Sounds like you're exactly the opposite of the target audience.
Besides, Grammarly would have suggested a missing "as".
Seriously. The magic for the mass market in a product like Grammarly is not handling all cases correctly, all the time, with lots of complexity; it's handling most cases cases correctly, most of the time, with minimal complexity.
I know this is an easy mistake to make but in this context the irony is palpable.
Although it may be appropriate given the context and target audience.
I get what you are saying though.
I would hope none of their authors argue that any of those tools could replace a professional copywriter.
High price point is the only reason why I haven't gotten around purchasing its premium plan even though I think it would very beneficial for me.
Personally, I've been a premium user for more than a year now, and it has become an invaluable tool for me, especially as a non-native English speaker. $20/month is not too cheap, but I feel like it's worth it for the boost in professionalism that all my writing gets.
This is how Grammarly's premium edition would have corrected your post:
> Grammarly is a great tool. I never forget to check my article ~~with~~/on (Incorrect correction, think 'with' makes more sense here) it before publishing. If you had asked me a few years ago how much would anyone pay for a Grammar-checking tool, I would have guessed it would be no more ~~that~~/than (Probably a typo on your end, rather than a grammatical mistake) $3-4 / month. Grammarly charges $29 a month. Of course, its value can be measured with the improved communication but $29 _is_ a lot. It's amazing that it convinced people that it's worth it.
>~~High~~/The high (probably the most common mistake non-native English speakers do) price point is the only reason why I haven't gotten around purchasing its premium plan even though I think it would very beneficial for me.
I think a native English speaker would probably write "I always check my article with it before publishing" - reversing the negation avoids the awkward "never forget to".
Meanwhile, that last sentence reads like perfectly reasonable conversational English to me: omitting the "the" emphasises the "High price point" part.
It seems that Grammarly will help you avoid the very common ESL type English errors (missing definite article, verb-subject agreement etc etc), which makes it worthwhile for many people, but it isn't going to get you over that final 'native speaker' grade hump.
Perhaps this can serve as future guidance for those who soon look to encroach on Google or FB turf who may be afraid to act due to anti-trust enforcement.
There is a bit of a Y Combinator attitude against buying advertising to build a startup. If it ain't viral, then the product isn't good enough. Unfortunately, a grammar checker isn't exactly something you tell your friends about, but it is quite cheap to tell the world with cheap display ads on dictionary site garbage inventory. Advertising is a really good option when there is cheap inventory in the niche, and a profitable CPA can be established.
Lots and lots of advertising
I almost can't go a day on YouTube without seeing a Grammarly ad. And yes, certainly coming across it a lot on the content network too.
Good luck to them if it works. The premium version is relatively inexpensive, so it would be interesting to know (not as if we ever would!) how much on average they spend to get a premium customer.
It may take them far more than the $29.95 they charge a month, so they could be out of pocket for months on that customer. But then, the customers who pay up front for a year, plus all the other less expensive lead sources, more than likely make up the difference and then some.
I haven't been through their funnel so I don't know if they have any upsells, cross sells...etc. On the surface it appears that they basically only have one single product (even though they also have business and education versions of that product).
I do worry about businesses that don't really diversify their offerings, since it's more of a funnel than an actual business. But for many companies, I guess the goal is to make as much money as quickly as possible then cash out, rather than create something that will really be around for the long-term.
Anyway, good luck to them (again). But they're probably desperately hoping Google doesn't add similar functionality to Gmail/Chrome, and that Microsoft doesn't expand their grammar checking functionality in Word!
To be able to use Grammarly within Sublime text or other editors would be incredible. As it stands, because you're forced to copy and past content over into their editor, the workflow is the biggest drawback. It's really handy in textareas on the web, but I've struggled to integrate it into my writing workflow because of the copy/paste process. Writing mainly in Markdown doesn't make it any more elegant either.
I've been meaning to have a play with it as a potential replacement for Grammarly before the special offer subscription of that is due to renew in a couple of months (though if I keep the special offer rate it is probably just as well for me to stick with Grammarly).
It is Java based which may put off a lot of projects from including it directly in their desktop or mobile products, but they could host their own instance and have their applications submit data to that. Assuming the extra admin (keeping the service running & up-to-date, and monitoring/enforcing API-key use if they don't want the service to become de-facto public once other developers notice it exists) and hosting costs would not be too high, of course.
Site functionality is pretty much broken now, but it's been almost two years since it went online, so I'm surprised they haven't offered a public API by now.
API focused businesses don't own the customer.
Are they upfront about their plans to use (or not) this data?
It used to do a really good job fixing my notes, but I feel like it's detection ability dropped off a cliff recently. I've had some pieces with pretty obvious mistakes that it has previously caught not get highlighted on a regular basis.
I saw the same thing happen with FoxType's V1 product, and then they pivoted away from it and eventually closed.
I wonder if there is some issue in aggregating people's writing mistakes into AI that lowers its value over time?
If it didn't invade privacy, I wish I could know who I was competing against. I consistently get "You used more unique words than x% of Grammarly users." where x is always 95% or more, but I didn't think my vocabulary was top 5% territory.
> By the time Grammarly transitioned to freemium, it was already profitable with millions of users—and could fund a freemium plan to drive even more new user acquisition.