17 ms·

As a longtime YouTube creator who uses Patreon for financial support, the news is terrible: Patreon informed me that all creators must switch to a monthly subsc

by bkraz 2y ago

As a longtime YouTube creator who uses Patreon for financial support, the news is terrible: Patreon informed me that all creators must switch to a monthly subscription schedule instead of the per-creation schedule that I and many other currently use. The whole point of per-creation is that it allows me to take time off, and only charge people when I release something, thus incentivizing me, and being fair to my supporters. I'm really annoyed by this change, and will start pushing back, but if it happens as planned, I may be forced to switch to another platform, or come up with some other solution.

ThrowawayTestr 2y ago
If you're able, my artist friend has had a lot of success running their own site and doing their own payments through PayPal.
- ncr100 2y ago
  Am I misunderstanding, that PayPal can workaround Apple's payment rules which Patreon is complying with?
  - hnuser123456 2y ago
    As long as you're not using the paypal app on an apple device
  - burnished 2y ago
    You are misunderstanding, the suggestion is to do it yourself instead of using patreon.
  - whimsicalism 2y ago
    think p2p transactions are exempt - apple doesn’t get 30% of my venmo or zelle. no clue why patreon doesn’t count though
    - froggit 2y ago
      It's not p2p. 2 transactions happen: you pay patreon, patreon pays them.
      - whimsicalism 2y ago
        likewise with venmo, no? who gets to decide what constitutes a transaction
        johnnyanmac 2y ago
        If we're being honest, private backroom deals based on a variety of business factors and debates. Venmo is Paypal, Paypal has Musk's and Thiel's deep pockets. They can and will settle something. There is no real line, just imaginary ones apple draws arbitrarily.
  - grugagag 2y ago
    It seems this bypasses both Patreon and Apple.
  - ncr100 2y ago
    Meta: So the negative point value, currently -1, tells me that I am asking a rhetorical question and I should have said that I'm asking a rhetorical question. Back on topic: I am an expert on in-app purchases circa 2020 and do know that there's no working around it unless you have a deal with Apple. Used to be my job. Paypal or any other financial transaction entity Is all the same to Apple, the user is sending their money while using an apple hosted app, and apple wants to make sure that users don't get fleeced! So Apple taxes those transactions ostensibly to provide oversight Services. So the only way for patreon to get around this is to not mention in their app that you can also sign up on you know patreon.com To give money, and to allow users who have signed up and sent money on patreon.com to use the iOS app.
- ryan29 2y ago
  How do they deal with the taxes?
- yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
  1. Building and running your own site is a lot more work than using Patreon. 2. Now you're at PayPal's tender mercies, which... well, you do you, but I wouldn't advise it.
  - underlipton 2y ago
    Keep it simple, use templates. In fact, how amazing would it be if someone who was about to embark on yet another decentralized protocol fiasco instead just released a Patreon-like template? There are other payment providers.
    - johnnyanmac 2y ago
      >how amazing would it be if someone who was about to embark on yet another decentralized protocol fiasco instead just released a Patreon-like template they probably exist already (minus payment processing). Network effects take hold as usual, though. Patrons are more willing than average to jump, but I can see hesitation signing up and adding payment for a new/unknown website and honestly all payment providers suck in some unique way. Though most of the fault lies in Visa/Mastercard. That's a monopoly we need to tackle one day.
- bluescrn 2y ago
  Everyone's heard horror stories about Paypal, though. Doesn't seem like a platform that you want to become too reliant on.
  - kalleboo 2y ago
    I've heard horror stories about Patreon as well. Your best bet is probably to spread your risk by being on Patreon, Ko-fi, PayPal+Web, YouTube memberships (if you do video) etc.
    - johnnyanmac 2y ago
      managing so many fronts with such different medium (you can host all media on patreon, only really videos on YT but also more limited videos than patreon. then you can't host at all on ko-fi), sounds like a pain both logistically and financially.
renewiltord 2y ago
How can another platform be better about this? Wouldn’t they be subject to the same thing? Or is there some component here that is not tied to the Apple demand?
- bkraz 2y ago
  That's a great question! How far does Apple's control extend into markets that are unrelated to their core business? I always prefer using mobile websites on my own android phone instead of downloading apps because of security concerns and general notification spamming, ads, and annoyances, and it seems to me this would be a great solution ie just replacing "apps" with bookmarks. For the current situation, I may look into services like Nebula, doing PayPal directly, YouTube subscriptions and donations, or setting up an online store. Or even.... sponsored videos!! (just kidding)
  - xnyan 2y ago
    > it seems to me this would be a great solution ie just replacing "apps" with bookmarks. I think there are several reasons users gravitate to apps, but the biggest pain point apps mitigate is the login UX. I'd wager that you use a password manager, most people do not and cannot be convinced to do so. With an app, one can create an account and log in once, then stay logged in and never think about the password again until they get a new device, at which time the password can be reset via email and then immediately forgotten.
