3 ms·
Part of the problem was that IFTTT started charging businesses a few years ago to add support. I think they used to charge per trigger, so lots of companies pul
by guptaneil 6y ago
Part of the problem was that IFTTT started charging businesses a few years ago to add support. I think they used to charge per trigger, so lots of companies pulled everything but the bare minimum. Now IFTTT is trying to charge consumers instead but it’s likely too late. A cloud-based consumer automation platform is of dubious value in a world filled with smart home platforms and local options like iOS Shortcuts.
- jwr 6y ago> Part of the problem was that IFTTT started charging businesses Evidence: I run a SaaS and had a long-standing TODO: "Implement Zapier and IFTTT support". Well, I eventually did implement both, and then learned that in the meantime IFTTT changed its approach, started charging businesses, and the amounts are not insignificant. I had no idea if any of my customers actually wanted IFTTT, so I simply killed the integration and sticked to Zapier.
- toomuchtodo 6y agoBoth models can coexist (Zapier charging the end user instead of integration partners, IFTTT offering for "free" or very low cost if integration partners will pay and absorb those costs elsewhere, maybe baked into recurring revenue or the cost of hardware sold), but the use cases are drastically different.
- aaronharnly 6y agoWow, what a disastrously short-sighted business model.
- futhey 6y agoI want to say our tiny startup was quoted about $30k? Then they dropped it recently to $199, and now it's free. I'm guessing "hope Google calls asking for a new integration and charge them a million dollars" was the business model, and they're hoping to transition into a model where they charge users.