4 ms·

I am incredibly excited about micropaymemts from a consumer perspective. I would pay 5 cents for every article I read. I won't pay a $5 subscription.

enraged_camel 6y ago
The thing is -- and I realize the flaws in this argument before I even make it -- I would want to pay 5 cents for every article not to access it, but after I have read it. And it would have to be my decision: if I think it was a high quality article, well researched and reasoned about, perfect. If it turns out to be garbage though? I wouldn't want to pay.
- TACIXAT 6y ago
  I used to think that, then I realized I have also thrown change on the ground rather than carry it. If the article sucks that just hurts my chances of purchasing again from that author or publication.
  - lazyjones 6y ago
    > If the article sucks that just hurts my chances of purchasing again from that author or publication. And this is why most publishers will use subscriptions for their normal content, except some dubious ones who will use clickbait headlines to attract one-time buyers.
- rhizome 6y ago
  I don't think postpaying is a necessary model, there could be a popup saying you don't have a subscription and to read the (full, probably) article is $0.05, would you like to pay this? I would almost certainly click "yes" on a lot of the stuff I don't wind up getting much value out of, and hey, 5c is naturally not that much so it balances out! And maybe that Isaac Chotiner or Bill Simmons (stay with me) 8,000 word'er will be $1. Package deals are easy. In fact, what with d-u-m-b cookie settings, email begs, and rest of the stack of "first 5 seconds" mandatory interactions, right now would be a great time to pop up a less-annoying payment dialog: "[Yes] [Account] [Sign Up] [No]"
Proven 6y ago
You'd spend $5 a day and you'd need $150 per month and yet you aren't willing to pay $5 to subscribe to up to 25 sites... Call me skeptical but I don't see that happening...

enraged_camel 6y ago

The thing is -- and I realize the flaws in this argument before I even make it -- I would want to pay 5 cents for every article not to access it, but after I have read it. And it would have to be my decision: if I think it was a high quality article, well researched and reasoned about, perfect. If it turns out to be garbage though? I wouldn't want to pay.

TACIXAT 6y ago
I used to think that, then I realized I have also thrown change on the ground rather than carry it. If the article sucks that just hurts my chances of purchasing again from that author or publication.
- lazyjones 6y ago
  > If the article sucks that just hurts my chances of purchasing again from that author or publication. And this is why most publishers will use subscriptions for their normal content, except some dubious ones who will use clickbait headlines to attract one-time buyers.
rhizome 6y ago
I don't think postpaying is a necessary model, there could be a popup saying you don't have a subscription and to read the (full, probably) article is $0.05, would you like to pay this? I would almost certainly click "yes" on a lot of the stuff I don't wind up getting much value out of, and hey, 5c is naturally not that much so it balances out! And maybe that Isaac Chotiner or Bill Simmons (stay with me) 8,000 word'er will be $1. Package deals are easy. In fact, what with d-u-m-b cookie settings, email begs, and rest of the stack of "first 5 seconds" mandatory interactions, right now would be a great time to pop up a less-annoying payment dialog: "[Yes] [Account] [Sign Up] [No]"

Proven 6y ago

You'd spend $5 a day and you'd need $150 per month and yet you aren't willing to pay $5 to subscribe to up to 25 sites... Call me skeptical but I don't see that happening...