3 ms·
I agree with @erlend_sh. Patreon _does not_ have much in the way of a network. Its recommendations (if you like this, you'll like that) are typically awful. The
by kaffee 9y ago
I agree with @erlend_sh. Patreon _does not_ have much in the way of a network. Its recommendations (if you like this, you'll like that) are typically awful. They're so bad in fact, that I suspect there's some sort of legal/liability constraint.
Right now Patreon is a remarkably dumb system with really high fees.
That there isn't a serious alternative already makes me suspect that this is isn't a really high profit site in the first place. It could be that dealing with the NSFW creators is really a bid to increase the profit of the site beyond some modest baseline.
Of course this pessimistic conclusion suggests the reason why there isn't a bitcoin-based competitor either. The legal issues and the fees are just too high to attract investment.
- raesene6 9y agoI guess it depends on what you consider high profit. From https://techcrunch.com/2017/05/18/patreon-pushes-as-youtube-stutters/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/05/18/patreon-pushes-as-youtube-... looks like Patreon has 50k creators and 1M+ patrons. The challenge could well be that whilst they're growing and making money, they're not making enough money to satisfy their VC backers, having taken $47m in funding so far.
- Torgo 9y agoPatreon had a competitor, Subbable, which acquired a bunch of Youtube stars before Patreon bought them. >bitcoin-based competitor The problem here is that bitoin is push payment rather than pull, and reducing friction is critical to a subscription system. Bitcoin would require a user taking action every single month to pay, and on time.