I have a problem with the idea that $9.99 is expensive. I bought a croissant to go with my coffee this morning and ended up spending that.
The idea that using hours that bill at $150-$200 (current stab at journeyman iOS dev rate) to build products that sell "pricey" at anything over $1.99 is a problem. Problem might be the wrong word. Con.
Marco will be fine. Or he won't, I guess. That's not my problem with this line of pricing thinking.
It probably is, but that's not why I paid for it; I paid for it because it's the coffee shop in my building and I'm not going to go out of my way to optimize over 5-6 dollars.
If it was crappy coffee, it would not matter to me if it cost $0.50. I can get crappy coffee for free in the lobby of the parking garage I park at.
Though this is oft-repeated: nothing is "free". Pocket plans to make money off you somehow, whether directly or indirectly. Instapaper is simply more up-front about how and when you will pay.
> Instapaper is simply more up-front about how and when you will pay.
Whatever Pocket ends up doing, nothing's preventing Instapaper from doing it too.
They may not need to, but as we've seen in the past, you can't assume that that one-time purchase means you're now the customer again (and not the product).
The difference, as far as I see it, is that Pocket makes being free a selling point, whereas Instapaper users are used to paying for features. Instapaper can continue to exist without substantially shifting business models for the foreseeable future - Pocket can't.
The idea that using hours that bill at $150-$200 (current stab at journeyman iOS dev rate) to build products that sell "pricey" at anything over $1.99 is a problem. Problem might be the wrong word. Con.
Marco will be fine. Or he won't, I guess. That's not my problem with this line of pricing thinking.