4 ms·

I don't think that model will work, honestly. There's friction anytime you ask someone to spend anything, even if the price is de minimis. Look what happens w

I don't think that model will work, honestly. There's friction anytime you ask someone to spend anything, even if the price is de minimis. Look what happens whenever a city adopts a $0.05 plastic bag tax. When Washington DC did it, plastic bag use dropped by 50% - 70%. I'd see people that just spent $30 bucks at the store with their arms overflowing with stuff rather than pay that extra nickel. I'd expect prompting users to choose whether reading a story is worth $0.05 to them every time will cause them to read and engage significantly less.

superbaconman 8y ago
That's not a great example. You can buy your own plastic bags for 1 cent a piece on amazon.
wutbrodo 8y ago
> I'd expect prompting users to choose whether reading a story is worth $0.05 to them every time will cause them to read and engage significantly less. The example that gives me a little bit of optimism in the long run is power: people don't really have a problem with the fact that their power bill is pay-per-use, and if it discourages them from unduly wasting power, all the better. But the problem you describe is still significant: people are _already_ used to that dynamic for electricity, and it's not clear to me how to get over the hump where they'd treat micro transactions for publishing in the way you describe. Most people aren't remotely rational enough to realize on their own that stressing over each minuscule payment has a cost of its own and coming up with a better strategy for handling it. (In the electricity example, this is the difference between 1) calculating the power usage of each device in your house and considering whether you want to pay a few cents before flicking that light switch or 2) conserve in common sense ways and adjust if necessary based on your monthly bill.) > When Washington DC did it, plastic bag use dropped by 50% - 70%. I'd see people that just spent $30 bucks at the store with their arms overflowing with stuff rather than pay that extra nickel. Case in point... This may be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. My city has had a ten cent bag tax for a long time now, and the way everyone reacts is 1) carry it in your hand if it's one or two small things, 2) pay a freaking dime if you have too much stuff and be slightly more likely to remember your reusable bag next time.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- wffurr 8y ago
  Electricity is different. The charge is decoupled from point of use. When you flip a light switch, it doesn't visibly and immediately bill you 2¢. The bag tax, pay per article, etc. do.
  - wutbrodo 8y ago
    Do you mean that the usage and the monthly bill are separated in time? I don't see why the pay per article couldn't work the same way. The bag tax example was ludicrous for a different reason: namely that carrying multiple loads in your arms is more than worth five cents for all but the absolutely poorest Americans.
- sleavey 8y ago
  Regarding bags, that's a strange reaction given that everywhere else I've heard of that introduced a bag tax has seen usage drop dramatically. It's not the price - clearly most people can afford what they charge - it's the psychology that makes you stop and think whether you really need a single use bag for what you've bought.
  - wutbrodo 8y ago
    Oh I completely agree. It's extremely effective as a reminder and has been extremely effective in my city. I think it's great example of damn near Pareto-efficient govt policy. But when I _do_ forget my reusable bag for whatever reason and have an unwieldy amount of stuff to carry, it would be beyond idiotic to ride that psychological effect all the way into the absurdity of stuffing my arms full of thing (I gather from the original comment I responded to that he wasn't talking about carrying an item or three).
reitanqild 8y ago
> I don't think that model will work, honestly. There's friction anytime you ask someone to spend anything, even if the price is de minimis. The price is so low that there is little friction. You also get a full refund if you are disappointed, further reducing friction. Furthermore you don't pay every time but you pay from an account with Blendle.
glenneroo 8y ago
Regarding bag tax, I have trouble believing this is more than your own anecdotal observations, do you have any sources to back up that claim? Most cities in Europe charge a lot more than 0.05 per bag (Austrian supermarkets generally charge between 0.25-1€) yet most people just bring their own. I buy the more expensive variant (cloth material) which survive about a year.
- majewsky 8y ago
  > which survive about a year What are you doing with those? I have one reusable bag which is 11 years old now. I just throw it in the laundry about once a year and it's as good as new.
  - glenneroo 8y ago
    I use them for everything... they often end up as bags for recyclables (e.g. bottles, metal with sharp edges, paper) so they get chewed up fairly fast. Even if I only use them for exclusively shopping, I go 1-3x per week (~100 excursions/year) and when it's warm we throw a lot of BBQ parties so some of those trips are overloaded with heavy stuff which ends up cutting corners in the sides.
xbkingx 8y ago
And then you have those magical psychological effects at different price points. I remember when almost every piece of "shareware" was $20+ and most full "programs" were $100+. Now people balk at apps over $0.99 and even opt to have a ton of their personal information sent off to a stranger to avoid that price. The tone of the engagement matters, too, because it works on psychological levels most people aren't aware of. It's essentially brainwashing. To me, "Buying" means assessing and confirming value, "Upgrading" means reassessing the value and how relevant the new features are to me, and "Renewing a subscription" means to keep the status quo and automatically remain up to date. Upgrade notifications feel like nagging, while subscription renewal notices are almost alarming. Nag all you want because I can just use what I have now. Yay! I upgraded and now all the icons are in different spots. Maybe they added something interesting. I hope it still reads my old files. End the subscription and who knows what happens. Yay! I renewed my subscription and now all my most precious files are no longer in danger of being wiped from existence. Subscribing sure saved my butt. I'm so glad I did! Overall, though, I think the subscription model exists to take advantage of inattentive customers, which makes up the bulk of any user base. A person forgetting to cancel their subscription is as good as a new subscriber and there are all sorts of situations where that can happen to anyone. Hell, those are probably the same customers that didn't notice when a new version was released, so the company even makes up for missed upgrades. I have no real data to back that up, but it fits with a lot of personal observations.
- lev99 8y ago
  > Overall, though, I think the subscription model exists to take advantage of inattentive customers, which makes up the bulk of any user base. This may be true for some services, but I don't think it's true of the most successful services. Think about Spotify and Netflix, most users are fully aware of their subscription.
- ptero 8y ago
  > Now people balk at apps over $0.99 and even opt to have a ton of their personal information sent off to a stranger to avoid that price Yes! This is extremely puzzling for me and I would love to know why it happens. I am mostly free from this and do not think about trying a $1 app any longer than I do about buying a cup of tea (and always pay for an ad-free version if I still using the app a week later). However, I am in the minority: hearing this my friends roll their eyes "you are paying for an app you may not use long term? You must be rich. Look for a free app instead, man".
mrhappyunhappy 8y ago
It would work if the model used preloaded crypto payments where all you had to do is see how many tokens something costs and have them deducted automatically by clicking the article read button.
vorpalhex 8y ago
UI is everything. My purchase of <$2 apps in the Google Play store went up tremendously when I could do it with just a fingerprint read instead of a full password entry. The amount of money I spend with Amazon's one-swipe checkout is obnoxious. Ask me to give you my full address twice and manually enter a credit card, even if you have an item I really want? Nope, probably not doing it.
- nojvek 8y ago
  I feel terrible for all those companies which don’t analyze their shopping funnels. The simplest checkout experience should require the minimum friction. What ends up happening is that they want to collect ridiculous amount of customer data in the hopes they’ll use it some other day. Those companies deserve to die.
archagon 8y ago
If you could click a button that says "5¢ to Read" and have it work immediately, I think the problem would be solved. But this would either require some sort of browser-based wallet or a wider adoption of cryptocurrency.

