←back to thread

713 points greenburger | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.256s | source
Show context
mrtksn ◴[] No.44289633[source]
Does anybody have stats on how many people are O.K. paying for their core services, i.e. how many people pay for paid personal e-mail services?

I just don't want to believe that our services have to be paid for through proxy by giving huge cut to 3rd parties. The quality goes down both as UX and as core content, our attention span is destroyed, our privacy is violated and our political power is being stolen as content gets curated by those who extract money by giving us the "free" services.

It's simply very inefficient. IMHO we should go back to pay for what you use, this can't go on forever. There must be way to turn everything into a paid service where you get what you paid for and have your lives enhanced instead of monetized by proxy.

replies(32): >>44289645 #>>44289703 #>>44289718 #>>44289745 #>>44289761 #>>44289772 #>>44289802 #>>44290036 #>>44293255 #>>44293334 #>>44293379 #>>44294057 #>>44294163 #>>44294406 #>>44294408 #>>44294581 #>>44294594 #>>44294635 #>>44295476 #>>44295719 #>>44295781 #>>44295934 #>>44296021 #>>44296753 #>>44297076 #>>44297147 #>>44297258 #>>44297386 #>>44297435 #>>44297650 #>>44300018 #>>44301446 #
Xenoamorphous ◴[] No.44293255[source]
I remember when Whatsapp became a paid app, I can’t remember the details as I believe they varied by platform (iOS vs Android) but it was either €0.79 or €0.99, I’m not sure if one off or yearly payment, but it doesn’t matter.

I, as the “computer guy”, had friends and family asking how to pirate it. This is coming from SMS costing €0.25 per message (text only!) and also coming from people who would gladly pay €3 for a Coke at a bar that they’d piss down the toilet an hour later. It didn’t matter if it only took 3 or 4 messages to make Whatsapp pay off for itself, as they were sending dozens if not hundreds of messages per day, either images, videos and whatnot (MMSs were much more expensive).

At that moment I realised many (most?) people would never pay for software. Either because it’s not something physical or because they’re stuck in the pre-Internet (or maybe music) mentality where copying something is not “stealing” as it’s digital data (but they don’t realise running Whatsapp servers, bandwidth etc cost very real money). And I guess this is why some of the biggest digital services are ad-funded.

In contrast, literally never someone has voiced privacy concerns, they simply find ads annoying and they’ve asked for a way to get rid of them (without paying, of course).

I should say, I’m from one of the European countries with the highest levels of piracy.

replies(15): >>44293400 #>>44293463 #>>44293507 #>>44293719 #>>44293802 #>>44293919 #>>44294071 #>>44294145 #>>44294513 #>>44295697 #>>44295943 #>>44296198 #>>44296331 #>>44307625 #>>44312675 #
yibg ◴[] No.44293463[source]
Similar situation as flights. People complain about lack of space, misc fees etc. But when it comes down to it, people for the most part, still pick the cheapest flight.

I think the other factor is a bit of anchoring. I know this impacts me anyways. If there is a "free" alternative, then that's where I'm anchored at. I can watch youtube for free so paying for it seems like a bad deal. Where as there is no free alternative to Coke that still gets your Coke (as opposed to say water).

replies(5): >>44293630 #>>44293644 #>>44293789 #>>44294729 #>>44296258 #
noosphr ◴[] No.44293789[source]
People pick the cheapest flights because price is a simple number they can understand.

How to you qualify the comfort of a seat with 20cm of legroom vs 30cm? Until we have a quality metric for flights that's also a single number we can't.

replies(1): >>44293890 #
Symbiote ◴[] No.44293890[source]
The price is one of the few things that's always available when choosing between flights. Journey time is the other, and people will pay for a shorter journey or shorter layovers.

Strangely, some of my colleagues have 'paid' (work's money, their time) extra to avoid Ryanair, when Ryanair has the only direct connection. This I find strange.

Given the choice, I've long paid a little more if it means an Airbus plane, as I think the cabin is quieter. However, that's rarely shown on flight booking sites.

replies(2): >>44294172 #>>44294938 #
lmm ◴[] No.44294938[source]
Ryanair are notorious for a) nickel-and-diming and b) general nastiness (e.g. charging a big fee to print a boarding pass at the airport, flying to an airport 70km from the city name they advertised, telling the press that they're going to start charging for the toilet). They're one of the few airlines whose reputation is big and extreme enough that it's percolated into the public consciousness.
replies(1): >>44296517 #
1. Symbiote ◴[] No.44296517[source]
It's easy to see where the flight is going.

Meanwhile, I get half a day free in Gdansk or Budapest or wherever while my colleague wanders around Munich Airport.