jkaplowitz 2y ago
It’s bad, yes. It would be good if Patreon allowed sticking with the billing systems which Apple is forbidding, but I do understand that they may no longer be able to justify the business expense of maintaining them given the anticipated changes in usage patterns. Practical suggestion: Maybe you can project a certain number of releases per year, reduce that projection slightly to give yourself a margin of flexibility, announce that target to your supporters, be explicit wit them that the rate of output throughout the year will be uneven, and then charge a monthly subscription price of 1/12 of the total price for your annual target output? Assuning a good projection would smoothly have approximately the same financial outcome for everyone as the status quo in most cases. I can think of ways in which this could be gamed, but most of those who would want to bother gaming it are probably cash-poor enough that you may not mind, or if too many people do this to preserve your financial objectives I can also think of workarounds for most of the potential abuses.
- bkraz 2y ago
  Yes, it's a reasonable workaround. I believe Patreon also allows creators to "pause" their account, suspending payments for an indefinite amount of time. So, I could just keep the account paused, then unpause for a month when I make a video. Although, I believe that Patreon doesn't want the per-creation model themselves, since charging the same amount each month is simpler, and easier to project revenue, etc, so they are probably just bundling this unpopular change with the Apple announcement.
  - HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
    So why is Patreon doing this if even they don't like it?
    - bluGill 2y ago
      Patreon doesn't have a choice. Apple is too large to give up having an iOS app - too many customers will just walk away instead of using the alternative (or so they think - but I don't blame them for not being willing to experiment - if they are right it will cost a lot of customers) Well there is a choice, but it is questionable if suing will or will not result in any change. Even if they win in court it will be several years and millions of dollars in legal fees, and it isn't clear they will win.
cesarb 2y ago
I've seen some creators on Patreon "pause" their monthly subscription when they have nothing to release on a given month, so that patrons won't be billed for that month. That could be a workaround for your use case.
- danShumway 2y ago
  Do we know whether or not iOS's subscription model supports pausing? I guess I assume Patreon would mention if it didn't.
  - HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - milesskorpen 2y ago
      ... if that is supported by Apple. Apple subscriptions aren't triggered.
  - danpalmer 2y ago
    It does not. Apple do all the billing. You have no mechanism to link up users and bills or change users billing. The only way would be to notify all subscribers to cancel their subscription, hope they do that, and then notify them all to resubscribe afterwards, which would obviously be catastrophic for subscription revenue, as well as a terrible user experience.
    - danShumway 2y ago
      I wonder why Patreon isn't hammering this point more if that's the case. This seems to me to be an almost bigger problem than the loss of the per-creation billing. Not that losing per-creation billing is good, but Patreon has been threatening it for a while, and there are ways it could in theory be simulated. But this makes it effectively impossible for creators to go on vacations, take a sabbatical, whatever... without continuing to charge patrons. It's a really commonly used mechanism from what I've seen, this would be a loss of a really important flexible tool for creators. I'm not distrusting you, I just feel like I'd like to see some confirmation from Patreon before I start making accusations about it. Maybe they have some deal or know something about a future unreleased API that I don't know? But losing the ability to pause a Patreon page would be a very, very big deal. Arguably even a bigger deal than the 30% tax, since I assume this change would affect everyone regardless of where they subscribe from. That's something that people should be talking about if it's the case.
stavros 2y ago
I think the platform you should switch to here is Android. This is Apple's fault, Patreon doesn't seem like it likes the changes any more than you do.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- spullara 2y ago
  do you think that they can switch their customers platform? this comment doesn't make any sense at all.
  - SilkRoadie 2y ago
    Does the app give any benefit over the web? Asking customers to use the browser over the dedicated app doesn’t seem unreasonable.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - InsomniacL 2y ago
      Does apple allow that? I think there are rules about telling people not to use IOS method. Not sure if that would extend to content displayed in the app too from creators?
      - Arainach 2y ago
        Take Apple out of the loop entirely. Why does Patreon need an app? Have users go through the website. Send them updates when people post new content. I've never used the Patreon app on either Android or iOS. I support a number of creators and I have no idea why I'd want an app. Money is taken from my account. Receipts are sent to my email. Articles from creators are sent to my email, and if they're long enough I click a link and read the full article (or view the pictures) on the website.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
inetknght 2y ago
> As a longtime YouTube creator who uses Patreon for financial support How long until YouTube (Google) demand "their" cut of your Patreon income? What will you do then?
