Thread

Zero-JS Hypermedia Browser

Relays: 5
Replies: 2
Generated: 20:43:39
Yeah but in this case, it’s a one time fee for a recurring expense. And the amount of money that comes in has to keep increasing over time semi-exponentially to be sustainable, or the costs need to be cut (you get worse service). This is worse than cross subsidization which is doable if managed right.
2025-10-31 16:07:03 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent 2 replies ↓
Login to reply

Replies (2)

Which I see that you recognize here. This model works _realy_ well to make offering products sustainable. Distribution is the right word I suppose. nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzq5455pmtewaacws6a73hxkqkea6fjwcm3keq9vqu3q7930nl4k9aqydhwumn8ghj7argv4nx7un9wd6zumn0wd68yvfwvdhk6tcppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qqs0eklzt2c24g9nwalnmyxmp8jtln0m3e2ffahzl6y5f8fty29yfuq408rt3
2025-10-31 16:14:53 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent 1 replies ↓ Reply
> Yeah but in this case, it’s a one time fee for a recurring expense Yeah it hides the actual cost of offering a service. Appealing to user's ideals, which in some cases is useful. As someone who prefers one-time costs over reoccurring costs, I also understand that unless you can accurately bill me, its not a true model. While it's nice to save money when purchasing bulk, I prefer up-front costs for a sense of "freedom" and "completeness". I still think it's possible to sell accurately priced products with longer time frames. The same distribution still occurs right, if I pay you up front, you have access to more capital, which can be more valuable compared to minimum short term payments. Therefore a tax is added to short term payment plans and/or a discount applied to initial payments/contracts.
2025-10-31 16:22:38 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent 1 replies ↓ Reply