Why not deliver this as a desktop application that users download and pay for one-time? There’s absolutely no need for an ongoing subscription to a backend service here. Outside of rent-seeking.
1. It still provides more value than the monthly subscription.
2. People have shown a greater willingness to pay for ongoing features and support in a SAAS model than in other formats.
3. It better aligns with the costs of support and maintenance that the provider needs to provide.
4. It's less risky for the consumer to get started.
5. There's no piracy or people decompiling your app and putting it out under their own name.
6. No updates to fiddle with and works across machines.
Not all answers above directly apply to the podcast->video service here but these are the general reasons.
Pretty crazy when you see your own app on torrent sites.
Not all problems are workable within that constraint.
Can you share some examples of how you've furthered humanity while living for free?
I've spent a lot of time on my app and I still had to pay people to help do the app.
The best thing you can do is identify them and segment them into beta / test updates for experimental features which you wouldn’t test on paying users.
1, 4, and 6 align with the customer. 4 could be alleviated even with a local application a la Sublime Text. I concede 6 is marginally easier to manage, but then again represents a con from the customer perspective in that the software they’re using could disappear at any time since they don’t own it.
JetBrains model seems to represent the best compromise to the customer here: subscription fee for constant updates and support, cancel anytime and keep your current version with no updates or support.
2, 3, 5 benefit the business, not the customer. In fact 3 is probably the most beneficial to the business in that cost of support and maintenance isn’t aligned, they’re decoupled! Hence the 70-80% margins this company is touting.
5 is brutal as csallen said, but then again there are counterpoints to this in that people will certainly pay and not pirate for the right experience: iTunes, Kindle, etc. even when the pirated versions are readily available.
I appreciate your response.
I'm simply wondering if there's a "your margin is my opportunity" play here where a company could devour SaaS companies by changing the distribution model. That's all. This thought has been banging around in my head for the past couple years due to a few data points, but I haven't had time to formally test the hypothesis.
That's all it is: a hypothesis that there's an opportunity here to change the distribution model to one that focuses on the customer and destroy a large number of SaaS models.
Microsoft Office, for example. $250 license cost every three years, or $99/year for the SaaS model. If you want to try it, you pay $10 for a month and if you don't like it you lost $10 rather than $250. And if you subscribe long term, the SaaS version's pricing is very much on par with the old style of selling software.
The alternative is the company going out of business and not providing the product or the company’s founders getting acqui-hired followed by a final “Our Amazing Journey” blog post before the product is cancelled.
I never said anything to the contrary?
Renting is often exactly what businesses want to do. They have better uses for their money than pre-purchasing all of their future expenses. They rent office space, lease cars, pay salaries fortnightly instead of at the start of the year, pay for their inventory not only as they receive it rather than in advance, but often on terms of credit. Software doesn't have a reason to be an exception to this. If I can pay $X now or $X spread over a number of years, I'm going to pick the latter.
The payment terms of a product are effectively part of the product itself. I'm in sales and I've won and lost deals against comparatively priced competitors on the basis that my/their pricing schedule better matched what the prospect wanted.
I took renting to mean just ongoing payments by the way. If you meant rent seeking as in the concept in economics then 1. this isn't it and 2. using IP law to prop up the value of locally installable software would be a closer example of it than doing so by keeping some of the code under your own control is.
The choice is between maintaining 2 mobile apps + a desktop app that is compatible with macOS and Windows and maintaining a single webapp.
That's the opposite of rent-seeking, that's .. charging money for a service.
I'm happy to do a free trial, and have it instantly accessible on all my devices that have a browser and etc.
Because when given the option, sellers usually choose more money than less money.
Anyone is welcome to create a competing product and take their margins.
The one time purchase could have been, let's say, $20, but if I want to use it a couple of times, paying $5 per month might be a better deal. And you're always getting the latest version
Your second (main?) point: "no need" / "rent-seeking" is addressed well by michaelbuckbee, particularly point #5.
Also maybe there could be automation with this service that saves time?
What you're proposing with the one-time upfront fee model is to compete on price, so smart entrepreneurs steer clear of that model.
Back then I was really surprised that I couldn't find a service like this. Had I found one I probably would've used it.
"We lost about 2 years of our time and $30k of my savings (which was most of it). "
"Getting those first 10/100+ customers was really hard. We relied primarily on direct outreach via cold email and social media messaging to obtain those first customers. Taking the time to reach out directly to customers for a $7/month plan was painful"
Outside of the few "lottery winners", most are grinders that didn't commit business suicide.
Major props for those who grind until they can share their tales.
you should go ask a miller.
That sounds tacky but I remember watching a clip from a Bill Burr podcast where he talked about super rich middle easterners bringing their gold Ferrari’s to London. It had a slide show super imposed with pictures of such cars in London and it Really helped bring the story to life.
The more difficult part:
- Understanding the work that goes into making and releasing a podcast
- Figuring out that a step in the process is not being done efficiently
- Determining a balanced set of features whose delivery and maintenance cost is low enough that people in industry will benefit from paying for them
- Marketing your software to potential customers
- Convincing them that they will benefit from purchasing your software
- Maintaining the software to satisfy your customer base
- Exploring and releasing new features to stay ahead of your inevitable competition if the product is successful
- Taking the initial risk to start development
But everybody here knows that already.
You can capture video and download it from canvas: https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2016/10/capture-st...
And it looks possible to add separate audio to it: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/39302814/mediastream-cap....