- dvngnt_ 2y ago
  pateron can upload an apk and bypass google's play store
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  I know what you are trying to do, but this is he host of an 800k channel. They already generate millions for youtube. Google will at best try to steer that channel to use Youtube's recent-ish dontation and memberships features. No reason to disrupt money directly from someone they are paying; if they want to do it sneakily they simply change their payout rates and argue over that instead.
dannyobrien 2y ago
I don't understand why Patreon has to drop the per-creation model. Can they not just not offer that on iOS, and continue it on other platforms? (Perhaps with a "convert from susbcription to per-creation" feature online?)
- rk06 2y ago
  Most likely because this feature existed on iOS before
- Uvix 2y ago
  User confusion - if they block users from subscribing to those creators on iOS they will inevitably have support tickets to deal with it. Hence their 16-month project to remove non-iOS-compatible plans.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- kmeisthax 2y ago
  From the article: > Apple has also made clear that if creators on Patreon continue to use unsupported billing models or disable transactions in the iOS app, we will be at risk of having the entire app removed from their App Store. In other words, every Patreon creator has to be billable through iOS App Store or you get kicked off. Someone should get the FTC or EU involved. This is beyond the pale.
  - reddalo 2y ago
    > Someone should get the FTC or EU involved. I agree, but I also wonder why Patreon needs an iOS app. It's 2024, you don't need an app for everything. See OnlyFans, they're doing fine even without being able to access the proprietary stores.
    - Sakos 2y ago
AlexandrB 2y ago
Apple has quietly been one of the biggest culprits in the proliferation of subscription software. They still don't support upgrades/upgrade pricing. Subscriptions are also the easiest way to implement a software demo or trial in the App Store. Finally they use their control of the App Store to coerce anyone doing something different than monthly/yearly subscriptions into that model (as we see here). It sucks big time.
- derefr 2y ago
  > They still don't support upgrades/upgrade pricing. What would this mean, exactly? You can sell people a demo→full-version permanent unlock as a one-time purchase, same as you can sell DLC in a game. And you can also have subscription tiers, where you get more features out of the higher tiers of subscriptions. And you can, in theory, freely mix these — e.g. charging someone a subscription for the base version, and then charging them a one-time fee to unlock a specific feature. If you want, you could even charge for app features as consumables (just like F2P games do) — where you pay to have a block of credits that you use up, or you pay for one month and then have to buy it again when it runs out. What's the missing revenue model here?
  - raybb 2y ago
    What's missing is you pay for Adobe Photoshop CS2 and it's yours forever. Then when CS3 comes out you can upgrade with a nice discount.
    - derefr 2y ago
      Ah, alright. There's nothing actually stopping you from doing this — it requires two things: 1. either a third-party licensing server (and thus some SSO auth system — but just require Apple's own SSO for it and it'll still be a clean-ish workflow) to share/sync the transaction status from one app to the other; or a local Group Container plus logic in each app to write the transaction statuses fetched for the given app into the group container for the other app to read 2. never charging for the app as a whole, but instead breaking your app's pricing down into a set of IAP-purchased feature entitlements (whether charged for individually, or as a bundle, the important part is that each entitlement has its own price.) Then, making the new version just a superset of the features of the old version — and so, when you're buying the old version, you're buying features A+B+C; and then when you're buying the new version (with the app being able to see whether or not you've bought the old version), new customers are buying A+B+C+D+E, while existing customers are buying D+E. --- Note that there's an even easier way to do this (and I think this is the way Apple would prefer you do this): don't release V2 as a separate app from V1. Instead, have V1 auto-update to a v2.0.0 release — which converts the V1 app into a launcher with an "edition" (major version) selector. Either compile in both the V1 and V2 codebase into this app, or better yet (for download/on-disk size), package separate V1 and V2 "engines" as executable DLC packages, submitted to Apple for review along with the app, downloaded on-demand when the app needs to run them. With this approach, the app would either start up the first time still within V1, and allow/offer people the option of "seamlessly upgrading" the app to V2; or the app would start up with an "edition launcher" UI that allows people a choice. (And either way, you could offer the ability at any time to freely switch between V2 and V1, re-launching the app with the other engine enabled. Like dual-booting Operating Systems, but at the app level.) Here, you could charge for the V2 "upgrade" ahead-of-time, before allowing the user to switch over to the V2 engine; or you could allow the user to switch between V1-fully-licensed and V2-demo modes (or even between V1-demo and V2-demo modes), where purchasing for each edition is separately available within that edition's UX. The expectation here is that all the user's existing feature entitlements would keep working as long as they continue to use the V1 engine — as you said, the V1 engine was a one-time purchase, and so even with this edition-launcher abstraction introduced in v2.0.0 of the app, V1 itself should still keep working for them forever. The benefit of doing this multi-editioned-shared-app approach, together with IAP feature entitlements, is that V2 can inherit some of the V1 entitlements, and then simply charge for the V2-novel entitlements. So V2 gets discounted for V1 purchasers inherently, by the fact that by buying V1, they've already bought half of the components of the V2 purchase-bundle.
