7 ms·

Thanks for highlighting this - we're trying to figure out what the best model is for our community. A lot of other apps follow a similar model, we allow people

Thanks for highlighting this - we're trying to figure out what the best model is for our community. A lot of other apps follow a similar model, we allow people to cancel anytime and have refunded everyone that has forgotten to cancel. Some people also like having the subscription because it is a pay per use model rather than putting everyone under the same one-off bundle. We're working on extending the free trial / moving to a freemium model. Would love any suggestions on how to improve this.

mStreamTeam 5y ago
The best model for your community is free and open source. Your current model of opt-in subscriptions makes it clear you're looking for the best model for your bank account
- samhw 5y ago
  How do you propose that they feed and house themselves? Has someone got a GitHub repo for that?
  - mStreamTeam 5y ago
    They can get a real job instead of making products that prey on people with ADHD. There's no job shortage, so don't make excuses for them
    - samhw 5y ago
      My point is about the unbelievably privileged attitude of "you should make products for me free of charge, or else you're the greedy one". Not whether this specific product should exist, which is a different point from how it should be funded.
      - mStreamTeam 5y ago
        You're using quotes but I never said those words. Never speak on my behalf again. It's insulting. I don't want them to do it for free. I want then to not make a predatory product. I want them to make their money through a more honest business And if they can't do that, I want them to do nothing
        samhw 5y ago
        Right, again, not wanting them to make it at all is a different point. You were proposing that they make it free of charge. (As for 'quoting you', it's called paraphrasing. I'd have hoped it was rather obvious I was not suggesting that you said those exact words.)
        mStreamTeam 5y ago
        I never proposed they make it free of charge. I said the best model for their community is free and open source. The point of saying that is to make a contrast with their current predatory model. And thats why I don't want you quoting me or paraphrasing me. You're putting words into my mouth that I never said or even implied. And once again, I find it extremely insulting. I'm going to make it clear so you don't do it again. I want then to make an honest business model and to stop this predatory one
        samhw 5y ago
        > I never proposed they make it free of charge. I said the best model for their community is free and open source. I ... they're the same picture ...
        mStreamTeam 5y ago
        I can't believe I have to say it again. Do not quote me. This time you omitted the next sentence that ties those two ideas together. You're clearly malicious and cannot listen to simple personal requests. I hope you can become a better person in the future. Goodbye
    - sebisaacsinflow 5y ago
      If we didn't build and charge for our app then we can't continue working on it and improving. We enable many people to get support they wouldn't be able to otherwise and significantly broaden accessibility compared to medication and in-person therapy. We're not a non-profit but we do need to improve our model.
      - mStreamTeam 5y ago
        Linux is free and somehow that has gotten decades of support. You can do good work for "your community" without putting profits first
        JohnBooty 5y ago
        Linux is free and somehow that has gotten decades of support. Most of the top contributors to Linux and other big FOSS projects do that work as a part of their salaried jobs at various corporations. It's shocking that the myth of Linux being created and maintained by a bunch of dedicated outlaw nerds, typing away in their basements for free in their spare time (while presumably also working 50 hour weeks at their tech jobs, to pay the bills?) persists to any degree whatsoever in 2021. Countless huge companies rely upon Linux in major ways, and therefore fund its development and maintenance. Sources: https://www.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020FOSSContributorSurveyReport_121020.pdf https://www.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020FOSSC... https://linux.slashdot.org/story/10/01/21/230201/75-of-linux-code-now-written-by-paid-developers https://linux.slashdot.org/story/10/01/21/230201/75-of-linux...
      - chrsig 5y ago
        Posing the question: did you at all investigate the viability of a non profit organization?
dtomd12 5y ago
I think the easiest solution is to stop providing access after the free trial until they opt-in to a subscription. That way there’s no surprise charge if they forget.
- rrrrrrrrrrrryan 5y ago
