4 ms·

I said cash-grab, not cash cow. A cash grab is something that has an unreasonably high profit margin. A cash cow is something that provides a significant portio

by Sephr 3y ago

I said cash-grab, not cash cow. A cash grab is something that has an unreasonably high profit margin. A cash cow is something that provides a significant portion of an entity's income. I have no idea if HIBP is a cash cow for Troy. It may be, given these prices, but I don't know much about his other sources of income. HIBP didn't start out as a cash-grab, but it is one now. Troy could have chosen to price it reasonably to cover the costs of the service. This pricing is clearly taking advantage of HIBP's popularity as the de-facto breach list site.

ehhthing 3y ago
I can't tell whether this is a joke or not. I would bet you that over 99.99 percent of HIBP's users do not pay for the service. Troy's time has value, so working on a service that provides no income is not really something you can expect a person to do. Troy decided to create an enterprise subscription service to get a bit of revenue from something he's created. It's not cheap, but it's not something you're meant to buy unless you're a company looking to monitor your employee email addresses. This service is pretty cheap in that regard, actually. I really do not understand why you feel that you're being ripped off here. This is just a lack of product-user fit, his pricing structure simply doesn't work for you because you use email canaries. But for a company with 100 people, this pricing is entirely reasonable, if not something incredibly cheap. What you're paying for is everyone who doesn't pay for the service, the time he takes to add new breaches to the service and the time he takes to develop the service. Just because their pricing model doesn't fit you doesn't mean it's a cash grab. Is this too hard to understand? EDIT: Also, I assumed this was a common understanding, but product pricing is based on the value it gives to the person buying. For a company of 100 people, do you think paying $160/yr is worth breach monitoring? I think for any IT department, this would be a no-brainer.
- Sephr 3y ago
  The cost of this service doesn't scale with number of 'breached accounts per domain'. Ideally, Troy should charge per domain and only choose a modest profit margin.

by Sephr 3y ago

ehhthing 3y ago

I can't tell whether this is a joke or not. I would bet you that over 99.99 percent of HIBP's users do not pay for the service. Troy's time has value, so working on a service that provides no income is not really something you can expect a person to do. Troy decided to create an enterprise subscription service to get a bit of revenue from something he's created. It's not cheap, but it's not something you're meant to buy unless you're a company looking to monitor your employee email addresses. This service is pretty cheap in that regard, actually. I really do not understand why you feel that you're being ripped off here. This is just a lack of product-user fit, his pricing structure simply doesn't work for you because you use email canaries. But for a company with 100 people, this pricing is entirely reasonable, if not something incredibly cheap. What you're paying for is everyone who doesn't pay for the service, the time he takes to add new breaches to the service and the time he takes to develop the service. Just because their pricing model doesn't fit you doesn't mean it's a cash grab. Is this too hard to understand? EDIT: Also, I assumed this was a common understanding, but product pricing is based on the value it gives to the person buying. For a company of 100 people, do you think paying $160/yr is worth breach monitoring? I think for any IT department, this would be a no-brainer.

Sephr 3y ago
The cost of this service doesn't scale with number of 'breached accounts per domain'. Ideally, Troy should charge per domain and only choose a modest profit margin.