3 ms·
Unfortunately raising money isn’t a proxy for profitability. In many cases it’s the opposite. It could be seen as a proxy for potential, but potential alone doe
by arielm 9y ago
Unfortunately raising money isn’t a proxy for profitability. In many cases it’s the opposite. It could be seen as a proxy for potential, but potential alone doesn’t pay the bills.
This fee feels a lot like the fee a merchant would be charged for a credit card transaction, so in essence Patreon is passing on their fees.
I wonder why they don’t have a structure akin to micro transactions, where there is no fixed fee but a slightly higher variable fee. I’d guess most of their transactions are probably small enough.
- egypturnash 9y agoOriginally half of the entire value proposition of Patreon was "backers pledge small amounts to multiple artists, Patreon bundles these up under one monthly charge, thereby spreading transaction fees fees around". Or in fewer, longer words: Patreon is a micropayments aggregator. And it worked pretty well! A lot of creators got paid, myself included. And now here's Patreon with a new fee structure that appends a percentage plus a minimum fee to every single transaction. So much for micropayments.
- nemothekid 9y agoDo you know where Patreon said that? I had a hunch that what was what Pareon was doing but I could never find a source for it. I think it's way more likely that Visa/MC came knocking on Patreon's door and told them to stop doing that, forcing them to either eat the fees, or pass it on to someone else, and now Patreon has to eat the bad PR.
- fnbr 9y agoWhy would Visa/MC do that? It doesn't seem any different than metering any other service (eg Mailchimp invoicing monthly vs per email). I'm not saying you're wrong- I just don't understand what leverage the CCs would have.