7 ms·

I loathe apps that want a subscription for such a trivial concept. Why did you choose this route over ad support or one time payment?

mishafb 5y ago
1. You charge what people are willing to pay, not how much your product is worth. 2. When it's a subscription as a customer you have more trust that it will continue working. When it's a one time purchase, who knows how long it will last.
- FunHearing3443 5y ago
  True, with #1 this is pedantic but it could be restated as the worth of your product is what people are willing to pay.
- xaedes 5y ago
  > When it's a subscription as a customer you have more trust that it will continue working. When it's a one time purchase, who knows how long it will last. Funny, for me this is the total opposite: subscription software may end any time and then you got nothing. One time purchased software you can just continue to use. Well, I guess in the games of rent-seeking, cloud-only, security and updates the viability of this is fading...
  - WA 5y ago
    It depends on the software. Is it an isolated thing? Then yes, you can continue to use it. But apps that read from APIs or scrape data are one version away from not functioning at all. Hence, regular updates. Hence, subscriptions to justify the ongoing modifications.
  - cftm 5y ago
    Total tangent, I used to have the Office 365 subscription but canceled it, yet I can still use word/excel - I've just lost access to the cloud features which I wasn't using to begin with - I would have thought they'd disable my version of word/excel but when I canceled it did not happen.
- robertlagrant 5y ago
  > 1. You charge what people are willing to pay, not how much your product is worth. What's the difference?
  - yupper32 5y ago
    Probably better phrased as: You charge what people are willing to pay, not how much you think your product is worth.
    - cookie_monsta 5y ago
      Or maybe: Your product is worth what people are willing to pay.
granshaw 5y ago
What do you think? To make more money of course, which is the whole point of businesses.
58x14 5y ago
Forgive me, but if the market responds to OP's subscription model (and $4k/mo is not trivial), no ads is a better user experience and there is less dependency on the ad network for revenue. It's typically much harder to acquire new users than retain current users = subscription model allows you to monetize your userbase over a broader period of time (let's say $5/mo * 6 mo = $30) to a value that would likely be cost-prohibitive. Most users would not spend $30 for this app. But they might sign up for a free trial, and then the $5 subscription.
- angryasian 5y ago
  the one time payment for a multi year support of software doesn't grow businesses. We just don't see the business of releasing a new version of the same software every two years with some new features and minor refresh, though it still done. It might support a small dev, but you need recurring revenue and subscriptions and ways to increase the ARPU to grow a real business.
  - par 5y ago
    Yes agreed. I used to have a one time purchase, but then I kept improving the app, adding more complex features, and the old price didn't reflect all the new work I had put in.
- csilverman 5y ago
  That’s the thing—I’d consider a limited version of a one-time $5 app, and very likely pay $30—once—to remove the limitations if I found the app useful. But when I see an app demanding subscriptions, I wouldn’t even try the free version. I’d never consider anything that didn’t offer a one-time payment.
par 5y ago
I don't get enough volume for ad support to be meaningful, and i didnt want to ruin the experience with ads. Before subscriptions, for a long time it was a one time purchase only. Then some VC's suggested i experiment with subscriptions, and I was very hesitant and semi grossed out. But I decided to give it a try, and I was seriously amazed that my conversion was barely impacted, and the same people buying one time purchases were also willing to purchase subscriptions. From there I did price experimentation, and was even more surprised to see the results there.
- chippy 5y ago
  how did you do the experimentations? some kind of AB testing?
  - par 5y ago
    I'm embarrassed to say that I never used any formal a/b testing tools. I just fully converted to subscriptions, and ran it for a few weeks, and compared it to the previous few weeks (which were one time purchase.)
    - inetknght 5y ago
      You don't need A/B testing tools. Most people don't like being tested on. Trust your gut, listen to your users, and just beware of vocal minorities. It seems like you're doing well already.
    - robocat 5y ago
      > embarrassed That’s a shame because it seems like you did the smart and effective solution without wasting your time. A/B testing isn’t needed if the signal is clear enough (¡parachute testing!), and it is hard to get enough samples for a weak signal. Good on you.
- asddubs 5y ago
  I'm surprised as well. I respect the hustle, but I honestly don't understand why anyone would debase themselves by paying $5 a month to make memes
bob229 5y ago
Are you a communist or something?!
na85 5y ago
I find ads to be disgusting, and I loathe apps that are ad supported. I'm glad the author chose the subscription route.
exdsq 5y ago
Clearly it's not trivial enough such that hundreds/thousands of people are willing to pay for it!
inetknght 5y ago
> I loathe apps that want a subscription for such a trivial concept. Why did you choose this route over ad support or one time payment? Not OP but to counterpoint: I loathe apps that want to be supported by ads. Give me a one-time payment or a subscription. Let me choose if your service if worth paying for. If it's not worth paying for then it's also not worth ads. I'll use adblockers and use your service without ads anyway or else not use it at all.
- ryandrake 5y ago
  As a user, my order of preference is: 1. Non-personalized (non-intrusive) ads 2. One time payment 3. Yearly subscription 4. Ads that mine Bitcoin or otherwise make use of my compute resources 5. Monthly subscription 6. Personalized, intrusive ads I will go out of my way to actively avoid 4-6. For 3 it would hav to be DAMN good software.
  - orangea 5y ago
    I know it is a popular opinion, but I never understood it... why would you rather have non-personalized ads than personalized ads?
    - ryandrake 5y ago
      Because I know personal ads were made possible by obtaining private information about me, whereas non-personalized ads likely weren’t. I’m not going to interact with either of them so I prefer the ones without privacy cost.
    - handrous 5y ago
      They're creepy as fuck. Same reason someone might not like being followed around everywhere, even if the person following them just writes down stuff about them but never does anything else. Spying ads are like that, but worse: it's like that person also occasionally runs in front of you to slap an ad-bearing sticker on some surface you're about to encounter, based on stuff they've written down. Spyvertising is that, but at an industrial scale. If one's creepy and ought to warrant intervention by law enforcement, the other's much, much worse.
tyingq 5y ago
Hard to argue when it's making non-trivial revenue. I was surprised people would pay a subscription for a meme tool too, but...
- par 5y ago
  but here we are :)