giancarlostoro 2y ago
The only way to put an end to this is if more people stop installing apps that are just website skins, and just use the open web instead.
- xelamonster 2y ago
  Yeah, though the problem with this is that from my experience with Android, the web version of Patreon is practically unusable. Not that the app is much better, they seem determined to come up with the most horrific UX anyone could imagine across all platforms, but it at least can somewhat consistently handle playing the podcasts I subscribe to without cutting out every five minutes.
  - Bwass 2y ago
    What do you mean, unusable? It's simple and straightforward.
    - rchaud 2y ago
      It's slow with tons of loading spinners.
- kjkjadksj 2y ago
  Apps are now forcing you to use their website skin even though its damn easy to offer a mobile web alternative that doesn't squander ever precious local storage.
  - giancarlostoro 2y ago
    Reddit is probably the worst at this, really annoying.
    - johnnyanmac 2y ago
      absolutely dreadful. It is quite literally unusable to use the mobile site. I don't even know why they bother hosting it. Only site where I simply toggle desktop. And now FF mobile can even install RES so that helps mitigate the otherwise clunky navigation (though, I have been unable to enable cloud backup. I can restore local copies though).
maxglute 2y ago
Applied Science in the wild! Your videos look expensive, does per video patreons tend to cover them?
trainyperson 2y ago
Does Patreon let you see what percentage of your subscribers signed up through the iOS app?
kevin_thibedeau 2y ago
Write to your Representative and Senator Wyden before you switch.
egypturnash 2y ago
Oh you too. Glad to know I'm not the only one who's really liked per-creation for years. "I pay my rent if I can do eight posts of comics pages/art/etc a month" was a good kick in the ass to keep working. Patreon's been trying to kick everyone off of per-creation for like half the time I've been using it, so I'm sure they're pretty delighted to have this excuse to nuke that mode. I don't think I've seen a single Patreon-like that has it and I don't want it badly enough to try and cobble up something out of a few Wordpress plugins.
- throwaway290 2y ago
  OG Patreon is monthly. The whole point is to support creator in tough times, not buy her stuff on discount.
  - orthoxerox 2y ago
    It is, but monthly subscriptions are too "sticky". There are creators that haven't released anything for several years, but they still earn thousands of dollars from their patrons, because people don't really care about saving $5 a month. At the same time, people do care about spending an extra $5 on top of $50 they already spend on patronage, so new creators in the same field find it harder to amass a sustainable number of patrons.
    - throwaway290 2y ago
      Is it really a problem? Right now I am skint so every time I sub I unsub from someone else. Patreon makes it super easy. It shows how much I spend on who and I can see who was inactive for years.
  - egypturnash 2y ago
    Patreon launched in May 2013. I joined after one of my fans asked me to set one up so they could give me money; my first post there is in February 2014. My account is on the "founders" plan, which has Patreon taking 5% ("plus applicable fees and taxes") rather than the 8/12% (plus applicable fees and taxes) that's what they offer now. Does that qualify me for "OG Patreon" status? Pay-per-creation mode was available then. It might have even been the only mode. I can't recall for sure. It's certainly the one I chose, if there was an option, and I haven't changed that for ten and a half years. Looking at archive.org's earliest capture of the site (June 2013), it says this: Pledges are only charged at the beginning of each new month based on whether the artist created any content that the artist specifically labels as supported content after your pledge. Artists can, of course, post new content that doesn't count as supported content. You'll get notified each time the Content Creator posts new content that the artist specifically labels as supported content, but you won't get charged each time. Artists can also, of course, make posts on their activity feed and even upload new content that isn't labeled as supported content. Charges are aggregated and done once at the beginning of each new month, and you can edit/cancel your patronage at any time. Additionally, you can set a max limit for how much you'll be charged, so you never need to worry about paying for too much content! This sure makes it sound like the original model was pay-per-post. There's nothing in there about a monthly subscription. "Support me through a monthly recurring tip" existed back then via Paypal's tip jars and some creators were getting by on it but it was a much harder sell before Patreon came along. (https://web.archive.org/web/20130608123152/http://www.patreon.com/faq?ftyp=payments https://web.archive.org/web/20130608123152/http://www.patreo...)
tetrisgm 2y ago
Any chance we could chat about how per creation works? I'm working on a competitor. @shokuonproduct / "shokunin." On discord
RockRobotRock 2y ago
You are my favorite youtuber by a mile! I appreciate that you always prioritize quality over quantity in your videos.