  This seems reasonable. Go ahead and collect the payment info before giving them access to the free trial, let them use the thing for free for X days, then when the free trial is up, block their access and ask them whether or not they'd like to pay for the subscription. It could literally just be one big button that says "accept." Then ideally, ask them again before each recurring charge. Some people here are proposing an absurd amount of friction - one highly upvoted post suggested that the app should require users to re-enter their payment info before every charge. What if this app is great? What if I actually want to give them my money? Making me type in my credit card info repeatedly is nightmarishly bad UX. Reducing friction is a good thing, even here. The important bit is just getting the user's clear consent by making it opt-in instead of opt-out.
anonymoushn 5y ago
> we allow people to cancel anytime and have refunded everyone that has forgotten to cancel Probably not, because your users are people who will forget to cancel and then forget to tell you about that. > Some people also like having the subscription because it is a pay per use model What does this mean? It sounds like users are complaining that if they download the app and don't use it it charges them $100. > Would love any suggestions on how to improve this. Howabout when the free trial ends, at that time the user has to approve a charge before continuing to use the app.
skeletron 5y ago
Thanks, I appreciate your response on this, but I'd be interested in your thoughts on the following two points specifically: - Why have you chosen to make users opt out of a subscription when the free trial ends, rather than letting them opt in? - Why is the annual payment option pushed so hard, in favour of the monthly payment option? I'm reiterating this because promoting an opt-in, monthly payment model (thus giving more opportunities for any unintentional ongoing payments to be noticed by the payer) seems to me to be the kindest approach to subscriptions for users with ADHD, and a model that would be most empathetic to their condition.
- sebisaacsinflow 5y ago
  Thanks for the follow-up questions. We're actually working on several different sign-ups flows at the moment including opt-in post free trial, longer free trial, web sign-up and one-off purchase vs subscription. It is not our intention to push annual significantly over monthly - we wanted to give a significant discount to yearly subscribers but perhaps the difference between the two is too large. The previously mentioned issue with scrolling is due to to a bug with small screen sizes on Android which we're working to fix.
  - skeletron 5y ago
    Thanks, it's good to know that you're considering alternatives. As you have a number of people with ADHD working on your app, I would be curious to know if any of them raised concerns about these specifics of your subscription model, during planning and development of the app?
    - sebisaacsinflow 5y ago
      As well as input from the team, we did a lot of user interviews and testing during development and this wasn't flagged as a concern (a lot of people were used to the model from other apps) but clearly this is something we need to work on.
      - 5y ago
yummypaint 5y ago
I can assure you that absolutely no-one "likes" being charged a full years subscription in advance. We're working on extending the free trial / moving to a freemium model. Please. You aren't spaceX "working on" your next engine, or AMD "working on" the next processor architecture. All you have to do to end the unethical behavior is flip a few bits in a database. Don't pretend it's some kind of grand technical challenge. You're luring in people who are trying to improve their mental health and tricking them out of their money. The product isn't even technically innovative. No idea why YC is compromising its brand like this.
- yololol 5y ago
  While criticism can be good when constructive, I think these comments are a bit dramatic and make way too many assumptions. I would expect that it's more financially lucrative to have a happy userbase, which translates to a good reputation and thus larger user-base, rather rip-off a few who will eventually give bad reviews and create a bad reputation. To me the current pricing model sounds more like a bad decision rather than anything else. But in any case, if I didn't like it I would just not use it, rather than throwing accusations around on malicious intentions without having any evidence. PS: I am not even remotely affiliated with the creators of that app
  - texasbigdata 5y ago
    If you worked towards the higher standard, of trying to avoid even the potential appearance of inappropriate action, you would never do what they did. Deep down do you believe that they would have changed if not for this public outcry? Make it free for 30 days THEN throw up a pay screen. You're a funded startup what's the issue here?
    - yololol 5y ago
      Agreed, and that's what I would expect too. In fact, if the app works as they claim to be, users would rush to subscribe after the 30 day trial. Yet, criticism doesn't necessarily need to be accompanied with unjustified accusations and demands. I find this attitude to be a very common pattern nowadays. Criticism can be constructive and to the point without any of these.
Ozzie_osman 5y ago
