this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2024
1410 points (97.6% liked)

memes

10304 readers
2227 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 40 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I get that services need to pay for staff/servers/production, so I'm fine with small monthly fees. I'd much rather pay than sit through ads.

Once a subscription creeps over six or seven bucks a month I'm gonna reevaluate it and start cutting.

It really annoys me that newspapers charge the same for digital and paper subscriptions.

[–] SexyTimeSasquatch@lemmy.world 24 points 9 months ago (3 children)

You're paying for the content in the case of the newspapers. It is a similar cost to print on newsprint as to run a website. It saves them no money. Most of what you are paying for is for the journalism, writing, editing, etc. Content costs money.

[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

That definitely depends on which news outlet we're talking about.

[–] li10@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 months ago

Exactly. The reason I cancel my subscriptions is because there’s been a nosedive in content that I enjoy, which has tipped the scales to it costing more than it’s worth to me.

I’ve moved to a Plex setup, but even then I don’t watch many shows at all. The ones I do watch are all on different platforms though, so it would be X many subscriptions just to watch the few shows I like.

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

That's counterintuitive, do you have a source for that?

EDIT: googling around, I don't see any obvious answers.

[–] skizzles@lemmy.ml 9 points 9 months ago

This is the point here.

Many people have no idea of the infrastructure and costs needed to run many of these servers that provide services to people.

I disagree with things like Adobe basically using it for DRM but have no issue for services that are literally serving millions of people and providing something worthwhile that the majority of the population would otherwise not know how to do on their own.

There is some nuance to it, like offering a service and then slowly creeping costs up or adding an advertisement tier and dropping everyone to that etc is crap. But in general, if they are providing a decent service then I don't really have a problem with it.

[–] JJROKCZ@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

I agree that ongoing infrastructure costs money, but several years of that should be included in the original estimate and pricing for the sale of the product. Plan for the sale price being cost to make+5 years of estimated maintenance for base product+profit margin. Then extend maintenance with each DLC if any. If no dlc then offer subscription to pay for servers and other infrastructure, if subscriptions fail to cover that then sunset the product but open source the server infrastructure so the community can pay to run it if desired.