Poll: Ask HN: Would you Pay for a Chrome extension? | Hacker News Reader

Poll: Ask HN: Would you Pay for a Chrome extension?

30 pointshackerbob52 comments

I've started looking into developing a chrome extension to help people visually analyze social data both passively and actively (this poll is not about the merits/value of my idea). I'm curious what others think of charging/paying for a browser extension. I'm not familiar with the history of Firefox extensions, but as a recent observer it seems Google's Chrome has a lot going for it like Google login, and checkout.

Simply put, if it solved a problem or created some value would you open your wallet (sorry I'm sometimes direct like that).

View on HN

I tend to buy things that solve a problem correctly and add value to my life.

How I spend my money doesn't rely on "what it is" in any way. Is it a "Chrome Extension"? "Standalone Product"? Doesn't matter.

I don't "expect" something to be free, but I'm happy when some things are. But if I find a Chrome extension that is $99, but it solves my problem perfectly, then $99 it is, and I may just buy it.

A higher price point is what I'm thinking about for what I'm doing, and I suppose its a bit misleading on my part to say what I'm doing would only be an extension as there'd be main website as a dashboard.

The price you list does bring up an interesting question. Could there ever be a market on the Chrome app store for people wanting to sell +$50 apps. I get the impression the market on the app store leans more towards free - $1.99.(to be fair its similar to the Apple app store, with some exceptions)

Another poll I was thinking of was, how much would you pay for a chrome extension/chrome app?

Unfortunately not, and not for any rational reason. It's the same reason I don't buy iPhone apps: because the vast majority are free.

There's an implicit valuation when one uses the term "chrome extension". When analyzing how much it is worth to me, I subconsciously compare it to other Chrome extensions, not other bits of code. I might be perfectly happy to pay for MS Office, even when OpenOffice is free, simply because most productivity applications command a premium. It seems right to pay for it. Even a $0.99 fee for a chrome extension or, for that matter, an iPhone app, presents a significant enough disincentive that I likely won't purchase it. In fact, I've never paid for any piece of software that wasn't a game or preloaded on my system.

Now, I'm not everybody. Certainly, there will be those out there who would be willing to pay for a Chrome extension, but I wouldn't count on them being the majority. If you do decide to charge for it, make sure that you set a value that accurately reflects what you feel it is worth, rather than what might entice people to use it. A $0.99 fee is high enough to stop most people from paying, while low enough to be pointless for you. Consider $9.99. I doubt that only 10% of the people who would pay $1 would pay $10. If I'm right, you make more money by charging more.

As to your idea, keep in mind that Chrome is still a browser with a small market share. If you really do want to make your idea pay, consider releasing a version for FF, IE9, Safari, etc. Or just make a website.

To counter this effect, charge for the service instead.

I think this might actually make it worse. While XBox Live, WoW, and others have been successful, I think most people expect to pay once for a program, and get to use it for free in perpetuity. There's strong resistance, at least amongst some segments of the population, to pay service fees. Oddly, I would have described gamers as being the ones least inclined to pay monthly fees, although they've been almost the biggest fee-payers, perhaps behind porn.

So...you disagree with me, and the example you'd use to illustrate the social reasons behind your point is actually not a good one.

Um, thanks for mentioning it?

I was citing exceptions. For examples, see every other piece of software people pay for.

If it solved a problem or created some value would you open your wallet?

Absolutely. I don't care what technology you use to solve my problems if you do it well.

You may find my experience with developing a freemium browser extension helpful:

http://www.chrisfinke.com/2010/09/13/my-experience-with-deve...

The executive summary is that a free extension with ~70,000 users had a conversion rate to paid users of about 0.1%. Of course, this situation is different than yours, as you're not starting with users who already associate your extension with being free.

Thanks that is informative. Do you think having a free version is a bad idea, if you ultimately aim for revenue through a paid version?

I'd go paid from the get-go. In my experience, once users associate something with "free," it's much harder to get them to pay anything for a similar product.

