Comment by jwr

Comment by jwr a day ago

The thing is, nobody cares.

As long as consumers keep making uneducated choices and companies keep copying one another, that's what we will be getting, and honestly, that's what we deserve.

After all, people watch "reviews" of video gear on YouTube (pretty much all "reviewers" get the gear for free and then pretend they are objective). These "reviewers" use the gear for all of several hours before making the video and forgetting about the gear. But that's what people base their buying decisions on.

And then, "competition" doesn't exist, because companies seem to be hell-bent on copying one another's idiotic ideas. Everybody is afraid to take a bolder step and make something different because, you know, next quarter's profits, and bonuses.

So, nobody cares.

nileshtrivedi a day ago

Louis Rossmann is putting together a Consumer Action Task Force. If people care, now would be a good time to show it.

Reply View 0 replies

mihaaly 18 hours ago

> As long as consumers keep making uneducated choices and companies keep copying one another, that's what we will be getting, and honestly, that's what we deserve.

So true! So sad!

Reply View 0 replies

wat10000 21 hours ago

The revenue boost you get from this dumb shit is easily measurable and attributable. “Let’s charge our existing customers $5 for some nonsense” -> bigger bonus that year.

The long term revenue hit you get from pissing off your customers is nearly impossible to measure or attribute.

Occasionally you’ll see a company where the leadership believes in the long term value of not doing this crap. They might do pretty well as a result. (Fans would point to Apple as a huge example, YMMV.) But even with an example to imitate, the incentives are almost impossible to overcome, especially since your revenue story will get worse before it gets better if you change course. And those rare good companies are vulnerable to change in leadership that takes them down the bad path.

Reply View 3 replies

EvanAnderson 17 hours ago

> The long term revenue hit you get from pissing off your customers is nearly impossible to measure or attribute.
As people become accepting of this practice I worry there won't be a long-term hit.
Tech consumers don't understand what kind of services actually warrant a subscription because there's a recurring cost to the provider (renting CPU or storage capacity) versus those that are just rent seeking (ahem-- "recovering development costs").
I was heartened when mainstream media was up-in-arms over auto manufacturers trying to charge monthly fees for features like heated seats or remote start. I worry that consumers can't identify those kinds of gouging behavior with technology and will just accept and normalize these practices.

Reply View | 2 replies
- wat10000 17 hours ago
  
  There’s only a long-term hit to the extent that there are alternatives without these practices. (This could be a less-terrible competitor, a different category of product, or just going without.)
  If every car company charges a subscription for seat heaters, then maybe this will drive a few people who are on the fence to not buy a car at all, but it’s going to be a very small effect. If there’s a competitor that sucks less, the impact will be greater.
  If there’s is no such competitor, then this behavior leaves an opening for one. But it’s a total crapshoot as to whether any company will actually seize the opportunity.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies
- Falos 13 hours ago
  
  People are /loosely/ averse and annoyed, but towards the market in general and that doesn't really materialize in a direct loss. "Boy I sure hate how _______ these days" isn't aimed at some particular product. The phrase names the scene at large.
  Yes, everything sucks now, will Joe Sixpack thus stop buying ...everything?
  In such an environment why WOULDN'T I take advantage of the nuisances that I can now safely get away with? I gain control, data, monopolistic single-sourcing, and good old revenue, all by being just a little bit shitty. No more than the next guy.
  "Quality" is greatly amorphous before buying a product and the stage is increasingly virtual. The only certain metric can be ye olde "bottom line" (price) and indulging shitty practices allows you to undercut. Consumer gets what they pay for but reckons most other offerings have the same shitty nuisances (and is mostly right) and reckons it's an uphill struggle to ferret out which ones are genuinely good quality and not consumer-second (and is definitely right, people crave the product opinions of genuine humans and these are being increasingly coopted)
  
  Reply View | 0 replies

dgb23 a day ago

You're assuming that these practices are actually beneficial in any way on the market. That's a fallacy. Just because a company is making money, doesn't mean they are making good products.

Reply View 1 reply

jollyllama 20 hours ago

Where do you get that idea? It's in no way implied in GP's comment. These practices don't have to benefit the company at all. GP is just saying, as long as enough people keep buying despite the practices, then the practices will continue.

Reply View | 0 replies