I feel like this is exactly what happens to every single big publicly traded company. They have a good core product that makes them a fuck ton of money. Instead of using that money to just pay out, or focus on streamlining the core product, they just start tacking on more and more shit. And the shit that they tack on gets less and less profitable until it's actually a loss. And then that core product has to carry the costs of all the additional "features". Eventually though, it can't, and the company starts losing money and they decide they need to cut things. But at this point the bullshit is so ingrained throughout the entire company that they don't understand what it is they need to cut, and so start cutting shit in a very sub optimal way that never recovers their profitability. And then they go bankrupt. Circle of life really.
I feel like publicly traded companies forget that they only exist because they provide value to the customer. Execs obsess over quarterly profits and lose sight of the bigger picture. They end up not providing as much value while increasing overhead then eventually sell off the business after miking it dry. I think it really takes a passionate CEO/founder to not let that happen.
morzinboExtolling the virtues of the High Ground2 months ago
\>linking to the guy that tried to bring 8ch down by posting cp
I like how they frame it backwards, like Patreon is being philanthropic by giving creators 90% of the money that users gave specifically with the intent of it going to the creators.
The company plans to provide creators with new "value services," like options for merchandising, to generate new revenue. Creators will be given the opportunity to participate in these services, and it could ultimately reduce Patreon's generous 90 percent pay-out model.
So a built in merch store? Seems like it wouldn't affect Dick and reduce his cut since he already has his own store, but could be useful to smaller creators. Could be a good idea if executed properly.
I'm just weary that we'll see more sneaky moves like last year where they try and force a bigger cut for themselves at the expense of content creators/users.
I suppose it could be considered as generous when you compare it to youtube, twitch, steam and other services that take a ~30% cut. But it is dumb that solid linear growth isn't good enough in today's world, gotta bleed as much profit as fast as possible.
The guy who's twitter thread I linked makes the argument that the problem is that Patreon promised investors geometric growth and linear growth, while good, isn't standing up to those promises.
YouTube and Twitch provide an absurdly expensive infrastructure for you to use to host your content. All that infrastructure isn’t free. It’s comparable to a concert venue. Sure, you can set up your own open air event, but at what price? For most everyone, using an established venue is the way to go.
Patreon, on the other hand, is literally just a middle man, which doesn’t add actual value, merely convenience.
The article says:
>Under the company's current business model, 90 percent of funds are paid directly to content creators. Patreon takes 5 percent, and the remaining 5 percent covers transaction fees.
The costs are, essentially, staff and tech (neither particularly cheap). Patreon probably also does some marketing, not that I've seen any.
The article says they will pay out half a billion USD in 2019. That would be income of $25m. I'd be surprised if their costs are more than that, but I don't know. Clearly, their investors probably want them to make more money. (It's why I'm very lucky to have never needed VC money).
I managed to use Stripe's functionality to write my own subscription service in a few hours. They charge, too, but less than 3% - but of course they aren't running that whole platform, and nor do they have any customer service people looking after every creator...
It happens. I'm amazed that the post itself has a positive point count. You want to the deplatforming controversy and anything promoting a content creators right to publish what they want within the law gets downvoted in this sub.I've been downvoted by more, trust me.
It's just internet points.
"it could ultimately reduce Patreon's generous 90 percent pay-out model"
90% to content creators is only generous if there is an expectation that the middle-man also staff individuals to subjectively police thought and censor opinion. Those concepts, IMHO, directly conflict with the ethos of independent journalism and the liberty of podcasting.
It's a slippery slope, and not a joke, when considering that yesterday's benign medical terms are now today's "hate speech", and there are so many participants in this call-out culture looking to burn someone to the ground simply for sport.
The first things that came to mind were spastic and sperg. S-words.
Neanderthal being an 'n' word that refers to a person of European descent that is actively used in some circles as a genetic aspersion would be one n-word that would come to mind. The doctor and current Governor of Virginia might be able to come up with a few more.
I was a guest on a progressive podcast several years ago where the insulting n-word euphamism was dispensed with while discussing university controlled media and censorship of older written works in literature. If you give words power they take it from you.
It has to do with the fact that they've made $55 mil in 5 or 6 years while taking on $100+ mil in investor cash that demands not just repayment but unicorn growth.
It's a story of toxic silicon valley investor culture and start-up mistakes more than anything.
Making it harder for content creators to leave: providing more value to content creators: diversifying past simply being a middle-man: realizing that they can be a casualty in the culture war... I'd have to say YES.
I have no skills either, so I am of no help. I think for non-coders who won't L3RN 2 C0D3, there's ample work in project organization and management. People were seriously discussing making a co-op alternative when Patreon pulled their pricing model switch last year. I think the first step is to make a Discord channel and start solicitation for people with actual programming skills and a desire to make something cooperatively that isn't a VC project.
"it could ultimately reduce Patreon's generous 90 percent pay-out model."
I like how they paint them as "generous" for only taking 10% of the money that people give to the creators they support. Giving people the money that they earned is not generosity unless you're in an abusive relationship headspace.