I probably wouldn't pay for a Chrome extension. I might, however pay for a service that is accessed through a browser extension.

Giving the context of the extension is going to color the question, which is "Will you pay for something that helps you and makes your life easier?" For those folks already using Chrome (of which I am one), the answer is going to be "Yes." Folks using a different browser incur additional cost since they must both switch to Chrome and pay for the tool. That audience will have a higher percentage of "Maybe" and "No" answers.

My answer is No, I wouldn't pay for something that should be included in the browser itself as a feature, especially when the browser is free to begin with. Everyone form my cable/Internet provider to my cell phone companies are charging me for everything I want to do, and most of those charges should really be standard features.

I think the path to riches on creating extensions lies in marketing the features to browser makers (from the companies that actually make money) like Microsoft and Google, so that they can eventually integrate your add-ons into their browsers for a fee, or better yet, buy you out altogether. That's the way to monetize that idea. If you put a price on your extension, chances are that you're also shooting yourself in the foot because your reach will only be to people who would pay. Unless its of course a revolutionary feature that no-one can live without. I'm a web designer and I think Firebug for FF is great, but if it had a price on it, I'd probably never care to know about it because its not "that" essential to me.

Although people have been voting "No" and "Not...yet", I think the answer to your question is simple:

If your extension solves a problem that a person values at X amount of money, they'll pay up to X for it. If the extension creates Y amount of value, they'll pay up to somewhere slightly under Y.

I definitely have no problem paying for a good browser app, if it helps me: 1. do my work faster 2. give me a competitive advantage in my business 3. provide a higher level of service to my few clients

I'm not sure I would specifically pay for an extension to analyze social data. I'd have to see the end results first, and evaluate it based on that.

In terms of pricing, don't limit yourself at the $1 to $3 app level. Evaluate the pricing based on the value provided to the customer. If it helps your customer earn $10,000 more over the course of a year, there's nothing wrong with charging $100 for it, or more.

For the customers not bothered by the transaction cost - there's not much different between $1 and $30 or more.

You are probably asking the wrong crowd ...

I tend to believe that most people who are coders, developer and into FOSS, tend to buy very little software and only pay for the absolute necessary

This is not a bad thing, software is our thing, so we just won't pay for anything

But I've seen people pay for less trivial stuff, like items on a facebook game.

So probably we won't, but that never will mean, that millions of web browsers won't! I can almost bet that if you sell an extension that claims to make chrome more secure, enough people will buy it to make you happy!

In fact I have paid for a Chrome extension. I've been using http://www.activeinboxhq.com/ Active Inbox since it was in beta on Firefox and it has been instrumental in getting my mail from thousands of unread or processed emails to regularly hitting a Zero Inbox.

I pay mainly to keep development going rather than paying X to buy Y. I think of it more like donating to NPR knowing that I am more likely to receive value in the future by paying now.

It's probably worth mentioning that if you think RockMelt will be a big deal, it may be a good idea to make your extension blend in naturally with the Rockmelt UI since it is built on top of Chromium and is compatible with Chrome apps and extensions.

If you want more feedback you should setup a google form where we can give you our e-mail to beta test your app. Ever since I started using @byoogle's disconnect extension I've been trying to find more "killer apps" to use.

Asking people if they would pay for something is a very ineffective way of actually determining inclination to buy. Conjoint analysis is the right tool to use, but is probably heavy-handed for the quick answer you are looking for. Creating a quick prototype, showing it to a few people, and asking for written, non-binding commitments to buy is very effective. And I don't mean that this HN poll is going to be slightly ineffective; I mean it is going to be 100% useless.

I'm not the average user but it would have to add significant value. I haven't started using the browser as my main application even though most of the services I use are web based. I expect the application to provide much of the utility and I'm not personally interested in aggregation services.

That being said, for a killer productivity tool I might pay but I would question wether a chrome extension is the right venue.

I think if there's one thing the App Store has shown, given the right audience and marketing people will pay for anything that has value to them.

