I'm surprised I didn't see an active thread on this already, and apologize if I am duplicating one I missed.
Due to patreon's new fee structure, I have decided to remove my pledge.
Starting on January 1, I will be sending donations Dave's way via PayPal. Dave, if you have a different (non-patreon) preferred method of receiving donations, please let us know!
In my opinion, patreon needs to get immediate, direct feedback for their decision. There are two means to do this:
1) Create a support ticket and let them know they messed up:
https://patreon.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/requests/new2) Delete your pledge. When you delete your pledge there is a short survey. There is an option you can check that indicates it is an issue with patreon, and a slot for a comment.
- I do not advocate this for most people.
With enough feedback, hopefully they will reverse this decision, so we can get back to normal!
I think unless people really can't afford the new fees it's a bit of an overreaction to go canceling pledges. I've been kind of shocked how many creators I've seen cancel their pledges to other creators in protest, but still maintain a Patreon page. That said, I'd prefer to donate in whatever the creator preferred method is that hopefully gets the most money to them.
To be clear, I am only doing this to send a message to patreon that they made a mistake.
I would only advocate option 2 if you will definitely support the creators through another method. If people forget to support through other methods, it harms the creators more than the fee changes will.
Re: changing to Paypal...
Paypal fees are similar: in the US the fee for each transaction is 2.9% plus $0.30 USD of the amount you receive.
I think you can avoid this with Paypal "Friends & Family" but i'm guessing that will not apply to Dave's donations..?
Don't forget that patreon still takes 5% of the donation amount on top of that 2.9% + $0.35. PayPal charges 2.9% + $0.30 without the 5% fee.
I dropped Patreon. The $0.35 fee itself was OK. The fact they they did it for every pledge is wrong. Right now let's say I'm supporting 10 folks with $1 a month. They charge me ONCE for $10. I would not balk so much at $10 + 2.9% + $0.35. But instead it's $10 + 2.9% + $3.50. Why I am getting dinged for 10 credit card transactions when it's only one transaction?
I'll just go back to making larger paypal contributions less often to those I support. I'll miss the simple management that Patreon offered but it's not worth $0.35 per pledge to me.
It just occurred to me that right now we can support Dave through his 121GW kickstarter campaign.
I just kicked in an extra AU$10 to my pledge for the meter to help offset some of the lost patreon revenue.
I dropped Patreon. The $0.35 fee itself was OK. The fact they they did it for every pledge is wrong. Right now let's say I'm supporting 10 folks with $1 a month. They charge me ONCE for $10. I would not balk so much at $10 + 2.9% + $0.35. But instead it's $10 + 2.9% + $3.50. Why I am getting dinged for 10 credit card transactions when it's only one transaction?
I'll just go back to making larger paypal contributions less often to those I support. I'll miss the simple management that Patreon offered but it's not worth $0.35 per pledge to me.
Was supporting one guy on Patreon, to give him 3$, there were 5€ leaving my bank account, yay..
I wasn't sure how to react, though i definitely disliked the new change, as the change seemed greedy, and Patreon's explanation somehow didn't seem sincere.
So.. I lowered each of my 7-8 donations on Patreon by $1, to try match the increase in cost, effectively costing me nothing more than it used to cost.
Update: I am a little conflicted, but I ended up removing my pledges and I removed my credit card in the settings. I will leave it up to the creator(s) to come up with some alternate donation gimmick.
It's always nice when a company is willing to admit mistake and backtrack rather than plugging its ears, yelling "lalalalalalalala" and forging ahead as is so often the case.
I got the email stating they will NOT rollout the changes as well. Too much blow back.
The squeaky wheel still gets the oil..
Patreon just stepped back from the not so cool idea.
We messed up. We’re sorry, and we’re not rolling out the fees change.
Dear creators,
From the bottom of our hearts, we’re truly sorry. Last week’s service fee announcement caused a tough week for you, your patrons, and your teams. We were trying to solve a problem for creators and, in turn, caused more problems for you and your patrons.
You’ve spoken loud and clear. We’re not going to rollout the changes to our payments system that we announced last week, and are currently assessing other option
More on the ÜatreonBlog
Don't forget to re-support your creators!
