it professionally, unless they're from third world countries (which likely pirate it anyway)

The suite is $60 / month, which is not peanuts, especially since the vast majority of self-employed creatives aren’t exactly raking in cash.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#498

Post by jspdown »

_el1s7 wrote: post #480
hliyan wrote: post #368

The phenomenon at work here is: if product being produced by a profit-seeking enterprise can be rented instead of being sold, said enterprise will eventually find a way to do it, then over time, rather than a single bill, it will attempt to rent out individual aspects of the now product-turned-service, followed by cost cutting that degrades the default service level while introducing additional service levels for whi…

Single bill for modern software doesn't make sense economically anymore. Do you want updates? You want new versions? New features? Support? Single bill it's like buying an IPhone once and then you expect to get a new one for free each year.

All the digital artists I know don't use and want new features in Photophop. And more generally, most non-tech businesses values more stability than having new features.

Single bill makes a lot of sense for many users.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#499

Post by liendolucas »

maccard wrote: post #489
liendolucas wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fee application for cancelling a subscription service should be absolutely illegal.

It’s a fee for cancelling an annual subscription that you agreed to.

That's exactly why it should be illegal: so people don't have to agree to an abusive and money thirsty contract.

Re: Adobe deletes Bluesky posts after backlash

#500

Post by wyclif »

reisse wrote: post #484
r33b33 wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why you always use throwaway cards for this.

Of course it's highly unlikely they'll go in court for a single user, but if everyone starts doing this, they'll sue. It doesn't matter the payment failed, you still legally owe Adobe (or any other service) money.

Who are they going to sue in that scenario? They can't go after every user who pays with a throwaway card.
Post reply on HN