superbaconman 8y ago

That's not a great example. You can buy your own plastic bags for 1 cent a piece on amazon.

wutbrodo 8y ago

> I'd expect prompting users to choose whether reading a story is worth $0.05 to them every time will cause them to read and engage significantly less. The example that gives me a little bit of optimism in the long run is power: people don't really have a problem with the fact that their power bill is pay-per-use, and if it discourages them from unduly wasting power, all the better. But the problem you describe is still significant: people are _already_ used to that dynamic for electricity, and it's not clear to me how to get over the hump where they'd treat micro transactions for publishing in the way you describe. Most people aren't remotely rational enough to realize on their own that stressing over each minuscule payment has a cost of its own and coming up with a better strategy for handling it. (In the electricity example, this is the difference between 1) calculating the power usage of each device in your house and considering whether you want to pay a few cents before flicking that light switch or 2) conserve in common sense ways and adjust if necessary based on your monthly bill.) > When Washington DC did it, plastic bag use dropped by 50% - 70%. I'd see people that just spent $30 bucks at the store with their arms overflowing with stuff rather than pay that extra nickel. Case in point... This may be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. My city has had a ten cent bag tax for a long time now, and the way everyone reacts is 1) carry it in your hand if it's one or two small things, 2) pay a freaking dime if you have too much stuff and be slightly more likely to remember your reusable bag next time.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
wffurr 8y ago
Electricity is different. The charge is decoupled from point of use. When you flip a light switch, it doesn't visibly and immediately bill you 2¢. The bag tax, pay per article, etc. do.
- wutbrodo 8y ago
  Do you mean that the usage and the monthly bill are separated in time? I don't see why the pay per article couldn't work the same way. The bag tax example was ludicrous for a different reason: namely that carrying multiple loads in your arms is more than worth five cents for all but the absolutely poorest Americans.
sleavey 8y ago
Regarding bags, that's a strange reaction given that everywhere else I've heard of that introduced a bag tax has seen usage drop dramatically. It's not the price - clearly most people can afford what they charge - it's the psychology that makes you stop and think whether you really need a single use bag for what you've bought.
- wutbrodo 8y ago
  Oh I completely agree. It's extremely effective as a reminder and has been extremely effective in my city. I think it's great example of damn near Pareto-efficient govt policy. But when I _do_ forget my reusable bag for whatever reason and have an unwieldy amount of stuff to carry, it would be beyond idiotic to ride that psychological effect all the way into the absurdity of stuffing my arms full of thing (I gather from the original comment I responded to that he wasn't talking about carrying an item or three).