I don't know the founders and have not tried the product, but I'm building a business in the consumer subscription space so I'll post a few things that might clarify why they could end up with this model even with good intentions. I'll also add that I don't know much about the science/behavior of folks with ADHD, so I won't try to talk about that piece at all. First, the app stores are pretty prescriptive about how you handle introductory trials on subscriptions (especially Apple), which means you are usually stuck with "start trial + opt-out" as the only viable model if you're billing through the App Store. Second, behavioral/commitment theory often shows that for apps or really any behavior change that requires some effort, a longer time commitment/investment gets people to actually invest the effort they need to actually get value out of the product. If you let people pay for a month, they won't actually put in any effort and then at the end of the month they'll be like "I'm not getting any value here" and they'll just cancel. They won't put in the effort to build the habits. So most wellness apps/products (from meditation/fitness apps to gym memberships) end up with some sort of free trial period, followed by an annual commitment (and if there's a monthly option, it's at a steep hike from the annual one). Finally, when you're early on in the life of your startup, you're mostly trying to get to product-market fit and see whether people are willing to use / pay for what you've built. You just choose a pricing period/plan that makes sense, focus on the product, then when you get the product where you want, you go back and experiment with finding the ideal pricing plan for you and your users. That said, it's clear in this case that this model may not be great for the target audience (in fact, even for neurotypicals, canceling subscriptions and such is still a challenge to manage). And obviously the app creators could have put more thought into it. We ended up with an opt-out free trial plan as per Apple's rules on iOS, with a monthly plan where the yearly plan is a 25% discount if you choose it, and several reminders before the trial converts to paid. We also allow users to do a standard opt-in plan if they're not signing up through iOS (ie only need to put credit card after trial expires). We offer refunds where we can for people who got billed but didn't intend to, but Apple has to process those refunds too.
skinkestek 5y ago
Generally supportive of you guys but want to pick even more. > A lot of other apps follow a similar model, we allow people to cancel anytime and have refunded everyone that has forgotten to cancel. Many ADHD people also forget or are too embarrassed to do that. Life hack that works for some: at least on iOS and in my region one can subscribe, immediately unsubscribe and continue to use a product during its free trial period without risking getting trapped.
- napsterbr 5y ago
  This hack works on Android, too. At least I was able to do that with Audible.
MrRiddle 5y ago
Charging for monthly instead of yearly after trial ends is something you can push to production in half an hour. Don't try to weasel out in front of technical audience. Liar.
- sebisaacsinflow 5y ago
  Users do have a choice between monthly and yearly.
- andybak 5y ago
  Harsh but fair.
shadowoflight 5y ago
Just gonna jump on the bandwagon here and say that, as somebody who suffers from ADHD, with all due respect, that is 100% USDA certified horseshit. At the very least, bill monthly and make the trial not auto-renew at full price. And, since the target market is people with executive dysfunction, I'd love to see your team go the extra mile and default to pushing notifications the week before and day before a user's subscription renews, giving them ample time to cancel if it doesn't fit their budget this month.
- andybak 5y ago
  Yep. ADHD here and I won't touch anything that auto-renews.
- saaaaaam 5y ago
  As someone who has ADHD and suffers a lot from forgetting to cancel subscriptions etc this would be really really good. I used to set several calendar reminders each quarter. One to sit down and work out what subscriptions I have. Another one to sit down and work out what subscriptions I have. One to cancel subscriptions. Another one to sit down and actually cancel them. A third one to work out if I’ve cancelled them… Now I have a bunch of automations set up that ping me and say “you’ve got this subscription… are you actually using it?” It took me a fair bit of effort to engineer but it’s saved me a whole load of money.
smsm42 5y ago
Please do not confuse people liking subscription and people that forget about the day when the trial ends and get charged (a non-trivial sum of over $100) against their wishes. People that like subscription certainly can use subscription, and giving them such an option is a smart move. A sneaky and underhanded move is to charge those that did not explicitly express the desire to have the subscription, but just forgot to cancel in time. Refunding after people vocally complain is fixing half of the problem. Not doing opt-out charging would be the other half. I know many providers do not dare to give up on opt-out trials, since it brings them money. It is scary to trust your future clients - maybe they won't buy after all? But if you don't trust them, why would they trust you?

