3 ms·

Article misses the fallacy of the comparison. If I buy a cup of coffee, I get my end of the bargain immediately* and no further commitment on my part is needed.

Article misses the fallacy of the comparison. If I buy a cup of coffee, I get my end of the bargain immediately* and no further commitment on my part is needed. For most saas offerings though, I’m basically committing to a regular payment in perpetuity. Usually if I stop paying, I not only lose the immediate benefits, but also whatever I have put into the app in the time I used it. Even if it is just storage, if I cancel it, I have to find a way to replace the storage and the access to the storage from my devices. Committing to a monthly payment is usually not the same as buying X coffees for a month. *or close to immediately if it is one of those annoying poor over places

hsitz 7y ago
I think the article did discuss your point, "But [with a cup of coffee] nowhere am I asked to 'subscribe' to anything. I buy it, enjoy it, and that’s it. I’m not committed to buy another cup ever again." Maybe you wanted him to emphasize that particular aspect more.
- OJFord 7y ago
  I actually do 'subscribe to coffee' though; I get beans delivered by https://pactcoffee.com https://pactcoffee.com (UK only I think). I can't recall the keyword for this in the realm of economics, but it's a weird thing to compare 'good value' across sectors. I do it quite often, wonder why I think X is such a rip-off when I won't even blink at Y - perhaps for that reason I've never had a problem with coffee-currencied pricing. At least for consumables (coffee, groceries, SaaS in the sense that even if you don't consume a quota you consume a timeframe) I think there is value to be had in comparing their relative value, but only secondarily to comparison against something of the same type of course.
  - watwut 7y ago
    Most people can afford a thing for price x easily. Had they never balked at price x, they would pay 20 times x and that is entirely different number. Meaning, it is not just about comparing value of goods. It is much more about keeping strategy that is easy to remember and execute, but allows you to keep savings.
naniwaduni 7y ago
Coffee, as a somewhat addictive substance, makes a better than usual metaphor for SaaS.

hsitz 7y ago

I think the article did discuss your point, "But [with a cup of coffee] nowhere am I asked to 'subscribe' to anything. I buy it, enjoy it, and that’s it. I’m not committed to buy another cup ever again." Maybe you wanted him to emphasize that particular aspect more.

OJFord 7y ago
I actually do 'subscribe to coffee' though; I get beans delivered by https://pactcoffee.com https://pactcoffee.com (UK only I think). I can't recall the keyword for this in the realm of economics, but it's a weird thing to compare 'good value' across sectors. I do it quite often, wonder why I think X is such a rip-off when I won't even blink at Y - perhaps for that reason I've never had a problem with coffee-currencied pricing. At least for consumables (coffee, groceries, SaaS in the sense that even if you don't consume a quota you consume a timeframe) I think there is value to be had in comparing their relative value, but only secondarily to comparison against something of the same type of course.
- watwut 7y ago
  Most people can afford a thing for price x easily. Had they never balked at price x, they would pay 20 times x and that is entirely different number. Meaning, it is not just about comparing value of goods. It is much more about keeping strategy that is easy to remember and execute, but allows you to keep savings.

naniwaduni 7y ago

Coffee, as a somewhat addictive substance, makes a better than usual metaphor for SaaS.