by bkraz 2y ago

ThrowawayTestr 2y ago

If you're able, my artist friend has had a lot of success running their own site and doing their own payments through PayPal.

ncr100 2y ago
Am I misunderstanding, that PayPal can workaround Apple's payment rules which Patreon is complying with?
- hnuser123456 2y ago
  As long as you're not using the paypal app on an apple device
- burnished 2y ago
  You are misunderstanding, the suggestion is to do it yourself instead of using patreon.
- whimsicalism 2y ago
  think p2p transactions are exempt - apple doesn’t get 30% of my venmo or zelle. no clue why patreon doesn’t count though
  - froggit 2y ago
    It's not p2p. 2 transactions happen: you pay patreon, patreon pays them.
    - whimsicalism 2y ago
      likewise with venmo, no? who gets to decide what constitutes a transaction
      - johnnyanmac 2y ago
        If we're being honest, private backroom deals based on a variety of business factors and debates. Venmo is Paypal, Paypal has Musk's and Thiel's deep pockets. They can and will settle something. There is no real line, just imaginary ones apple draws arbitrarily.
- grugagag 2y ago
  It seems this bypasses both Patreon and Apple.
- ncr100 2y ago
  Meta: So the negative point value, currently -1, tells me that I am asking a rhetorical question and I should have said that I'm asking a rhetorical question. Back on topic: I am an expert on in-app purchases circa 2020 and do know that there's no working around it unless you have a deal with Apple. Used to be my job. Paypal or any other financial transaction entity Is all the same to Apple, the user is sending their money while using an apple hosted app, and apple wants to make sure that users don't get fleeced! So Apple taxes those transactions ostensibly to provide oversight Services. So the only way for patreon to get around this is to not mention in their app that you can also sign up on you know patreon.com To give money, and to allow users who have signed up and sent money on patreon.com to use the iOS app.
ryan29 2y ago
How do they deal with the taxes?
yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
1. Building and running your own site is a lot more work than using Patreon. 2. Now you're at PayPal's tender mercies, which... well, you do you, but I wouldn't advise it.
- underlipton 2y ago
  Keep it simple, use templates. In fact, how amazing would it be if someone who was about to embark on yet another decentralized protocol fiasco instead just released a Patreon-like template? There are other payment providers.
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    >how amazing would it be if someone who was about to embark on yet another decentralized protocol fiasco instead just released a Patreon-like template they probably exist already (minus payment processing). Network effects take hold as usual, though. Patrons are more willing than average to jump, but I can see hesitation signing up and adding payment for a new/unknown website and honestly all payment providers suck in some unique way. Though most of the fault lies in Visa/Mastercard. That's a monopoly we need to tackle one day.
bluescrn 2y ago
Everyone's heard horror stories about Paypal, though. Doesn't seem like a platform that you want to become too reliant on.
- kalleboo 2y ago
  I've heard horror stories about Patreon as well. Your best bet is probably to spread your risk by being on Patreon, Ko-fi, PayPal+Web, YouTube memberships (if you do video) etc.
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    managing so many fronts with such different medium (you can host all media on patreon, only really videos on YT but also more limited videos than patreon. then you can't host at all on ko-fi), sounds like a pain both logistically and financially.

renewiltord 2y ago

How can another platform be better about this? Wouldn’t they be subject to the same thing? Or is there some component here that is not tied to the Apple demand?

bkraz 2y ago
That's a great question! How far does Apple's control extend into markets that are unrelated to their core business? I always prefer using mobile websites on my own android phone instead of downloading apps because of security concerns and general notification spamming, ads, and annoyances, and it seems to me this would be a great solution ie just replacing "apps" with bookmarks. For the current situation, I may look into services like Nebula, doing PayPal directly, YouTube subscriptions and donations, or setting up an online store. Or even.... sponsored videos!! (just kidding)
- xnyan 2y ago
  > it seems to me this would be a great solution ie just replacing "apps" with bookmarks. I think there are several reasons users gravitate to apps, but the biggest pain point apps mitigate is the login UX. I'd wager that you use a password manager, most people do not and cannot be convinced to do so. With an app, one can create an account and log in once, then stay logged in and never think about the password again until they get a new device, at which time the password can be reset via email and then immediately forgotten.