Like any other program, app or website.. It's about the need and scarcity that makes me want to pay or not.

I guess what you are asking is: Assuming your tool is useful, is it being a chrome extension hindering me from buying it?

So it comes down to if I generally use Chrome for my browsing or, if your tool is only used occasionally, if I am willing to use Chrome for those moments.

I'd make it a web app that the extension compliments.

The overwhelming usage would probably come through the extension and a site would compliment it as a dashboard.

Right, but the important part is creating the impression users are paying for a web app rather than an extension.

I will donate for a plugin or extension that I want to install on every system the browser runs on. Like NoScript. (Well, as a Firefox user, I would not spend money on Chrome extensions...)

Hm, looking back on my install base, it looks like I will have to donate some money this year on Adblock+, RequestPolicy, Certificate Patrol, Web Developer's Toolbar, Firebug.

I've donated to a developer that made one that I can't live without. But I wouldn't have purchased it.. I'm not sure what that's about?

Yes. I have one of the new CR-48 ChromeOS netbooks and if someone had a reasonably priced native VNC client I would pay for it. Sure, I could just install Ubuntu on here and be done with it, but I like having a super simple ChromeOS netbook and I just want a native VNC client.

And native printing to a usb connected printer

It is striking that approx 30% would buy. I think that the climate for this kind of purchase is becoming increasingly favorable because of: a) many people regularly buy phone apps b) micropayments and apps stores are becoming familiar I see a bright future in this area.

If it would give me some value - of course.

What I would like though is an opportunity to back off... There is no approval process with the chrome extensions, so I would like to know that if the thing doesn't work as advertised I can get my money back.

It would have to either be something that would make me money, save me money, or save me time.

I'd probably pay a few bucks for FlashBlock, since it saves me a lot of time (by keeping my computer running nice and quick when I have a ton of tabs open).

If I were you I'd look into Chrome Web Store (though I imagine you already are). It looks tailor made to facilitate this sort of product's sales.

https://chrome.google.com/webstore

Not yet, as the Chrome Web Store doesn't allow authors to sell extensions, only apps.

I wouldn't buy one, because I wouldn't be assured of using it indefinitely (especially if it's proprietary). I might rent one, because that keeps you on the hook to maintain compatibility when Google pushes updates.

Sure, if something is useful, and superior to free alternatives, I'll shell out money for it. If it's free and I really love it, I'll donate, too. I'm more likely to pay if I have to, though!

I wouldn't pay a single penny. Purely and simply because I can't be bothered to set up another payment method. I didn't do it on my Blackberry, nor my Nexus for this precise reason.

Yes, but you can't (assuming you use the Chrome Web Store, which would have the largest target audience). Google only allows you to sell apps, not extensions.

Yes, I would pay for an extension if it was valuable (eg: historio.us) however not for your idea. Voted yes though, as per poll q.

The poll is the important part, I'm glad you voted.

Firefox plugins have been wildly successful when solving pain.

Not sure if your idea solves pain, or is just a tool.

> Firefox plugins have been wildly successful when solving pain.

But not when charging for the solution.

There has been some notable exceptions.

I would pay for a Chrome extension that adds value in a way that no free alternative is able to add it.

No. Why? If the requirement is large enough, someone will develop it for free, and I'll use that.

> "someone will develop it for free"

Perhaps a fair point. But I sigh nonetheless...

---ignore all--- On a totally unrelated note, I like your about quote, always one of my favourite simpsons line. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juFZh92MUOY

I'd pay for Firebug on Chrome if it worked as well as Firebug on Firefox!

Not for social data.

What's your price point? If you made something that truly added value I appreciated, I'd pay $1-3. It'd have to be really awesome to sell for more than $3 though.

I can't speak for others, but I'd be primarily looking for value-added, not slick/cool/usability.

More likely when it's presented as a 'Chrome App' rather than an extension.

Especially since I'm using CR-48, you better believe I would pay for an extension of business value to me. I would not pay for anything fun or personal.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com