Comment by Wump | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Wump | Hacker News Reader

There seems to be a lot of griping about the $100/year price here. The folks behind Muse have made what seems to be a solid product and want to charge for it to build a sustainable business. I don't understand what the issue is.

On the one hand, people complain about having to pay for things (especially subscriptions). On the other, they complain about startups that try to grow fast, subsidize the cost of the product with venture money, and get acquired and shut down. I don't have a problem with either approach; I think they both have their place.

But how can software developers trying to build great products (and businesses) escape this lose-lose scenario?

You may not feel that this specific product is worth $100/year to you. That's fine; not everything is for everyone. But how do we, as a tech community, better support people and teams trying to create value in a sustainable way?

The subscription model for apps is a hard sell. Remember all the backlash Jetbrains got?

Personally, I'm on the same page. I will pay for a service, but for an app, it has to be one I'm dependent on for in my work, not a personal note taking app that I may not use very often. Make me pay monthly for storage or subscription tier. Not just to use the app.

This looks intriguing, but IMO, GoodNotes at $8 single purchase is good enough for me and is an infinitely better value. I normally trial new apps, but this one is just way too expensive.

FWIW, I paid for this the second I crossed the free trial threshold. The polish is 1% level. It's truly a next-level product.

I agree. That price for a great home to do great thinking? Well worth it.

> But how do we, as a tech community, better support people and teams trying to create value in a sustainable way?

By giving people honest feedback when they ask for it, including letting them know that their pricing structure what is stopping us purchasing it.

Another way of framing "the price is too high" is "the value is too low -- here are the things XYZ that I would love for you to add to justify that price for me."

It seems the second flavor of feedback is more useful to the developers.

Sometimes the value isn’t too low though, and it’s actually the price.

Looks like the app has enough features, and I don’t think just adding features will somehow raise the value (for me personally).

If the in-app purchase allows family sharing (which isn’t even possible until ios14) I’d be much more likely to shell out.

Chances are, if I wind up liking the app enough to pay, my wife would also, and I hate paying full price x2...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com