reitanqild 8y ago

> I don't think that model will work, honestly. There's friction anytime you ask someone to spend anything, even if the price is de minimis. The price is so low that there is little friction. You also get a full refund if you are disappointed, further reducing friction. Furthermore you don't pay every time but you pay from an account with Blendle.

glenneroo 8y ago

Regarding bag tax, I have trouble believing this is more than your own anecdotal observations, do you have any sources to back up that claim? Most cities in Europe charge a lot more than 0.05 per bag (Austrian supermarkets generally charge between 0.25-1€) yet most people just bring their own. I buy the more expensive variant (cloth material) which survive about a year.

majewsky 8y ago
> which survive about a year What are you doing with those? I have one reusable bag which is 11 years old now. I just throw it in the laundry about once a year and it's as good as new.
- glenneroo 8y ago
  I use them for everything... they often end up as bags for recyclables (e.g. bottles, metal with sharp edges, paper) so they get chewed up fairly fast. Even if I only use them for exclusively shopping, I go 1-3x per week (~100 excursions/year) and when it's warm we throw a lot of BBQ parties so some of those trips are overloaded with heavy stuff which ends up cutting corners in the sides.

xbkingx 8y ago

And then you have those magical psychological effects at different price points. I remember when almost every piece of "shareware" was $20+ and most full "programs" were $100+. Now people balk at apps over $0.99 and even opt to have a ton of their personal information sent off to a stranger to avoid that price. The tone of the engagement matters, too, because it works on psychological levels most people aren't aware of. It's essentially brainwashing. To me, "Buying" means assessing and confirming value, "Upgrading" means reassessing the value and how relevant the new features are to me, and "Renewing a subscription" means to keep the status quo and automatically remain up to date. Upgrade notifications feel like nagging, while subscription renewal notices are almost alarming. Nag all you want because I can just use what I have now. Yay! I upgraded and now all the icons are in different spots. Maybe they added something interesting. I hope it still reads my old files. End the subscription and who knows what happens. Yay! I renewed my subscription and now all my most precious files are no longer in danger of being wiped from existence. Subscribing sure saved my butt. I'm so glad I did! Overall, though, I think the subscription model exists to take advantage of inattentive customers, which makes up the bulk of any user base. A person forgetting to cancel their subscription is as good as a new subscriber and there are all sorts of situations where that can happen to anyone. Hell, those are probably the same customers that didn't notice when a new version was released, so the company even makes up for missed upgrades. I have no real data to back that up, but it fits with a lot of personal observations.

lev99 8y ago
> Overall, though, I think the subscription model exists to take advantage of inattentive customers, which makes up the bulk of any user base. This may be true for some services, but I don't think it's true of the most successful services. Think about Spotify and Netflix, most users are fully aware of their subscription.
ptero 8y ago
> Now people balk at apps over $0.99 and even opt to have a ton of their personal information sent off to a stranger to avoid that price Yes! This is extremely puzzling for me and I would love to know why it happens. I am mostly free from this and do not think about trying a $1 app any longer than I do about buying a cup of tea (and always pay for an ad-free version if I still using the app a week later). However, I am in the minority: hearing this my friends roll their eyes "you are paying for an app you may not use long term? You must be rich. Look for a free app instead, man".

mrhappyunhappy 8y ago

It would work if the model used preloaded crypto payments where all you had to do is see how many tokens something costs and have them deducted automatically by clicking the article read button.

vorpalhex 8y ago

UI is everything. My purchase of <$2 apps in the Google Play store went up tremendously when I could do it with just a fingerprint read instead of a full password entry. The amount of money I spend with Amazon's one-swipe checkout is obnoxious. Ask me to give you my full address twice and manually enter a credit card, even if you have an item I really want? Nope, probably not doing it.

nojvek 8y ago
I feel terrible for all those companies which don’t analyze their shopping funnels. The simplest checkout experience should require the minimum friction. What ends up happening is that they want to collect ridiculous amount of customer data in the hopes they’ll use it some other day. Those companies deserve to die.

archagon 8y ago

If you could click a button that says "5¢ to Read" and have it work immediately, I think the problem would be solved. But this would either require some sort of browser-based wallet or a wider adoption of cryptocurrency.