mStreamTeam 5y ago

The best model for your community is free and open source. Your current model of opt-in subscriptions makes it clear you're looking for the best model for your bank account

samhw 5y ago
How do you propose that they feed and house themselves? Has someone got a GitHub repo for that?
- mStreamTeam 5y ago
  They can get a real job instead of making products that prey on people with ADHD. There's no job shortage, so don't make excuses for them
  - samhw 5y ago
    My point is about the unbelievably privileged attitude of "you should make products for me free of charge, or else you're the greedy one". Not whether this specific product should exist, which is a different point from how it should be funded.
    - mStreamTeam 5y ago
      You're using quotes but I never said those words. Never speak on my behalf again. It's insulting. I don't want them to do it for free. I want then to not make a predatory product. I want them to make their money through a more honest business And if they can't do that, I want them to do nothing
      - samhw 5y ago
        Right, again, not wanting them to make it at all is a different point. You were proposing that they make it free of charge. (As for 'quoting you', it's called paraphrasing. I'd have hoped it was rather obvious I was not suggesting that you said those exact words.)
        mStreamTeam 5y ago
        I never proposed they make it free of charge. I said the best model for their community is free and open source. The point of saying that is to make a contrast with their current predatory model. And thats why I don't want you quoting me or paraphrasing me. You're putting words into my mouth that I never said or even implied. And once again, I find it extremely insulting. I'm going to make it clear so you don't do it again. I want then to make an honest business model and to stop this predatory one
        samhw 5y ago
        > I never proposed they make it free of charge. I said the best model for their community is free and open source. I ... they're the same picture ...
        mStreamTeam 5y ago
        I can't believe I have to say it again. Do not quote me. This time you omitted the next sentence that ties those two ideas together. You're clearly malicious and cannot listen to simple personal requests. I hope you can become a better person in the future. Goodbye
  - sebisaacsinflow 5y ago
    If we didn't build and charge for our app then we can't continue working on it and improving. We enable many people to get support they wouldn't be able to otherwise and significantly broaden accessibility compared to medication and in-person therapy. We're not a non-profit but we do need to improve our model.
    - mStreamTeam 5y ago
      Linux is free and somehow that has gotten decades of support. You can do good work for "your community" without putting profits first
      - JohnBooty 5y ago
        Linux is free and somehow that has gotten decades of support. Most of the top contributors to Linux and other big FOSS projects do that work as a part of their salaried jobs at various corporations. It's shocking that the myth of Linux being created and maintained by a bunch of dedicated outlaw nerds, typing away in their basements for free in their spare time (while presumably also working 50 hour weeks at their tech jobs, to pay the bills?) persists to any degree whatsoever in 2021. Countless huge companies rely upon Linux in major ways, and therefore fund its development and maintenance. Sources: https://www.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020FOSSContributorSurveyReport_121020.pdf https://www.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020FOSSC... https://linux.slashdot.org/story/10/01/21/230201/75-of-linux-code-now-written-by-paid-developers https://linux.slashdot.org/story/10/01/21/230201/75-of-linux...
    - chrsig 5y ago
      Posing the question: did you at all investigate the viability of a non profit organization?

dtomd12 5y ago

I think the easiest solution is to stop providing access after the free trial until they opt-in to a subscription. That way there’s no surprise charge if they forget.

rrrrrrrrrrrryan 5y ago
This seems reasonable. Go ahead and collect the payment info before giving them access to the free trial, let them use the thing for free for X days, then when the free trial is up, block their access and ask them whether or not they'd like to pay for the subscription. It could literally just be one big button that says "accept." Then ideally, ask them again before each recurring charge. Some people here are proposing an absurd amount of friction - one highly upvoted post suggested that the app should require users to re-enter their payment info before every charge. What if this app is great? What if I actually want to give them my money? Making me type in my credit card info repeatedly is nightmarishly bad UX. Reducing friction is a good thing, even here. The important bit is just getting the user's clear consent by making it opt-in instead of opt-out.

