Disappointing to see you doubled your premium service price today.

  • 5
  • Problem
  • Updated 6 years ago
Disappointing to see you doubled your premium service. I visited here this morning and it was $1/month. By the time I managed to get my export from Google Reader and returned to load it, it's now $2/month.
Photo of Donna B. McNicol

Donna B. McNicol

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
  • sad

Posted 7 years ago

  • 5
Photo of Bradley Petrik

Bradley Petrik

  • 1 Post
  • 4 Reply Likes
Can't expect him to add the additional resources without some additional cost. What's an extra dollar a month anyway?
Photo of iber

iber

  • 8 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
https://twitter.com/newsblur - check it and you will better understand why he done that.
Photo of Telofy

Telofy

  • 18 Posts
  • 19 Reply Likes
The prices for dog food increased. That, or he has to buy a whole bunch of new servers. ;-)

But monthly or quarter-yearly payments would be nice. *nitpick* ^^
Photo of Mat Phillips

Mat Phillips

  • 1 Post
  • 1 Reply Like
One would think that an increase in the number of paying customers would cover the necessary increase in resources. Otherwise the price can be expected to increase again and again as the service gains more users.
Photo of Gareth Thomas

Gareth Thomas

  • 3 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
It would seem he has temporarily suspended the free and cheapest premium accounts to reduce the number of sign-ups and give him a better chance of getting the service working - a dead service would probably reduce sign ups more than a tiny fee.
Photo of Adrian Fita

Adrian Fita

  • 274 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
He's using the price increase as a tactic to cool down the number of new users signing up so the servers will still be able to provide service to current users. I'm sure he will switch the pricing back when the storm passes. So keep tight and come back soon.
Photo of Telofy

Telofy

  • 18 Posts
  • 19 Reply Likes
@Mat: Let’s hope not. $1 was awesome, $2 is OK, $3 would be borderline, above I’d think about setting up my own private NewsBlur instance. I already have a few servers I could use, so that wouldn’t cost me anything.

@Gareth and @Adrian: That’s how I’d interpret it too.
Photo of Adam Muller

Adam Muller

  • 1 Post
  • 7 Reply Likes
I think the 3$/month is totally reasonable personally. Even from a long-term point-of-view. I'd, personally, pay a hell of a lot more to have a 100% working service right now (Not that I'm implying that Samuel isn't doing everything he can to handle this crushing onslaught).

Limiting free accounts and cheaper-paid ones seems like a totally reasonable restriction to me.
Photo of jfmessier

jfmessier

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I was lucky enough to jump at the beginning, right when I saw what the site was capable of. And although I do not find everything I would want yet, I know I will get it. I am happy.
Photo of JJ Lopez Minkoff

JJ Lopez Minkoff

  • 12 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
I used Google Reader for my job...2 bucks a month is nothing compared to the time and effort I would have spent going to each website to get my information.

I am very happy to have found Newsblur...relieved is more like it.
Photo of Rob Farrell

Rob Farrell

  • 9 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
$2/month is nothing for this service... as long as it works. He had to (at least temporarily) reduce the traffic for free on super super cheap accounts to keep the service running. What is your problem?
Photo of Chris Adams

Chris Adams

  • 42 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
I drop $2-3 on a cup of coffee without blinking. I'd much prefer newsblur be a success than quibble over $1/month
Photo of Alec

Alec

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Chris, I understand that a heavy user would be happy to pay $25 or $30/year. But I don't use RSS that much and would have bought two years at $24 happily and hardly used the service (but it would be there when I needed it).

In the meantime, I've gone with Feedly which looks very, very good - although it's less traditional. Looked everywhere for somewhere to send Feedly $10. There's nowhere! Not sure I like the idea of completely free either. That was Google Reader.
Photo of Ferdinand

Ferdinand

  • 23 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
So go for feedly if you don't think it is important. Go for newsblur if you really depend on the service. Google Reader taught me to pay for things I like or find important.
Photo of Ken

Ken

  • 90 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
As we know from Google and Facebook, when the service is free, what they are really selling is ... you. They are monetizing your data, search patterns, interests, and habits. Someone else is paying and you are the product. No, thanks.

Samuel is doing a lovely job here under stress and I would pay more than I did for the quality of service. Now that he has given me search, I will be content to shut up and enjoy. Thanks.
Photo of Samuel Clay

Samuel Clay, Official Rep

  • 6514 Posts
  • 1474 Reply Likes
Gosh, you're all so wonderful. Yes, it's temporary for the reasons outlined above.

