3 ms·

Does anyone have any idea what advantage charging each subscription separately was supposed to have?

gizmo686 9y ago
This is discussed in the original announcement [0] Essentially, some creators were having a problem where their donations dissapeared at the end of the month because the donator canceled before making the payment. To rectify this, Patreon introduced a pay up front system, where the first payment happens when you pledge, and all future payments happen at the beggining of the month. This introduces a problem when you pledge at the end of the month. In this case you could pay on the 29th when you sign up, and again on the 1st when the monthly pledge ticks. Charging seperatly would enable them to charge you when you first pledge, and monthly, starting with your pledge. So in the above example, they would charge you on the 29th of each month. [0] https://blog.patreon.com/updating-patreons-fee-structure/ https://blog.patreon.com/updating-patreons-fee-structure/
rhizome 9y ago
Apparently, increased service-fee flow.
egypturnash 9y ago
There is a subset of creators who are trying to use Patreon as a paywall for their content. This change was entirely about trying to make sure that nobody could ever sign up to support a creator, get access, scrape all their paid content, then stop supporting that person without ever being charged. Unfortunately changing the payment model for EVERY creator site-wide completely breaks aggregating multiple payments into one charge. Which, as a creator, is the entire reason I'm on Patreon in the first place - I could just set up a Paypal widget and try to get my fans to subscribe to that for about the same fees, minus the 5% to Patreon. Or at least that was the argument they gave, there are multiple theories about why they were doing this (those new VC loans they were crowing about last month wanna see some profit, maybe aggregating micropayments is brushing perilously close to laws designed to fight money laundering, they're trying to look more profitable before selling themselves, they just want more money baths) that are rather less charitable than "they got obsessed with solving this one problem caused by people trying to use Patreon in ways it was never designed for and threw the baby out with the bathwater".
- quadrangle 9y ago
  The subset of creators who DO use Patreon as a paywall service seems to be the majority! Patreon pushes perks as a key part of their model, and it's always easier (thought not as ethical arguably) to restrict otherwise shareable content than to offer something naturally scarce (dedicated time, physical goods) to patrons. But even though most creators do this artificial-scarcity paywall thing, only a small minority of them probably have even the slightest worry about freeriders. Most focus on continuing to be productive and don't stress out about the horror of some freerider "stealing" by getting around the paywall and then not paying. It's a pathological worry to freak out about that. It's healthy to just focus on all those who are happy supporters and want to donate. Patreon screwed up by focusing their attention on the noisy minority who were not only using paywalls but demanding that Patreon make the paywalls stronger. And while they come up with a non-stupid way to deal with charges around stronger paywalls, they show no indication of stepping back from prioritizing strong paywalls.

This is discussed in the original announcement [0] Essentially, some creators were having a problem where their donations dissapeared at the end of the month because the donator canceled before making the payment. To rectify this, Patreon introduced a pay up front system, where the first payment happens when you pledge, and all future payments happen at the beggining of the month. This introduces a problem when you pledge at the end of the month. In this case you could pay on the 29th when you sign up, and again on the 1st when the monthly pledge ticks. Charging seperatly would enable them to charge you when you first pledge, and monthly, starting with your pledge. So in the above example, they would charge you on the 29th of each month. [0] https://blog.patreon.com/updating-patreons-fee-structure/ https://blog.patreon.com/updating-patreons-fee-structure/

rhizome 9y ago

Apparently, increased service-fee flow.

egypturnash 9y ago

There is a subset of creators who are trying to use Patreon as a paywall for their content. This change was entirely about trying to make sure that nobody could ever sign up to support a creator, get access, scrape all their paid content, then stop supporting that person without ever being charged. Unfortunately changing the payment model for EVERY creator site-wide completely breaks aggregating multiple payments into one charge. Which, as a creator, is the entire reason I'm on Patreon in the first place - I could just set up a Paypal widget and try to get my fans to subscribe to that for about the same fees, minus the 5% to Patreon. Or at least that was the argument they gave, there are multiple theories about why they were doing this (those new VC loans they were crowing about last month wanna see some profit, maybe aggregating micropayments is brushing perilously close to laws designed to fight money laundering, they're trying to look more profitable before selling themselves, they just want more money baths) that are rather less charitable than "they got obsessed with solving this one problem caused by people trying to use Patreon in ways it was never designed for and threw the baby out with the bathwater".

quadrangle 9y ago
The subset of creators who DO use Patreon as a paywall service seems to be the majority! Patreon pushes perks as a key part of their model, and it's always easier (thought not as ethical arguably) to restrict otherwise shareable content than to offer something naturally scarce (dedicated time, physical goods) to patrons. But even though most creators do this artificial-scarcity paywall thing, only a small minority of them probably have even the slightest worry about freeriders. Most focus on continuing to be productive and don't stress out about the horror of some freerider "stealing" by getting around the paywall and then not paying. It's a pathological worry to freak out about that. It's healthy to just focus on all those who are happy supporters and want to donate. Patreon screwed up by focusing their attention on the noisy minority who were not only using paywalls but demanding that Patreon make the paywalls stronger. And while they come up with a non-stupid way to deal with charges around stronger paywalls, they show no indication of stepping back from prioritizing strong paywalls.