anonymoushn 5y ago

> we allow people to cancel anytime and have refunded everyone that has forgotten to cancel Probably not, because your users are people who will forget to cancel and then forget to tell you about that. > Some people also like having the subscription because it is a pay per use model What does this mean? It sounds like users are complaining that if they download the app and don't use it it charges them $100. > Would love any suggestions on how to improve this. Howabout when the free trial ends, at that time the user has to approve a charge before continuing to use the app.

skeletron 5y ago

Thanks, I appreciate your response on this, but I'd be interested in your thoughts on the following two points specifically: - Why have you chosen to make users opt out of a subscription when the free trial ends, rather than letting them opt in? - Why is the annual payment option pushed so hard, in favour of the monthly payment option? I'm reiterating this because promoting an opt-in, monthly payment model (thus giving more opportunities for any unintentional ongoing payments to be noticed by the payer) seems to me to be the kindest approach to subscriptions for users with ADHD, and a model that would be most empathetic to their condition.

sebisaacsinflow 5y ago
Thanks for the follow-up questions. We're actually working on several different sign-ups flows at the moment including opt-in post free trial, longer free trial, web sign-up and one-off purchase vs subscription. It is not our intention to push annual significantly over monthly - we wanted to give a significant discount to yearly subscribers but perhaps the difference between the two is too large. The previously mentioned issue with scrolling is due to to a bug with small screen sizes on Android which we're working to fix.
- skeletron 5y ago
  Thanks, it's good to know that you're considering alternatives. As you have a number of people with ADHD working on your app, I would be curious to know if any of them raised concerns about these specifics of your subscription model, during planning and development of the app?
  - sebisaacsinflow 5y ago
    As well as input from the team, we did a lot of user interviews and testing during development and this wasn't flagged as a concern (a lot of people were used to the model from other apps) but clearly this is something we need to work on.
    - 5y ago

yummypaint 5y ago

I can assure you that absolutely no-one "likes" being charged a full years subscription in advance. We're working on extending the free trial / moving to a freemium model. Please. You aren't spaceX "working on" your next engine, or AMD "working on" the next processor architecture. All you have to do to end the unethical behavior is flip a few bits in a database. Don't pretend it's some kind of grand technical challenge. You're luring in people who are trying to improve their mental health and tricking them out of their money. The product isn't even technically innovative. No idea why YC is compromising its brand like this.

yololol 5y ago
While criticism can be good when constructive, I think these comments are a bit dramatic and make way too many assumptions. I would expect that it's more financially lucrative to have a happy userbase, which translates to a good reputation and thus larger user-base, rather rip-off a few who will eventually give bad reviews and create a bad reputation. To me the current pricing model sounds more like a bad decision rather than anything else. But in any case, if I didn't like it I would just not use it, rather than throwing accusations around on malicious intentions without having any evidence. PS: I am not even remotely affiliated with the creators of that app
- texasbigdata 5y ago
  If you worked towards the higher standard, of trying to avoid even the potential appearance of inappropriate action, you would never do what they did. Deep down do you believe that they would have changed if not for this public outcry? Make it free for 30 days THEN throw up a pay screen. You're a funded startup what's the issue here?
  - yololol 5y ago
    Agreed, and that's what I would expect too. In fact, if the app works as they claim to be, users would rush to subscribe after the 30 day trial. Yet, criticism doesn't necessarily need to be accompanied with unjustified accusations and demands. I find this attitude to be a very common pattern nowadays. Criticism can be constructive and to the point without any of these.

