3 ms·

I would call that being cheap, with all due respect. There’s nothing wrong with a subscription pricing model if the value is there and there’s a relatively easy

by itisit 5y ago

I would call that being cheap, with all due respect. There’s nothing wrong with a subscription pricing model if the value is there and there’s a relatively easy way to unsubscribe.

kadoban 5y ago
Subscriptions can be a little scummy because companies know a lot of people forget to turn them off. They're counting on that. It's far from the biggest evil in the world though. Personally I just vaguely try to avoid them and instead make an effort to pay people for the content I consume in lump sums here and there.
pritambaral 5y ago
I would call that being inconsiderate, with all due respect. Your parent said they're anti-subscription, not anti-paying. Conflating the two can lead to some really stupid conclusions, like "Oh, you don't rent? Does that mean you're homeless?"
- itisit 5y ago
  To help, let's call it "anti-paying-for-a-subscription". Ongoing access to 70 million tracks is not without some form of recurrent payment: money, data, attention, etc. Parent's gripe, as stated, are the ads, and there's a reasonably priced alternative to dealing with them. Hence my respectful remark..
  - pritambaral 5y ago
    I don't doubt you're trying to be respectful, but you're still not considering what your parent might have meant, and are still claiming your own assumptions as facts for them. For example: > Ongoing access to 70 million tracks ... It'd be pretty difficult to go through 70 million tracks for a person. I know it will be for me. Maybe your parent also doesn't need so many tracks. It is, after all, common for people to compile/curate their own music library. I still do it. I'm not saying your parent does it too, but maybe they have a similar reason to not need access to 70 million tracks. And: > Parent's gripe, as stated, are the ads ... Even if that were the only gripe they've stated, it wouldn't mean that's the only issue they have. In fact, when I read their stated anti-subscription position without an accompanying explanation, I assumed they might have a reason for it, even if they didn't state it here and now.

by itisit 5y ago

I would call that being cheap, with all due respect. There’s nothing wrong with a subscription pricing model if the value is there and there’s a relatively easy way to unsubscribe.

kadoban 5y ago

Subscriptions can be a little scummy because companies know a lot of people forget to turn them off. They're counting on that. It's far from the biggest evil in the world though. Personally I just vaguely try to avoid them and instead make an effort to pay people for the content I consume in lump sums here and there.

pritambaral 5y ago

I would call that being inconsiderate, with all due respect. Your parent said they're anti-subscription, not anti-paying. Conflating the two can lead to some really stupid conclusions, like "Oh, you don't rent? Does that mean you're homeless?"

itisit 5y ago
To help, let's call it "anti-paying-for-a-subscription". Ongoing access to 70 million tracks is not without some form of recurrent payment: money, data, attention, etc. Parent's gripe, as stated, are the ads, and there's a reasonably priced alternative to dealing with them. Hence my respectful remark..
- pritambaral 5y ago
  I don't doubt you're trying to be respectful, but you're still not considering what your parent might have meant, and are still claiming your own assumptions as facts for them. For example: > Ongoing access to 70 million tracks ... It'd be pretty difficult to go through 70 million tracks for a person. I know it will be for me. Maybe your parent also doesn't need so many tracks. It is, after all, common for people to compile/curate their own music library. I still do it. I'm not saying your parent does it too, but maybe they have a similar reason to not need access to 70 million tracks. And: > Parent's gripe, as stated, are the ads ... Even if that were the only gripe they've stated, it wouldn't mean that's the only issue they have. In fact, when I read their stated anti-subscription position without an accompanying explanation, I assumed they might have a reason for it, even if they didn't state it here and now.