Notability’s change to subscription system has been criticized on hot searches. Is there a better way for App developers to make money? |ifanrTallk

The fact that Notability turned the bow halfway and headed straight to the subscription system was aroused. Even if Notability quickly apologized and adjusted its policy, the resistance of users to the subscription system still scared many developers.

Some developers said that he believes that the current general environment has a rational discussion about the quality of the subscription system; some developers admit that the "subscription system" can give developers more sense of security; even if some developers think that peers’ practices are biased , But still believe that this incident shows the cognitive asymmetry between developers and users. Users do not know the cost of developers, and developers do not understand the "hate" of users towards the subscription system.

Buyouts, subscriptions, advertising, commissions… There seem to be many ways to make money, but can small and beautiful developers use these methods to make money? What are the possibilities for the app's profit model?

This time, we invited several application developers to continue to talk about this topic.

Ye Ming, head of the Chinese market for Pola Retouching:

I think this kind of incident has a considerable degree of positive significance. It can provide developers with more accurate guidance, further clarify the boundaries of "subscription", and can also provide follow-up consumer rights protection. The significance of reference has also triggered a discussion among the whole people about the "subscription system", so I think it is a good thing to have such a "out of the circle".

Ying Zhong, the developer of Taio:

There are two main problems in the Notability incident: the migration of old users and the subscription system itself. This matter caused a lot of controversy, but many controversies did not separate the two things.

For the migration of old users, developers can choose several methods: not to migrate, retain existing functions, and convert to permanent members. Obviously Notability chose the most unfriendly method for old users. This point is controversial. normal. Although Notability changed the mode to retain the existing functions the next day, it still caused some old users to be dissatisfied, because they expected that the application has been "buy out", and you can enjoy it forever without paying any more. Update, this is the reason why these users feel deceived.

Regarding the charging model, whether it is a subscription system or re-charging for a large version, the core problem to be solved has never changed: to maintain a product continuously requires continuous funding. In the past few years, many products have shifted to a subscription system, but the current user acceptance is not high. Especially in the field of tools and software, many people think that products that do not require "extra" expenditure cannot be subscribed. Many people simply interpret this point as a cloud service expenditure.

My personal opinion is very clear. Continuous R&D investment is a huge cost. If a product is continuously improving, the subscription system is suitable. Nowadays, software development is no longer the era of selling copies. Only products that do not need to be updated after release are suitable for "buyout".

Of course, as a developer, I will inevitably be biased when discussing this issue. But users also need to believe that a mutually beneficial environment exists and that many developers are exploring, and making money is not a shameful thing.

▲ Taio app

YaoYao developer Wang Jiahao:

I don't like the subscription system myself, but from the perspective of vertical products, it is difficult to maintain the cost and expenditure year after year without the subscription system, so it is understandable.

Generally, small vertical products have a small user base, and it is impossible to have very good profits. It is impossible to rely on advertising or anything. Ordinary users do not understand the economic logic inherent in the operation of the entire Internet at all.

It is not applicable to most (small companies) products for large companies to obtain economic benefits through free and big data methods. To understand these things, most of them need to be engaged in this industry, and to know where the cost of the software is. I feel this dispute It also reflects the cognitive asymmetry between developers and users. Of course, Notability's approach is also a bit lost.

YaoYao developer Wang Jiahao:

For example, how much does a small product made by 5 people cost a year? The salary of each person is estimated to be about 2-3W per month, the platform’s 30%, plus the rent and water and electricity…If you sell a 10-20 yuan each, how many copies must be sold to return the cost, how big the market base is, a little calculation You'll know it next.

From a developer's perspective, I hope that the entire software industry is like the console game industry, paying with one hand and delivering with one hand. Manufacturers work hard to make products well, and don't try to play market psychology routines. Everyone is more relaxed, but this is not easy.

▲ YaoYao app

Ye Ming, head of the Chinese market for Pola Retouching:

Pola is now a subscription system. As a developer, I think the "subscription system" can indeed give developers more security. But I also think that not all applications are suitable for subscription. For example, annotated apps are actually more suitable for "buy-out", because such applications will not provide new consumer content, and will not update new features regularly. In this case It is obviously not reasonable to ask consumers to pay monthly.

I feel that if the "subscription system" is used well, developers can pay more attention to the product itself, and consumers can continue to experience new services and functions. If it is not used well, it may simply become a long-term money-making Tools.

But I think the "subscription system" itself is an excellent profit model.

▲ When Pola Retouching changed to a subscription system, it gave old users an option to renew for 248 years

YaoYao developer Wang Jiahao:

The subscription system can also refer to the large subscription system of XGP. Now, if a small team works hard for a long time, the quality may be better, but it still can't fight the free-to-charge model of large companies. Of course it's just hopeless, and there is no hope at the moment.

Pay with one hand and deliver with one hand. I think this model does not work. Another reason is that the platform may not do well. None of the platforms provide users with a good trial mode, resulting in high user uncertainty, and people are unwilling to pay high prices for things with high uncertainty.

The post-paid model is more suitable for large manufacturers, who have a large user base funnel. Small companies can only use free or small payments to attract users first, and then convert them

Yu Jianshen, Commercial Manager of Aifaner:

I think the ideal profit model for the product is free use + membership system, such as Ink Knife and Processon, they will give two or three free space to use, and then you have a better experience, you will go to open members to use more Function and space

Ye Ming, head of the Chinese market for Pola Retouching:

If all developers in this world don't make money, there will be no developers. Therefore, a good sale must benefit both parties, otherwise such a sale cannot be long-term.

In fact, many users complain about the "subscription system" and "developer makes money." The core problem is that the investment and the income are not equal. For example, after a developer has developed a piece of software, there will be no investment or updates in the follow-up but will continue to charge consumers, which is obviously not a benefit for both parties. On the contrary, if developers regularly add new features, fix existing problems, and update usage tutorials, this can form a virtuous circle.

The front-end development manager of Aifaner Technology Department promises:

User experience is the prerequisite for maintaining user stickiness and user growth, and product profitability can ensure the continuous and healthy development of the product.

Yu Jianshen, Commercial Manager of Aifaner:

Product profitability should be based on the consideration of ensuring user experience. Because some apps are filled with a bunch of advertisements first, and then prompted to pay to advertise. Like me, I have to watch a bunch of advertisements before I have much experience, and I don’t even think about spending money on the advertisements but simply uninstall them.

Not too interesting, not too optimistic.

#Welcome to follow Aifaner's official WeChat account: Aifaner (WeChat ID: ifanr), more exciting content will be provided to you as soon as possible.

Ai Faner | Original link · View comments · Sina Weibo