App.net pricing changes

by

When we announced the join.app.net project, our yearly pricing was an attempt to validate that a critical mass of people would financially support the existence of a service like App.net. Our stated goal for hitting a “critical mass” was 10,000 paying members. Fortunately, the market has told us “yes”, and then some.

In the 12 weeks since join.app.net was announced, several important milestones have been reached:

Because of this momentum and scale, we’ve decided to introduce a couple of updates to our pricing model.

First, we are introducing a $5/month Member plan. Some folks have been asking for a monthly plan since day one, and given all of the progress that has been made in the App.net ecosystem, we think now is a good time to introduce it.

Second, we are dropping the Member price from $50/year to $36/year. All existing members will get the benefits of the yearly price drop. Existing members will get additional months added to their plan so that they see the same pricing benefits that new yearly members get. If you are an existing member, you should have received an email from us explaining the extra time that has been added to your subscription.

This news, combined with our new Developer Incentive Program is all part of our commitment to enabling a successful, sustainable ecosystem. We fundamentally believe that 3rd-party developers will innovate faster, create better applications on more platforms, and make more users happy than any single company could. As the platform matures, and the community and app selection grows, we believe that the value and appeal of App.net can only increase. Remember: we are just getting started.

Thanks,
Dalton Caldwell
App.net founder/CEO

  • http://id.mocek.org/phil Phil

    Dalton, are we members or customers? I recall paying for a service, not joining a membership organization.

    • Dalton Caldwell

      “Member” is the name of the pricing tier, along with “Developer”. This is the terminology we used to distinguish between prices on http://join.app.net

      • neuroscr

        Phil is right. The perspective that we’re more than just members is important. We’re paying customers of a service which is not the same class as a member of twitter.

        • http://id.mocek.org/phil Phil

          Neuroscr: I believe that we, as customers of Mixed Media Labs and users of App.net, are not, as you wrote, “more than just members.” We are not members at all; we are customers. Twitter users are neither members nor customers; we are the product.

    • Rob

      Phil what distinguishes a member from a customer? Either way Dalton has an obligation to bus to provide the best service available.

      • http://id.mocek.org/phil Phil

        Rob: I didn’t join an organization, I paid a fee in exchange for the ability to use a service for a period of time. I am a customer of Mixed Media Labs and a user of App.net.

        • Fastred

          Hi Phil – its marketing. And if you don’t like it, you have a choice :)

        • otheronetruegod

          Yes, because no one ever payed money in return for being a member of something.

          Grow up.

          • http://twitter.com/maradydd Meredith L Patterson

            One does pay money in order to become a member of a credit union or a co-op, as Phil pointed out, and that membership carries with it certain extra privileges, e.g., the ability to influence organisational policy through voting. It’s reasonable to want to know what your money’s buying you.

          • otheronetruegod

            Yeah, it sure would be nice if there were some kind of terms of service that stated exactly what’s going on. Man, it sure would be amazing if someone would post that somewhere.

            https://alpha.app.net/legal/terms/

          • Phil

            OOTG: The App.net terms of service page to which you referred does not describe qualifications for membership or benefits of membership. It does not even include the word “membership”. The only use of the word “member” there is in the statement, “we are providing developer and member tier subscriptions.” At most, it seems, “member” is a class of subscribers to the App.net service.

          • otheronetruegod

            Shockingly: yes. As stated repeatedly by Dalton, “Member” is the name of a tier. As someone who is part of the App.net community, you are therefore a “member” of that community, regardless of any monies transferred. You do not get any privileges other than those provided to you by the terms of service. Anything else you might think you get is entirely in your mind. You are being ridiculously pedantic and making a lot of noise about nothing. Keep it up, though, I think you’re convincing people of something.

          • fruit loops

            Not all paid memberships include voting rights. Gym memberships, for example. As for knowing what you’re getting for your money, it’s in pretty big letters on the front page. “$5/mo – One month of service.” Do we need a more detailed description? “$5/mo – One month of service, no voting rights”?

            I’m just trying to identify the real problem here.

        • Asdf

          What a douche

        • fruit loops

          jeebus pedantic christ

        • Jtmoney

          Dude, chill the fuck out. Jesus Fucking Christ.

        • Jtmoney

          Just did my research on this Phil “I Know my Rights!” Mocek fellow. Turns out he’s a bit of a crazy ass neckbeard type; read more about his insane behavior here: http://www.seattleweekly.com/2011-01-26/news/phil-mocek-the-tsa-s-worst-nightmare/

          Phil. You’re absolutely out of your fucking mind.

        • recklesscoder

          The comparison of App.Net’s service and a mobile phone carrier service makes sense in the context of comparing a mobile cell customer’s phone number to an App.Net username.

          In the old days prior to 2003 some of us remember how cell phone companies used to coerce customers to stay with them because the customer would lose their phone number if they canceled service.

          A person’s phone number is a unique identity within the world of telecommunications in a similar way that a person’s App.Net username is their identity in the App.Net world (not to mention other services, which are obviously out of App.Net’s control). And the longer a person has that App.Net identity the more valuable it becomes to them.

          I don’t see how App.Net would not be tempted to take advantage of this identity any differently than pre-2003 cell phone companies did: As a way to keep people using the service or face the loss of their App.Net identity. And the longer a person uses App.Net (assuming App.Net is successful) the more valuable that identity becomes to the customer.