mishafb 5y ago

1. You charge what people are willing to pay, not how much your product is worth. 2. When it's a subscription as a customer you have more trust that it will continue working. When it's a one time purchase, who knows how long it will last.

FunHearing3443 5y ago
True, with #1 this is pedantic but it could be restated as the worth of your product is what people are willing to pay.
xaedes 5y ago
> When it's a subscription as a customer you have more trust that it will continue working. When it's a one time purchase, who knows how long it will last. Funny, for me this is the total opposite: subscription software may end any time and then you got nothing. One time purchased software you can just continue to use. Well, I guess in the games of rent-seeking, cloud-only, security and updates the viability of this is fading...
- WA 5y ago
  It depends on the software. Is it an isolated thing? Then yes, you can continue to use it. But apps that read from APIs or scrape data are one version away from not functioning at all. Hence, regular updates. Hence, subscriptions to justify the ongoing modifications.
- cftm 5y ago
  Total tangent, I used to have the Office 365 subscription but canceled it, yet I can still use word/excel - I've just lost access to the cloud features which I wasn't using to begin with - I would have thought they'd disable my version of word/excel but when I canceled it did not happen.
robertlagrant 5y ago
> 1. You charge what people are willing to pay, not how much your product is worth. What's the difference?
- yupper32 5y ago
  Probably better phrased as: You charge what people are willing to pay, not how much you think your product is worth.
  - cookie_monsta 5y ago
    Or maybe: Your product is worth what people are willing to pay.

granshaw 5y ago

What do you think? To make more money of course, which is the whole point of businesses.