jkaplowitz 2y ago

It’s bad, yes. It would be good if Patreon allowed sticking with the billing systems which Apple is forbidding, but I do understand that they may no longer be able to justify the business expense of maintaining them given the anticipated changes in usage patterns. Practical suggestion: Maybe you can project a certain number of releases per year, reduce that projection slightly to give yourself a margin of flexibility, announce that target to your supporters, be explicit wit them that the rate of output throughout the year will be uneven, and then charge a monthly subscription price of 1/12 of the total price for your annual target output? Assuning a good projection would smoothly have approximately the same financial outcome for everyone as the status quo in most cases. I can think of ways in which this could be gamed, but most of those who would want to bother gaming it are probably cash-poor enough that you may not mind, or if too many people do this to preserve your financial objectives I can also think of workarounds for most of the potential abuses.

bkraz 2y ago
Yes, it's a reasonable workaround. I believe Patreon also allows creators to "pause" their account, suspending payments for an indefinite amount of time. So, I could just keep the account paused, then unpause for a month when I make a video. Although, I believe that Patreon doesn't want the per-creation model themselves, since charging the same amount each month is simpler, and easier to project revenue, etc, so they are probably just bundling this unpopular change with the Apple announcement.
- HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
  So why is Patreon doing this if even they don't like it?
  - bluGill 2y ago
    Patreon doesn't have a choice. Apple is too large to give up having an iOS app - too many customers will just walk away instead of using the alternative (or so they think - but I don't blame them for not being willing to experiment - if they are right it will cost a lot of customers) Well there is a choice, but it is questionable if suing will or will not result in any change. Even if they win in court it will be several years and millions of dollars in legal fees, and it isn't clear they will win.

cesarb 2y ago

I've seen some creators on Patreon "pause" their monthly subscription when they have nothing to release on a given month, so that patrons won't be billed for that month. That could be a workaround for your use case.

danShumway 2y ago
Do we know whether or not iOS's subscription model supports pausing? I guess I assume Patreon would mention if it didn't.
- HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - milesskorpen 2y ago
    ... if that is supported by Apple. Apple subscriptions aren't triggered.
- danpalmer 2y ago
  It does not. Apple do all the billing. You have no mechanism to link up users and bills or change users billing. The only way would be to notify all subscribers to cancel their subscription, hope they do that, and then notify them all to resubscribe afterwards, which would obviously be catastrophic for subscription revenue, as well as a terrible user experience.
  - danShumway 2y ago
    I wonder why Patreon isn't hammering this point more if that's the case. This seems to me to be an almost bigger problem than the loss of the per-creation billing. Not that losing per-creation billing is good, but Patreon has been threatening it for a while, and there are ways it could in theory be simulated. But this makes it effectively impossible for creators to go on vacations, take a sabbatical, whatever... without continuing to charge patrons. It's a really commonly used mechanism from what I've seen, this would be a loss of a really important flexible tool for creators. I'm not distrusting you, I just feel like I'd like to see some confirmation from Patreon before I start making accusations about it. Maybe they have some deal or know something about a future unreleased API that I don't know? But losing the ability to pause a Patreon page would be a very, very big deal. Arguably even a bigger deal than the 30% tax, since I assume this change would affect everyone regardless of where they subscribe from. That's something that people should be talking about if it's the case.

stavros 2y ago

I think the platform you should switch to here is Android. This is Apple's fault, Patreon doesn't seem like it likes the changes any more than you do.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
spullara 2y ago
do you think that they can switch their customers platform? this comment doesn't make any sense at all.
- SilkRoadie 2y ago
  Does the app give any benefit over the web? Asking customers to use the browser over the dedicated app doesn’t seem unreasonable.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - InsomniacL 2y ago
    Does apple allow that? I think there are rules about telling people not to use IOS method. Not sure if that would extend to content displayed in the app too from creators?
    - Arainach 2y ago
      Take Apple out of the loop entirely. Why does Patreon need an app? Have users go through the website. Send them updates when people post new content. I've never used the Patreon app on either Android or iOS. I support a number of creators and I have no idea why I'd want an app. Money is taken from my account. Receipts are sent to my email. Articles from creators are sent to my email, and if they're long enough I click a link and read the full article (or view the pictures) on the website.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

inetknght 2y ago

> As a longtime YouTube creator who uses Patreon for financial support How long until YouTube (Google) demand "their" cut of your Patreon income? What will you do then?

dvngnt_ 2y ago
pateron can upload an apk and bypass google's play store
johnnyanmac 2y ago
I know what you are trying to do, but this is he host of an 800k channel. They already generate millions for youtube. Google will at best try to steer that channel to use Youtube's recent-ish dontation and memberships features. No reason to disrupt money directly from someone they are paying; if they want to do it sneakily they simply change their payout rates and argue over that instead.

