For example, the monthly fees for:
- Reddit Premium - $5.99 - Evernote - £5.99 ($7.39) - YouTube Premium - £11.99 ($14.80) - Experian Credit Check - £14.99 ($18.50) - Microsoft (Office) 365 Personal - £5.99 ($7.39)
Whether these services are worth the money is not my question - but is it not profitable to offer a e.g. $2 monthly tier (in general, not for these sites in particular)? On Patreon (different I realise) $1/$2 supporter tiers do seem more common so there are obviously people who would pay $1 a month for something but wouldn't pay $6 a month. Which is what I'd expect.
Obvious ones like the fixed portion of a credit card transaction fee.
Less obvious ones like customer support.
And of course segmenting the market between customers with money and the extremely price sensitive is a proven business strategy.
These are products or services I genuinely want to pay for, but if my usage is essentially only the first $1 out of the required $25, I'm going to just use a $5 VPS for the same or higher specs.
Paid tier users come with costs, they want support and queries solved quickly
By making the cost small (2 cups of coffee a month) but not tiny they actually encourage users to use and value the service (how many free tools have you neglected over time?)
They want the slightly richer customers to take their base packages as they will be more likely to buy the expensive packages in the future.
- $5 per month seems very cheap to IT people in USA.
- they think that if someone is willing to pay, $2 or $5 dollars makes no difference to the customer because it’s so little anyway.
I wonder how these companies do their market studies.