          The solution to the phone number issue was to make phone numbers portable. Obviously, this isn’t the solution for App.Net, but from a customer standpoint there needs to be more thought put into this. Sixty days just dosen’t seem to be nearly long enough “grace” period. I’m not sure what is, but, I think a year seems much more customer friendly.

          The identity is key here. App.Net is providing a service for customers to grow an identity and provide content to App.Net through that identity.

    • Phil

      Relax, Phil.

    • scottelloco

      You’re not a member or a customer. You’re “the market.”

  • http://luxurybauble.com/ Erik Schmidt

    I like that the price dropped, but not too far. I also think the introduction of the monthly plan will give people the ability to test the waters before they jump in with both feet.

  • http://Documentally.com/ Documentally

    Great move. I am loving App.net as much now as on day one. I hope this acts as an incentive so that others can find the same value I have.

  • Chris

    What happens to user names if someone cancels their account?

    That is before there was little chance of name squatting like on Twitter do to the high $50 entry fee. With $5 a month, similiar to Domain Names people are more likely to signup to grab a name. If they sign up and then remove their credit card, the day after the first month will their username be rereleased? Or after what time? If it goes into a limbo for 60 or 90 days as Comcast does with email addresses, people may also pay $5 once ever 90 days to keep the name from being used.

    • Brandon

      Hi Chris. I asked App.net your first question and here is the email support response I received. You may find the answer somewhat troubling as I have—you might have thought there would be a measure in place to export your data from the service or prolong it’s existence so as to convince you to re-join once more in the future (similar model: Flickr).

      Question: “What happens to a username/profile if a monthly/yearly subscription is not
      renewed?”

      App.net Support: “If an account is not renewed it is deleted. When it’s deleted the username is up for grabs to anyone that signs up.”

      • Bryan Berg (@berg)

        Hi Brandon,

        Bryan from App.net here. While it’s true that we won’t allow cancelled monthly subscriptions to squat on names forever, there will be a grace period in which the account’s data is retained; in addition, we already provide a data export tool to all of our users. We’ll make that tool available to expired accounts even without additional payment during the grace period. I expect the grace period will be about 60 days.

        Hopefully that helps to clarify the response you received from our support team. If you have any comments as to how we could do a better job of handling this, or I can additionally clarify things for you at all, I’m on the service as @berg or you can email me at bryan@app.net.

        -Bryan

    • http://www.codedevelopr.com/ Jason Davis

      I would like to know the answer to this as well. If a monthly payer, skips a couples months and comes back, is all there previous data lost or still there? Furthermore I welcome the new pricing scheme and I think it will attract a lot more new users

  • http://twitter.com/nickcicero Nick Cicero

    Nice! Look forward to connecting with everyone on App.net @nickcicero

  • http://www.darnellclayton.com Darnell Clayton

    $5/month is reasonable to test out the service. Wish other services like @Disqus would integrate with it though.

  • http://twitter.com/leicaman leicaman

    Good job! And thanks! I suspect more people will join as Twitter implodes from lameness.

  • Peterxyu

    Punctuation error.

    Fortunately, the market has told us “yes”, and then some.

    Commas and periods always go inside the quotation marks in American English.

    • http://www.alexandergieg.org/ Alexander Gieg

      Actually, in old American print publishers conventions, commas and periods went below the quotation marks, so that both characters took a single “character space”. Then when technologies that forced you to have them as separate characters went about, some chose to place commas and periods before the quotation, and others to place them afterwards. Since the former looked better with the fonts of the time, it ended up becoming favored. But current computer fonts take pains to make the other way look better, and so the old fashion trend reversed.

      Besides, placing commas and periods within the quotes can be confusing, because it doesn’t make clear whether that punctuation is in the original. By placing within the quote *only* what the other guy actually spoke or wrote, you make sure the original meaning isn’t messed with. It’s far more semantically appropriate.

  • Waxwing1

    FYI – the link to iOS apps shows podcasts not apps.

  • http://www.alexandergieg.org/ Alexander Gieg

    Nice to see the price dropping. It’s still three to five times more expensive than what I’d feel comfortable paying, so I’ll hold on it, expecting it to drop down to something like $10/year and $1/month.

    However, given some of the discussions below, here’s a suggestion I’d love you to at least think about: offer an option for one to permanently purchase a username. Ideally it should allow his existing content to live on even if the owner stopped paying the active service fee. This might be priced higher, and could perhaps specify that after, let’s say, 5 years, although the name stays preserved, the contents is moved to something like Amazon Glacier for archival purposes, but remains recoverable if at any point the user decides to reactivate the account.

    I bet lot’s of users would gladly pay for this additional layer of assurance and protection once they’ve heavily invested in adding content to the service. I know I would (once the price of the live service drops and I sign up, evidently).

  • Weston Dunn

    I’m glad to see that an ecosystem such as App.net can mange to be successful in these trying times of social media we live in. This pricing model seems to be the right way to go, but I do have a fear that this lower pricing structure may lead to lower quality content and conversation. What is App.net’s strategy on battling SPAM posts?

  • Ajguyot

    Might want to fix the App Store link for the 10 iOS apps. It sends you to the iTunes Store and looks for podcasts instead of apps.

  • http://www.ernmander.com ernmander

    I think it’s a great pricing policy.

  • http://about.me/curioSEOty Chris

    I’m with you as soon as you offer paypal…