3 ms·
The reasons invoked by patreon were a bit different (see the update in their blog post[1]), they argued that - the new model would make it easier to understand
by cdancette 9y ago
The reasons invoked by patreon were a bit different (see the update in their blog post[1]), they argued that
- the new model would make it easier to understand for creators (they are now certain to earn 95% of each pledge, where they could earn less before)
- it also makes it clearer for patrons, because now they are paying exactly at the date they made the pledge. And it also avoids double spend for CUF (charge up front) payments, where you could pay twice the pledge within a few days.
But your point is interesting, I hope patreon will give more details about this. If this is true, the business model itself is flawed, and competitors (drip, gratispay, liberapay) will face the same issue.
[1] https://blog.patreon.com/updating-patreons-fee-structure/ https://blog.patreon.com/updating-patreons-fee-structure/
- ZenoArrow 9y ago> "the business model itself is flawed, and competitors (drip, gratispay, liberapay) will face the same issue" It's only an issue if the goal is to make the platform itself highly profitable. Some of its competitors are driven by a desire to support creators. Patreon used to be, as it was started to support YouTube creators, but clearly they've lost focus and forgotten the platform itself was only meant to be a means to an end.