3 ms·
I'd be concerned if I was Patreon: they're a somewhat classic example of a "feature" rather than a standalone service. We're already seeing services like YouTu
by michaelbuckbee 8y ago
I'd be concerned if I was Patreon: they're a somewhat classic example of a "feature" rather than a standalone service.
We're already seeing services like YouTube implementing these low cost, support a creator type subscriptions natively.
- MBCook 8y agoSo are DropBox and YouTube. Sometimes it’s the network effects tied to a feature that make it succeed. That seems to be the case here. I know I don’t want to subscribe to 5 different sites that do this kind of thing.
- wiseleo 8y agoContent creators have been burned by YouTube more than once or twice. I subscribed to several premium YouTube channels, then YouTube discontinued paid service and caused me to lose access to my paid content, then it introduced new paid service much later. Patreon's appeal is being independent of YouTube's whims. Of course, now content creators are subject to Patreon's whims. Companies really should strive on being focused on stability for users. My own product is modeled more on Salesforce API that has multiple versions available concurrently. Users will not lose features even if they are no longer profitable to support.