Avelon App

659 readers

1 users here now

Official community for the native iOS Lemmy app Avelon.

Available on the App Store!

Download Avelon

Wanna be a beta tester and see new features early?

Join the Testflight

Rules

Posts should be related to the Avelon app in some way. Be civil :)
If you have a feature request/bug report, mark the post with [Feature Request] or [Bug]. That way they're easier to find for everyone!
If you're reporting a bug, please include the iOS version, Avelon version, the device you're using, and any steps necessary to reproduce the bug. Screenshots are also very helpful. The more information you include, the quicker the bug can be squashed! Thanks!

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

(Edited to add context) Paywalling features most other apps have for free isn't a great look (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

57 comments fedilink hide all child comments

#EDITED TO ADD CONTEXT:

The developer has responded quite a bit in the comments here, and has made adjustments to the free tier feature set based on my and others' feedback. See more info in this update thread: https://lemm.ee/post/12353243

If you're reading this post after update 1.0.7 I suggest you skim these comments and that update thread before forming an opinion.

#ORIGINAL POST:

I like this app a lot, I can tell there's been a ton of love and hard work put into it.

The strategy for monetization leaves a bit of a sour taste though.

For one, nobody wants another subscription - and $30 lifetime for a brand new app is a huge asking price compared to, say, Apollo, which was $5 or so (with a subscription tier for things that actually made sense to buy due to recurring cost).

But this app is paywalling basic stuff like a comment jump button (everyone else has this for free), content filtering, video scrubbing, and various other things that have no recurring cost to the developer.

My recommendation, take it or leave it, if you want my money make it a reasonable one time purchase for things that don't cost you money (under $10 imo, $5 would've been an easy sell).

If you want to justify a subscription model you are gonna need to build features that justify it - push notifications, stuff like that.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (19 children)

Hi, sorry for the late (and long) reply. You're right, $30 is definitely a lot to be asking for an app. I'll try to explain where I'm coming from, and why I've landed on this price & monetization model. If anyone have any suggestions on how I can improve things while considering my points as well I'm definitely open to discuss.

But this app is paywalling basic stuff like a comment jump button (everyone else has this for free), content filtering, video scrubbing

When I was working on this update I spent a lot of time considering which features were "essential" and which features were more convenience/nice-to-have features. Two of the bigger features I've decided should be free are multiple accounts & post creation, both of which have been paid features in other apps. I thought everyone having access to these was way more important than app themes or a smart jump button.

Everything that was free in the last version is still free, and of course there's a bunch of new non-pro stuff too. My intent with this update was not to paywall "basic" features, but to offer more hardcore users some extra niceties that in turn support development. I don't expect the majority of people to upgrade, which is totally fine. I'll still keep improving the app for everyone regardless.

make it a reasonable one time purchase for things that don’t cost you money (under $10 imo, $5 would’ve been an easy sell). If you want to justify a subscription model you are gonna need to build features that justify it

I get that the lifetime price is high, I really do. The #1 reason I'm going for this type of subscription model is that Lemmy is so small. Apps like Apollo easily had tens of thousands of users and could therefore charge way way less. For some context - if every single active Avelon user paid for a $5 upgrade, which I'm sure you'd agree is unreasonable, that'd still be barely enough to finance one month of development. That's it. I'm not saying this justifies the price, but Lemmy is still very niche, and with such a niche market the development cost will naturally be spread among much fewer users. With the slow growth of the Lemmy userbase a one-time purchase is very risky from my perspective, and I want Avelon to make sense over a long period of time. I think the devs of both sync (which is $99) and Bean (which is $50) realized this too.

I do believe Avelon can continue to play a part in lowering the barrier of entry to Lemmy and improving the platform as a whole by pushing for more high quality apps. I hope to see Lemmy continue to become the best link-aggregator platform ever, and as that happens prices will naturally decrease.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I had a long response typed up but I think I accidentally discovered a bug - Avelon crashed while I was typing!

I really appreciate your reply here and I'll try to condense my thoughts, as someone who works in tech and is responsible for a product that brings in significant dollars of revenue (albeit B2B so not quite the same).

I think you are doing an awesome job at adding ease of setup and overall quality on top of the Lemmy platform. Others have noted the two sides of the longevity aspect, we all just have to deal with that.

To me the main missing piece is feature differentiation; where most people are used to apps like this paywalling things like themes and icons, I can go to several other apps for free to get the features you want a subscription fee (or large lump sum) for. The comment jump button is a good example, no it isn't necessary but for people used to having it it feels that way.

When this is all so new, you can't really expect people to trust you enough to think a big lifetime purchase is worth it, and subscriptions only feel logical when they are paying for an ongoing cost.

I'd say if you were to keep adding good features and maintaining the app, and especially if you add something like push notifications where you incur a cost I need to cover to use, I would be more likely to feel comfortable paying (and would expect you to build in a profit layer over your server costs).

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Attempt at neutral thoughts on pricing models aside, my suggestion for a different approach would be to offer most things for free in simple forms, and paywall advanced customization.

Using the smart comment button as an example, you could include it for free with only the core expected functionality (jump between parent comments). But if I want to change the interaction, or access advanced actions like collapsing threads or something, that's locked behind a purchase.

This way people can get a taste for everything you have to offer, and the decision to spend money is shifted from "pay you to get something that feels arbitrarily disabled" to "I like this and want more" or even just "I want to support a good developer".

As far as actual cost, I don't think I'd pay more than $10 one-time for any Lemmy app right now. If you're getting what you hoped for out of this model then don't change it on account of one angsty thread - but if any of this rings true, you could consider pricing for early adopters at a cheaper "early bird" price as one option, to build goodwill (making us more likely to want to support you down the road).

Or the other option is to follow Apollo's (RIP) model, with a one-time mid tier for upgrades of basic stuff, and a subscription/larger cost for more unique features/things we all know cost money on an ongoing basis/the subset of people who just want to support you.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Please can I just add to this.

At the moment pricing doesn’t account for different values of money as it’s not been localised.

Two examples, at the moment lifetime is £29.99 in the UK which is $37.80.

Also, the average Indian worker earns the equivalent of $3 per day.

So localised pricing is essential for any app.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Most devs (me included) use the standard Apple localization since we don't have the knowledge/capacity to manually manage the 175+ regions available. Not sure about this particular case, but it could have to do with taxes in the UK or something like that

load more comments (17 replies)