Ozzie_osman 5y ago

I don't know the founders and have not tried the product, but I'm building a business in the consumer subscription space so I'll post a few things that might clarify why they could end up with this model even with good intentions. I'll also add that I don't know much about the science/behavior of folks with ADHD, so I won't try to talk about that piece at all. First, the app stores are pretty prescriptive about how you handle introductory trials on subscriptions (especially Apple), which means you are usually stuck with "start trial + opt-out" as the only viable model if you're billing through the App Store. Second, behavioral/commitment theory often shows that for apps or really any behavior change that requires some effort, a longer time commitment/investment gets people to actually invest the effort they need to actually get value out of the product. If you let people pay for a month, they won't actually put in any effort and then at the end of the month they'll be like "I'm not getting any value here" and they'll just cancel. They won't put in the effort to build the habits. So most wellness apps/products (from meditation/fitness apps to gym memberships) end up with some sort of free trial period, followed by an annual commitment (and if there's a monthly option, it's at a steep hike from the annual one). Finally, when you're early on in the life of your startup, you're mostly trying to get to product-market fit and see whether people are willing to use / pay for what you've built. You just choose a pricing period/plan that makes sense, focus on the product, then when you get the product where you want, you go back and experiment with finding the ideal pricing plan for you and your users. That said, it's clear in this case that this model may not be great for the target audience (in fact, even for neurotypicals, canceling subscriptions and such is still a challenge to manage). And obviously the app creators could have put more thought into it. We ended up with an opt-out free trial plan as per Apple's rules on iOS, with a monthly plan where the yearly plan is a 25% discount if you choose it, and several reminders before the trial converts to paid. We also allow users to do a standard opt-in plan if they're not signing up through iOS (ie only need to put credit card after trial expires). We offer refunds where we can for people who got billed but didn't intend to, but Apple has to process those refunds too.

skinkestek 5y ago

Generally supportive of you guys but want to pick even more. > A lot of other apps follow a similar model, we allow people to cancel anytime and have refunded everyone that has forgotten to cancel. Many ADHD people also forget or are too embarrassed to do that. Life hack that works for some: at least on iOS and in my region one can subscribe, immediately unsubscribe and continue to use a product during its free trial period without risking getting trapped.

napsterbr 5y ago
This hack works on Android, too. At least I was able to do that with Audible.

MrRiddle 5y ago

Charging for monthly instead of yearly after trial ends is something you can push to production in half an hour. Don't try to weasel out in front of technical audience. Liar.

sebisaacsinflow 5y ago
Users do have a choice between monthly and yearly.
andybak 5y ago
Harsh but fair.

shadowoflight 5y ago

Just gonna jump on the bandwagon here and say that, as somebody who suffers from ADHD, with all due respect, that is 100% USDA certified horseshit. At the very least, bill monthly and make the trial not auto-renew at full price. And, since the target market is people with executive dysfunction, I'd love to see your team go the extra mile and default to pushing notifications the week before and day before a user's subscription renews, giving them ample time to cancel if it doesn't fit their budget this month.

andybak 5y ago
Yep. ADHD here and I won't touch anything that auto-renews.
saaaaaam 5y ago
As someone who has ADHD and suffers a lot from forgetting to cancel subscriptions etc this would be really really good. I used to set several calendar reminders each quarter. One to sit down and work out what subscriptions I have. Another one to sit down and work out what subscriptions I have. One to cancel subscriptions. Another one to sit down and actually cancel them. A third one to work out if I’ve cancelled them… Now I have a bunch of automations set up that ping me and say “you’ve got this subscription… are you actually using it?” It took me a fair bit of effort to engineer but it’s saved me a whole load of money.

smsm42 5y ago

Please do not confuse people liking subscription and people that forget about the day when the trial ends and get charged (a non-trivial sum of over $100) against their wishes. People that like subscription certainly can use subscription, and giving them such an option is a smart move. A sneaky and underhanded move is to charge those that did not explicitly express the desire to have the subscription, but just forgot to cancel in time. Refunding after people vocally complain is fixing half of the problem. Not doing opt-out charging would be the other half. I know many providers do not dare to give up on opt-out trials, since it brings them money. It is scary to trust your future clients - maybe they won't buy after all? But if you don't trust them, why would they trust you?