58x14 5y ago

Forgive me, but if the market responds to OP's subscription model (and $4k/mo is not trivial), no ads is a better user experience and there is less dependency on the ad network for revenue. It's typically much harder to acquire new users than retain current users = subscription model allows you to monetize your userbase over a broader period of time (let's say $5/mo * 6 mo = $30) to a value that would likely be cost-prohibitive. Most users would not spend $30 for this app. But they might sign up for a free trial, and then the $5 subscription.

angryasian 5y ago
the one time payment for a multi year support of software doesn't grow businesses. We just don't see the business of releasing a new version of the same software every two years with some new features and minor refresh, though it still done. It might support a small dev, but you need recurring revenue and subscriptions and ways to increase the ARPU to grow a real business.
- par 5y ago
  Yes agreed. I used to have a one time purchase, but then I kept improving the app, adding more complex features, and the old price didn't reflect all the new work I had put in.
csilverman 5y ago
That’s the thing—I’d consider a limited version of a one-time $5 app, and very likely pay $30—once—to remove the limitations if I found the app useful. But when I see an app demanding subscriptions, I wouldn’t even try the free version. I’d never consider anything that didn’t offer a one-time payment.

par 5y ago

I don't get enough volume for ad support to be meaningful, and i didnt want to ruin the experience with ads. Before subscriptions, for a long time it was a one time purchase only. Then some VC's suggested i experiment with subscriptions, and I was very hesitant and semi grossed out. But I decided to give it a try, and I was seriously amazed that my conversion was barely impacted, and the same people buying one time purchases were also willing to purchase subscriptions. From there I did price experimentation, and was even more surprised to see the results there.

chippy 5y ago
how did you do the experimentations? some kind of AB testing?
- par 5y ago
  I'm embarrassed to say that I never used any formal a/b testing tools. I just fully converted to subscriptions, and ran it for a few weeks, and compared it to the previous few weeks (which were one time purchase.)
  - inetknght 5y ago
    You don't need A/B testing tools. Most people don't like being tested on. Trust your gut, listen to your users, and just beware of vocal minorities. It seems like you're doing well already.
  - robocat 5y ago
    > embarrassed That’s a shame because it seems like you did the smart and effective solution without wasting your time. A/B testing isn’t needed if the signal is clear enough (¡parachute testing!), and it is hard to get enough samples for a weak signal. Good on you.
asddubs 5y ago
I'm surprised as well. I respect the hustle, but I honestly don't understand why anyone would debase themselves by paying $5 a month to make memes

bob229 5y ago

Are you a communist or something?!

na85 5y ago

I find ads to be disgusting, and I loathe apps that are ad supported. I'm glad the author chose the subscription route.

exdsq 5y ago

Clearly it's not trivial enough such that hundreds/thousands of people are willing to pay for it!

inetknght 5y ago

> I loathe apps that want a subscription for such a trivial concept. Why did you choose this route over ad support or one time payment? Not OP but to counterpoint: I loathe apps that want to be supported by ads. Give me a one-time payment or a subscription. Let me choose if your service if worth paying for. If it's not worth paying for then it's also not worth ads. I'll use adblockers and use your service without ads anyway or else not use it at all.

ryandrake 5y ago
As a user, my order of preference is: 1. Non-personalized (non-intrusive) ads 2. One time payment 3. Yearly subscription 4. Ads that mine Bitcoin or otherwise make use of my compute resources 5. Monthly subscription 6. Personalized, intrusive ads I will go out of my way to actively avoid 4-6. For 3 it would hav to be DAMN good software.
- orangea 5y ago
  I know it is a popular opinion, but I never understood it... why would you rather have non-personalized ads than personalized ads?
  - ryandrake 5y ago
    Because I know personal ads were made possible by obtaining private information about me, whereas non-personalized ads likely weren’t. I’m not going to interact with either of them so I prefer the ones without privacy cost.
  - handrous 5y ago
    They're creepy as fuck. Same reason someone might not like being followed around everywhere, even if the person following them just writes down stuff about them but never does anything else. Spying ads are like that, but worse: it's like that person also occasionally runs in front of you to slap an ad-bearing sticker on some surface you're about to encounter, based on stuff they've written down. Spyvertising is that, but at an industrial scale. If one's creepy and ought to warrant intervention by law enforcement, the other's much, much worse.

tyingq 5y ago

Hard to argue when it's making non-trivial revenue. I was surprised people would pay a subscription for a meme tool too, but...

par 5y ago
but here we are :)