Also, Alec, read this great essay by the Pinboard guy Maciej Ceglowski: http://blog.pinboard.in/2011/12/don_t...
Photo of Alec

Alec

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hi Samuel,

I read the essay and agree with it. We are developers too with some pay and even more donationware.

I have no problem sending you money for my minimal use. Even $24 if you want it. But for my $24 I'd like to see two years.

Again if I were a heavy or even medium user I wouldn't think twice about $24/year.

I think I log into Google reader once/month. But I don't want to lose what I have there. I fit into the free plan still (even the reduced one) for my core sites so I guess I'm good. When you change the pricing back, I'll likely send you some coin (I donate cash to open source projects all the time).

I was there with credit card in hand to send you $12 for a year or $24 for two even for my equivalent to free use.
Photo of Telofy

Telofy

  • 18 Posts
  • 19 Reply Likes
It seems capitalism is not the right model for free web services. Since changing the model on a national or global scale is more of a long shot, perhaps there should be sort of state subsidy or “success insurance” for valuable free services.
Photo of Stu Guru

Stu Guru

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I am more than happy to pay $24/year for this - as Chris said, I drop $4 on a coffee (stupid Aussie economy) and don't think anything of it. I used to almost live and breath by google reader, but NewsBlur relieves some of my reading anxiety with it's filters. It's very cool and well worth the small amount of money.
Photo of Nick Peelman

Nick Peelman

  • 27 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
@donna, you're also welcome to go download the source, fire up your own server instance at the hosting provider of your choice, and host it yourself, all "for free".

Glib or not, even $36/year for a service many people will use every day, sometimes multiple times a day, is a pittance. $24 is practically giving it away anyway. $12 would seem like stealing at this point.
Photo of riptide

riptide

  • 2 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
I would love to see an option that allows me to buy 1 month instead of a full year. You could even take a dollar more for that lonely month. But I want to try out the premium model first before I hand over $24 or $36 dollars for one year.

Will this be an option soon?
Photo of raddevon

raddevon

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I'm glad to pay $24 a year for this service.
Photo of pitamakan

pitamakan

  • 10 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
I completely understand the pressures of the current situation, and after playing with Newsblur for a bit I agree that it's well, well worth 2 or 3 bucks a month. I'm glad I found it!

Still, I think it would save a lot of confusion and resentment if the dev spent a couple of minutes adding a sentence to the Newsblur homepage explaining the current restrictions on free and low-cost account signups. Long-term, that's a small time commitment that would save a bunch of goodwill.
Photo of Andrew Auletta

Andrew Auletta

  • 23 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
I know. When I signed up the other day, I was doing it based on something I saw at the website referencing $12 per year. As I signed up, it showed as $24 for the year. I didn't complain, but I was surprised at the discrepancy.
Photo of pitamakan

pitamakan

  • 10 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
I think the homepage is corrected, now ... and I can't complain anyway, since I got one of the last $12 subscriptions. :)

There still seems to be a fair amount of online backlash about this, though. Hopefully when things calm down a little more Samuel will publicize his long-term plans for the pricing structure and freemium model.
Photo of Samuel Clay

Samuel Clay, Official Rep

  • 6514 Posts
  • 1474 Reply Likes
I went through and fixed the numbers on the homepage. I also boosted the free account back up to 64 feeds. Now the only missing price point is $12, which will eventually come back when I can handle the crushing load.
Photo of pitamakan

pitamakan

  • 10 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Many thanks ... and I need to say that I'm really loving Newsblur, especially the UI at the dev site.

(Looks like the homepage still suggests a 12-feed limit for free accounts, though.)

Anyhow, go take Shiloh for a walk. :)
Photo of Shea Clayton

Shea Clayton

  • 23 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
are you kidding me? I was thinking about this and at first thought I'd eagerly hand over as much as I pay for email (20/yr).

But on further thought that's not enough. I use Google Reader at least as much as I use Spotify which is $10/month. So I should honestly be willing to pay at least as much as I pay for spotify.

This thing is the digital archive of my personal short-form reading habits. It's only going to grow in importance over time. It's worth paying for when 20 years from now I can easily pull up old articles that made me laugh, share them with grandkids, etc...
Photo of Frank Dosh

Frank Dosh

  • 26 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
How close is the $1/month plan to coming back?