You could also recreate the waveforms and add to the canvas: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Web_Audio_A...,
Not widely supported, but you could try to add speech recognition too https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Web_Speech_...
With wavve, I instantly see how the shared clip will look like. I can even scroll down to the social media links and see a lot of examples directly in instagram / twitter / facebook.
Or maybe it's a good thing because it means a stupid simple idea can make you a millionaire
I have a lot of respect for sales people and people who can market themselves. One of my favorite videos about this is by a bodybuilder/powerlifter Stan Efferding  - he is some sort of marketing savant, with a product that I think is kind of silly, but he can market the hell out of it.
Could not agree more, especially underestimated by the vast majority of devs turned entrepreneur. But you don't have to be that statistic - get a complimentary cofounder/partner/outsource if it's not your passion.
Check out https://github.com/binoculars/aws-lambda-ffmpeg.
When your business starts making real money, at what point are you forced to start buying out these standalone apps so that your business model isn’t threatened?
My use case: trim and append multiple (4+) MP4s in the browser into one continuous video.
Seriously there’s lots of people happy to clone it and get a bite.
Of course there are, in fact I drove a few customers to them based on this post! Never heard of the service before and it looks interesting in the right setting.
However, it only takes 1 or 2 determined competitive efforts to start taxing your saas business even in small ways that only make life harder. Is showing your hand worth the trade-offs? That's up to each individual to answer. I know entrepreneurs / developers sitting on both sides of this table - doing the copying and being copied. Way of the road.
Exactly - if there's a successful business format, it wont stay a niche product without copycats forever. It's unlikely that showing your revenues will have any greater impact than being a number one featured product through any other route.
You can be copied if you stay silent and just do direct sales as well - if you're a company reliant on broad reach of a semi-technical, small-business (/revenue aspirational) audience, it seems like it's worth the risk.
One caveat is if your target market is entrepreneurs then being open about it might help differentiate yourself from competitors.
I’ve seen this a lot in stories like these as a way to get started and gain initial traction.
They state their profit margin is around 70-80%, and have 3 equity partners.
Lets assume they split the profits as their earnings, and each partner makes exactly a 1/3.
That would be about $20,000 a month (less taxes) or an annualized salary of approx $240,000. Which is very, very nice, but not worth spouting social change for.
Criticizing successful people isn't the answer.
Beyond that, his lifetime income, even assuming zero business expenses and a hyper optimistic business lifetime, is not remotely enough to guide a government. It's no even enough to buy a decent apartment building.
This income level is closer to the $1000 a month person than the Koch brothers by several decimal places. And the difference between how he got what he has vs theirs is like the difference between a faucet and a drain.
Making 76k a month, the creators here will take 1096 years to make 1 billion dollars.
Also I find it hard to believe that there are millions of Americans who barely make $1,000 a month.
Plug in $12,000 as the annual income, and that'll tell you that 24% of U.S. workers made that or less in 2014.
Looks like the number of full time U.S. workers in 2014 was 118.72 million: https://www.statista.com/statistics/192361/unadjusted-monthl...
That works out to be 28 million U.S. workers making <= $1,000 per month. Considering that's excluding part time workers, that should be make the calculation fairly conservative.
See also: https://howmuch.net/articles/how-much-americans-make-in-wage...
The specific numbers have changed in 6 years, but I don't find it all that unreasonable to suspect that there are many millions of U.S. citizens making less than $1,000 per month.
Also the last link to "howmuch.net" states that their numbers include any wage earners whatsoever.
"There is one important caveat to keep in mind when thinking about our dataset. The SSA numbers include any wage earners whatsoever, even part-time workers like students and teenagers. If the worker reports his or her income to the IRS on a W2 form, he or she is included in these stats."
The same is true for students, albeit in a lesser form. Nevertheless, students will rarely have full time, qualified jobs. They need the time to go to class, and have no qualifications or experience.
The fact that part timers are discounted, is because if you work 50% then it is to be expected that your monthly salary is half that of full time employment. Sure, some people may want to work more but cannot, but for many it is a choice that enables them to do something else. Raising kids for example.
Were not counting infants or dead people neither. Because it would not make sense. The point is to understand the wage situation of people when their wages are not influenced by something else, so that we can compare.
"What makes you so resilient against failure and so damn charming?"
But seriously I dont take issue with the concept of those kind of conversions, the problem I have is they tend muddy search results.
The questions (for those who won't click through):
"What's your background, and what are you currently working on?"
"What's your backstory and how did you come up with the idea?"
"How did you build Wavve?"
"Which were your marketing strategies to grow your business?"
"What are your goals for the future?"
"What were the biggest challenges you faced and obstacles you overcame?"
"Which are your greatest disadvantages? What were your worst mistakes?"
"If you had the chance to do things differently, what would you do?"
But at the end of day there is no innovation.
Or are we to assume you commercial efforts are well exceeding $76k mrr?
Market Share 2018
Despite far fewer devices, the Apple App Store has always made more revenue than Android. The most recent real numbers  I could find show this is a big difference.
I always assumed that’s why app devs roll out on iOS first.
> For podcasting to remain open and free, we must not leave major shortcomings for proprietary, locked-down services to exploit. Conversely, the more we strengthen the open podcast ecosystem with content, functionality, and ease of use, the larger the barrier becomes that any walled garden must overcome to be compelling.
And I suppose if I must choose a walled garden, I’d rather choose the one with the lowest walls.