Unfortunately, I think there is going to be a portion of those who pulled out that will not be so enthusiastic to jump back in. Also, I cannot see anyone getting excited enough by this schmozzle to be persuaded to take up a patronage for someone.
Patreon will have lost this on both reputation and financial parameters - and there will be some net loss to some creators.
Patreon has definitely lost some credibility. Since reversing their fee decision, through aggregation, they take fewer fees than Paypal which is good.
This whole thing has given Kickstarter's upcoming public launch of
https://d.rip/ a big leg up if Kickstarter plays their cards right.
The issue here isn't so much the amount, it's the principle that you can be charged more than you agreed to pay. Once this sort of thing gets established it's the small end of the wedge and worse will follow.
In the UK, many auction houses have started on this lark, and it now means that you can never be sure what price you will have to pay unless you spend time wading through small print before you bid. Which may not be feasible anyway. This must be the craziest possible situation since you've walked in off the street, signed nothing to agree to any surcharge, and spoken the words 'Ten pounds' to the auctioneer but you're actually required to pay twelve.
An auction bid is a legal contract so you are required by law to pay.. but you could be required to pay more than you actually bid. That just doesn't seem right.
Surely you have to sign something in order to be able to bid?
The auctions I've been to you sign a form agreeing to the terms at which point you are assigned a bidder number. You can't just walk in off the street and place a bid.
UH OH "and are currently assessing other option" Doesn't look like they have given up
I have re-enabled all my Patreon donations in light of the new development.
Though.. if they do some funny stuff still, they won't get far and I can only hope that it will be obvious so I can get to react to overt or covert changes in the future.
If Pateron were really scum, I imagine that they could force a one year subscription pool of money, with 12 months of advance payment without notifications, but I don't think they could even consider that. :|
Alternatively, if not requiring a yearly advance fee for donations, a yearly advance fee for payment costs or something, but again, I can't imagine they would get away with that without the consent of every individual donating money.
I guess I should watch out for Paypal to come up with funny stuff next. I don't even know what fees Paypal has for paying for stuff on eBay nowadays, so I chose the credit card option and fill in the details without storing the data, every time I buy stuff.
Eidt: I am reminded of this "psychological" idea of false goals, in which, when first presented with something terrible, the next, less terrible thing, will by merit of the way things are presented will likely seem relatively less inappropriate.. as if that second option will seem more ok, when first having been presented with a terrible first choice.
Eidt: I am reminded of this "psychological" idea of false goals, in which, when first presented with something terrible, the next, less terrible thing, will by merit of the way things are presented will likely seem relatively less inappropriate.. as if that second option will seem more ok, when first having been presented with a terrible first choice.
If you want to become really cynical, bear that idea in mind and watch politics for a while.
This is exactly how we (in the 'west') have got to where we currently are in respect of civil liberties, privacy, domestic mass surveillance and government data sharing. Horrible, regressive, oppressive legislation is proposed, there are objections and protests, the propositions are scaled back and the objectors accept the scaled back proposals (saying something like "it could have been worse" to themselves) and fail to notice that the new proposals are exactly what the government really wanted in the first place. Rinse and repeat in another three years and watch the ratchet move forward until you start going to lunch when the clocks strike 13.
Eidt: I am reminded of this "psychological" idea of false goals, in which, when first presented with something terrible, the next, less terrible thing, will by merit of the way things are presented will likely seem relatively less inappropriate.. as if that second option will seem more ok, when first having been presented with a terrible first choice.
I sometimes wonder if that's what Microsoft is attempting to do with Win8/10. Now that 10 is a "service" they released something that was a terrible mess so they can keep improving it and eventually maybe it will be as nice and polished as Windows 7?
Surely you have to sign something in order to be able to bid?
The auctions I've been to you sign a form agreeing to the terms at which point you are assigned a bidder number. You can't just walk in off the street and place a bid.
You might want to try some car auctions. Believe me you will be violently held to account not just by the auctioneer and his just out of prison on license "salesman" grunt, but by all the questionable immigrants waving around £1000's in cash too...
Moral of the story - DO NOT EVER USE YOUR MOBILE PHONE TO FILM A CAR AUCTION IN THE UK.