In the case of Apple you’re really paying for access to the platform, as you don’t have a choice. But in the case of Patreon, I don’t think they offer anything in terms of reach - by this I mean I’ve never made the decision to support a creator because they were on the platform. Typically if I decide to support someone, I just go to whatever they point me to - and I think this was the authors point (especially for very narrow/vertical creators).
A better example of a more ‘reach’ offering would probably be YouTube’s similar offering (although I don’t know their fee structure), which goes beyond just reach and has very low friction for creators who make content on that platform.
Honestly I feel like Patreon as a platform is pretty underwhelming from the donator side of things, nor do I see much in terms of what’s changed to improve the experience over the years as their fees have increased - but I have no idea what has changed on the creator side.
I think the big takeaway (no surprise) is that the creator really owns the donator, not the platform - vs someplace like Apple where they have a much stronger relationship with the customer than your typical app developer does.
> I mean I’ve never made the decision to support a creator because they were on the platform.
I have. It's nice to have a centralized UI for your donations and I would never enter my payment information just to support a single creator with a dollar or two.
I think whenever HN readers deride a product because it doesn't suit them, that's not an effective argument. Like do you have any idea how strong conversion rates are on email? Or even paper mail? Stuff we all hate can be very effective at growing an audience. I honestly don't use Patreon at all and we rejected it as a platform for content monetization at my company, but I can also tell you that our first-party approach wasn't exactly a slam dunk.
A better example of a more ‘reach’ offering would probably be YouTube’s similar offering (although I don’t know their fee structure), which goes beyond just reach and has very low friction for creators who make content on that platform.
Honestly I feel like Patreon as a platform is pretty underwhelming from the donator side of things, nor do I see much in terms of what’s changed to improve the experience over the years as their fees have increased - but I have no idea what has changed on the creator side.
I think the big takeaway (no surprise) is that the creator really owns the donator, not the platform - vs someplace like Apple where they have a much stronger relationship with the customer than your typical app developer does.