Hacker News Reader

Comment by krnlpnc | Hacker News Reader

15% is not a deep cut.

That’s a totally a reasonable cost for smoothly running the infrastructure necessary to support a creator with a monthly subscription model.

View on HN

That's about 10x more that I'd consider reasonable for what is effectly hosting a static website and bulletin board. I think we've all just had our expectations blown out of the water by Steam (and the subsequent app stores).

There's nothing static about processing payments and providing support.

That's not "the infrastructure", then, that's one piece of it.

A static website that shows/hides content depending on your subscription level dynamically?

I don't know how to respond to that. That's not a complicated thing to do.

Patreon gets to take the money they take because they've found a good niche, not because their website can do something that all websites have been able to do since the 1990s.

I personally think they take too much for what they provide. That's all. I am very happy they exist, though, because otherwise everyone would just be chasing the algorithm.

“Not because their website can do something that all websites have been able to do since the 1990s”.

That is describing most money-making websites in existence

Does your static website and bulletin board also process the digital international tax schemes like EU VAT and liberate you of the legal and financial responsibilities of processing and filing each of the payments that you receive one by one?

In crypto creative and art economies the standard is around 2.5%, with various platforms competing on that by offering lower commissions even down to 0%.

No. It's unacceptable that payment systems charge anything more than a fraction of a percent for each transaction. In any well-designed payment system the marginal cost per transaction is minuscule.

Pateron should work the same as they enable for any other content creator: They should get paid in donations by their customers.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com