dannyobrien 2y ago

I don't understand why Patreon has to drop the per-creation model. Can they not just not offer that on iOS, and continue it on other platforms? (Perhaps with a "convert from susbcription to per-creation" feature online?)

rk06 2y ago
Most likely because this feature existed on iOS before
Uvix 2y ago
User confusion - if they block users from subscribing to those creators on iOS they will inevitably have support tickets to deal with it. Hence their 16-month project to remove non-iOS-compatible plans.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
kmeisthax 2y ago
From the article: > Apple has also made clear that if creators on Patreon continue to use unsupported billing models or disable transactions in the iOS app, we will be at risk of having the entire app removed from their App Store. In other words, every Patreon creator has to be billable through iOS App Store or you get kicked off. Someone should get the FTC or EU involved. This is beyond the pale.
- reddalo 2y ago
  > Someone should get the FTC or EU involved. I agree, but I also wonder why Patreon needs an iOS app. It's 2024, you don't need an app for everything. See OnlyFans, they're doing fine even without being able to access the proprietary stores.
  - Sakos 2y ago

AlexandrB 2y ago

Apple has quietly been one of the biggest culprits in the proliferation of subscription software. They still don't support upgrades/upgrade pricing. Subscriptions are also the easiest way to implement a software demo or trial in the App Store. Finally they use their control of the App Store to coerce anyone doing something different than monthly/yearly subscriptions into that model (as we see here). It sucks big time.

derefr 2y ago
> They still don't support upgrades/upgrade pricing. What would this mean, exactly? You can sell people a demo→full-version permanent unlock as a one-time purchase, same as you can sell DLC in a game. And you can also have subscription tiers, where you get more features out of the higher tiers of subscriptions. And you can, in theory, freely mix these — e.g. charging someone a subscription for the base version, and then charging them a one-time fee to unlock a specific feature. If you want, you could even charge for app features as consumables (just like F2P games do) — where you pay to have a block of credits that you use up, or you pay for one month and then have to buy it again when it runs out. What's the missing revenue model here?
- raybb 2y ago
  What's missing is you pay for Adobe Photoshop CS2 and it's yours forever. Then when CS3 comes out you can upgrade with a nice discount.
  - derefr 2y ago
    Ah, alright. There's nothing actually stopping you from doing this — it requires two things: 1. either a third-party licensing server (and thus some SSO auth system — but just require Apple's own SSO for it and it'll still be a clean-ish workflow) to share/sync the transaction status from one app to the other; or a local Group Container plus logic in each app to write the transaction statuses fetched for the given app into the group container for the other app to read 2. never charging for the app as a whole, but instead breaking your app's pricing down into a set of IAP-purchased feature entitlements (whether charged for individually, or as a bundle, the important part is that each entitlement has its own price.) Then, making the new version just a superset of the features of the old version — and so, when you're buying the old version, you're buying features A+B+C; and then when you're buying the new version (with the app being able to see whether or not you've bought the old version), new customers are buying A+B+C+D+E, while existing customers are buying D+E. --- Note that there's an even easier way to do this (and I think this is the way Apple would prefer you do this): don't release V2 as a separate app from V1. Instead, have V1 auto-update to a v2.0.0 release — which converts the V1 app into a launcher with an "edition" (major version) selector. Either compile in both the V1 and V2 codebase into this app, or better yet (for download/on-disk size), package separate V1 and V2 "engines" as executable DLC packages, submitted to Apple for review along with the app, downloaded on-demand when the app needs to run them. With this approach, the app would either start up the first time still within V1, and allow/offer people the option of "seamlessly upgrading" the app to V2; or the app would start up with an "edition launcher" UI that allows people a choice. (And either way, you could offer the ability at any time to freely switch between V2 and V1, re-launching the app with the other engine enabled. Like dual-booting Operating Systems, but at the app level.) Here, you could charge for the V2 "upgrade" ahead-of-time, before allowing the user to switch over to the V2 engine; or you could allow the user to switch between V1-fully-licensed and V2-demo modes (or even between V1-demo and V2-demo modes), where purchasing for each edition is separately available within that edition's UX. The expectation here is that all the user's existing feature entitlements would keep working as long as they continue to use the V1 engine — as you said, the V1 engine was a one-time purchase, and so even with this edition-launcher abstraction introduced in v2.0.0 of the app, V1 itself should still keep working for them forever. The benefit of doing this multi-editioned-shared-app approach, together with IAP feature entitlements, is that V2 can inherit some of the V1 entitlements, and then simply charge for the V2-novel entitlements. So V2 gets discounted for V1 purchasers inherently, by the fact that by buying V1, they've already bought half of the components of the V2 purchase-bundle.

