Live data from Hacker News

Canva Hikes Pices by 300pc as It Readies for IPO

ia.acs.org.au

61–70 of 90 posts

Re: Canva Hikes Pices by 300pc as It Readies for IPO

#61
Pet peeve of mine, but Canva doesn't hike its prices by 300%; it hikes them by 200%.

I'm not a native English speaker, but I assume "to hike prices by x" means the new price = the old price + x, right? If not, ignore my comment.

In the example used in the article (team of 3 users), the old price = 12 * $39.99 = $479.88, and the new price is $1458. Let's see what a price hike of 300% looks like: 300% of the old price = 300% * $479.88 = $1439.64. New price = old price + that 300% = $479.88 + $1439.64 = $1919.52 which is nowhere close to the actual new price of $1458. When I do the same calculation with 200% instead of 300%, the answer is pretty close.

What they're _trying to say_ is that the new price is 300% of the old price, but what they're _actually saying_ is that the price is increased by 300%. That's _not_ the same thing. You could say that the price is increased by 200%, or that the new prices is 300% of the old one (or that it is 3 times the old one). You have to pick one of those, not mix them.

Re: Canva Hikes Pices by 300pc as It Readies for IPO

#62
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that not what Canva is doing? They’re raising prices because they think their product is superior. If they’re wrong, their customers will just switch to another product!

I'm referring to the 'capture customers and unreasonably hike the prices' business model, which intends to make profit of exactly the cases where a customer is NOT a rational agent, just like scams do. I'm not saying that's all there is to Canva, just making a general remark about these kinds of business models. Because yes, in theory a customer can 'just' switch to another product. In reality though, there are vario…

I don’t think the point of this price hike is to profit off of non-rational customers. I think it’s likelier that they expect and maybe even hope that they’ll lose customers.

Let’s say a full 50% of Canva’s customers eventually churn because of this. They’re raising prices 3x, so they’d still make 1.5x their previous revenue. And they’d make even more profit, because their customer support costs have been cut roughly in half.

Meanwhile, the 50% of customers who dropped are now on the market for a new design tool — and a big hole has just opened in the low end of the market. So it’s good for competition, too!

Of course, if 80% of Canva’s customers leave, that’s bad for them. It’s a gamble! But in general, increasing prices by Nx in hopes that you’ll retain at least (1/N)x customers is a totally reasonable strategy.

Re: Canva Hikes Pices by 300pc as It Readies for IPO

#63

Pet peeve of mine, but Canva doesn't hike its prices by 300%; it hikes them by 200%. I'm not a native English speaker, but I assume "to hike prices by x" means the new price = the old price + x, right? If not, ignore my comment. In the example used in the article (team of 3 users), the old price = 12 * $39.99 = $479.88, and the new price is $1458. Let's see what a price hike of 300% looks like: 300% of the old price…

Yes, it is ambiguous and I frequently encounter such ambiguous language in Apple's marketing copy, as a prominent example. Here I would rather they made a substitution of preposition from "by", to "to".

Re: Canva Hikes Pices by 300pc as It Readies for IPO

#64
post #36
post #2

Finally, a company that adds AI to their product and then IPOs - I can't wait to see what groundbreaking stickers the AI will come up with, so I can really level up my birthday cards.

If they wanted to be ahead of the competition, they would offer "handcrafted human designs for premium customers"

Interestingly enough, Canva has a mechanism where artists sell their templates on other sites like Etsy then grant access to customers... which Canva is getting none of the pie.

Re: Canva Hikes Pices by 300pc as It Readies for IPO

#65

Pet peeve of mine, but Canva doesn't hike its prices by 300%; it hikes them by 200%. I'm not a native English speaker, but I assume "to hike prices by x" means the new price = the old price + x, right? If not, ignore my comment. In the example used in the article (team of 3 users), the old price = 12 * $39.99 = $479.88, and the new price is $1458. Let's see what a price hike of 300% looks like: 300% of the old price…

Have they not previously learned the verb "to triple" ?

Re: Canva Hikes Pices by 300pc as It Readies for IPO

#66

Pet peeve of mine, but Canva doesn't hike its prices by 300%; it hikes them by 200%. I'm not a native English speaker, but I assume "to hike prices by x" means the new price = the old price + x, right? If not, ignore my comment. In the example used in the article (team of 3 users), the old price = 12 * $39.99 = $479.88, and the new price is $1458. Let's see what a price hike of 300% looks like: 300% of the old price…

> I'm not a native English speaker

Yeah, but based on this post alone I can tell you have better English reading comprehension than the average US adult lol

Re: Canva Hikes Pices by 300pc as It Readies for IPO

#67

Pet peeve of mine, but Canva doesn't hike its prices by 300%; it hikes them by 200%. I'm not a native English speaker, but I assume "to hike prices by x" means the new price = the old price + x, right? If not, ignore my comment. In the example used in the article (team of 3 users), the old price = 12 * $39.99 = $479.88, and the new price is $1458. Let's see what a price hike of 300% looks like: 300% of the old price…

Yes, this is correct. I disagree with the other guy who said that it was ambiguous. Claiming the prices were hiked by 300% is simply wrong.

Re: Canva Hikes Pices by 300pc as It Readies for IPO

#68
post #13
post #8

Capture customers and unreasonably hike the prices is a business plan as popular as subscription services. I hope consumers and businesses will notice how unreliable this is and start choosing more user friendly products more often.

This is just capitalism though. Like, what else are you suggesting? Opt for companies whose products are more expensive in the hope that they are less likely to hike prices later on? The real issue is when these companies become monopolies and then can raise prices without paying a competitive cost for doing so. But that's not Canva.

This is just shareholder* capitalism. Capitalism itself does not inherently put the share price over users

Re: Canva Hikes Pices by 300pc as It Readies for IPO

#69
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm referring to the 'capture customers and unreasonably hike the prices' business model, which intends to make profit of exactly the cases where a customer is NOT a rational agent, just like scams do. I'm not saying that's all there is to Canva, just making a general remark about these kinds of business models. Because yes, in theory a customer can 'just' switch to another product. In reality though, there are vario…

I don’t think the point of this price hike is to profit off of non-rational customers. I think it’s likelier that they expect and maybe even hope that they’ll lose customers. Let’s say a full 50% of Canva’s customers eventually churn because of this. They’re raising prices 3x, so they’d still make 1.5x their previous revenue. And they’d make even more profit, because their customer support costs have been cut roughly…

How much are you lowering the satisfaction of those users though? Sure you may end up with more cashflow, but a much smaller, less eager group of users to be promoters.

The point of this is imho likely to boost the numbers as much as possible prior to IPO at the expense of the UX, brand, and by extension product

Re: Canva Hikes Pices by 300pc as It Readies for IPO

#70
post #51
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt they're going to work on the Affinity suite much more, it was probably more of an acquihire, where they'll get the engineers to work on the main Canva product.

What makes you say that? Canva already stated Affinity won’t be going anywhere. https://www.canva.com/newsroom/news/affinity-canva-pledge/

I've used Affinity for years, it was pretty much in a feature freeze state before V2 (which didn't really add anything major). I'm fine with that, it's more capable and user friendly than GIMP and Inkscape so I was happy to pay for it.
Post reply on HN