giancarlostoro 2y ago

The only way to put an end to this is if more people stop installing apps that are just website skins, and just use the open web instead.

xelamonster 2y ago
Yeah, though the problem with this is that from my experience with Android, the web version of Patreon is practically unusable. Not that the app is much better, they seem determined to come up with the most horrific UX anyone could imagine across all platforms, but it at least can somewhat consistently handle playing the podcasts I subscribe to without cutting out every five minutes.
- Bwass 2y ago
  What do you mean, unusable? It's simple and straightforward.
  - rchaud 2y ago
    It's slow with tons of loading spinners.
kjkjadksj 2y ago
Apps are now forcing you to use their website skin even though its damn easy to offer a mobile web alternative that doesn't squander ever precious local storage.
- giancarlostoro 2y ago
  Reddit is probably the worst at this, really annoying.
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    absolutely dreadful. It is quite literally unusable to use the mobile site. I don't even know why they bother hosting it. Only site where I simply toggle desktop. And now FF mobile can even install RES so that helps mitigate the otherwise clunky navigation (though, I have been unable to enable cloud backup. I can restore local copies though).

maxglute 2y ago

Applied Science in the wild! Your videos look expensive, does per video patreons tend to cover them?

trainyperson 2y ago

Does Patreon let you see what percentage of your subscribers signed up through the iOS app?

kevin_thibedeau 2y ago

Write to your Representative and Senator Wyden before you switch.

egypturnash 2y ago

Oh you too. Glad to know I'm not the only one who's really liked per-creation for years. "I pay my rent if I can do eight posts of comics pages/art/etc a month" was a good kick in the ass to keep working. Patreon's been trying to kick everyone off of per-creation for like half the time I've been using it, so I'm sure they're pretty delighted to have this excuse to nuke that mode. I don't think I've seen a single Patreon-like that has it and I don't want it badly enough to try and cobble up something out of a few Wordpress plugins.

throwaway290 2y ago
OG Patreon is monthly. The whole point is to support creator in tough times, not buy her stuff on discount.
- orthoxerox 2y ago
  It is, but monthly subscriptions are too "sticky". There are creators that haven't released anything for several years, but they still earn thousands of dollars from their patrons, because people don't really care about saving $5 a month. At the same time, people do care about spending an extra $5 on top of $50 they already spend on patronage, so new creators in the same field find it harder to amass a sustainable number of patrons.
  - throwaway290 2y ago
    Is it really a problem? Right now I am skint so every time I sub I unsub from someone else. Patreon makes it super easy. It shows how much I spend on who and I can see who was inactive for years.
- egypturnash 2y ago
  Patreon launched in May 2013. I joined after one of my fans asked me to set one up so they could give me money; my first post there is in February 2014. My account is on the "founders" plan, which has Patreon taking 5% ("plus applicable fees and taxes") rather than the 8/12% (plus applicable fees and taxes) that's what they offer now. Does that qualify me for "OG Patreon" status? Pay-per-creation mode was available then. It might have even been the only mode. I can't recall for sure. It's certainly the one I chose, if there was an option, and I haven't changed that for ten and a half years. Looking at archive.org's earliest capture of the site (June 2013), it says this: Pledges are only charged at the beginning of each new month based on whether the artist created any content that the artist specifically labels as supported content after your pledge. Artists can, of course, post new content that doesn't count as supported content. You'll get notified each time the Content Creator posts new content that the artist specifically labels as supported content, but you won't get charged each time. Artists can also, of course, make posts on their activity feed and even upload new content that isn't labeled as supported content. Charges are aggregated and done once at the beginning of each new month, and you can edit/cancel your patronage at any time. Additionally, you can set a max limit for how much you'll be charged, so you never need to worry about paying for too much content! This sure makes it sound like the original model was pay-per-post. There's nothing in there about a monthly subscription. "Support me through a monthly recurring tip" existed back then via Paypal's tip jars and some creators were getting by on it but it was a much harder sell before Patreon came along. (https://web.archive.org/web/20130608123152/http://www.patreon.com/faq?ftyp=payments https://web.archive.org/web/20130608123152/http://www.patreo...)

tetrisgm 2y ago

Any chance we could chat about how per creation works? I'm working on a competitor. @shokuonproduct / "shokunin." On discord

RockRobotRock 2y ago

You are my favorite youtuber by a mile! I appreciate that you always prioritize quality over quantity in your videos.