Regarding processing fees

A limited pool of creators and patrons. Maybe in the future, talk about the features. bring it up, mention it in some fashion, let people comment. Rolling it out on such short notice and putting many of us and our patrons in a panic is extremely aggravating.

I know from your end of things how much this sucks and how hard it is dealing with it all behind the scenes. I’ve been where you are in a few different jobs and making these posts to try to remain neutral is how it goes. However, customer service is a key element to everything business. Making a point to appologize in your posts for the hardship. Relate to your user base. React to peoples comments with more sincerity than “we hear you BUT” comments. The, “we put thought and care into this” and getting “reactions from creators and patrons over a number of months” from a limited pool of creators just invalidates our concerns, as if they are the only creators and patrons that matter in this scenario.

Thank you for putting our concerns forward. I hope they are legitimately heard.

2 Likes

I’m starting to get notifications from the people I’m supporting - they all seem to be apologizing and understanding if people leave. :frowning:

1 Like

Here’s something I hadn’t thought of, but saw a content creator post on Twitter just now:

“I support other creators out of my Patreon account, directly. So … are you going to charge my patrons a processing fee to support me, and then charge me additional fees to support other creators? That’s double-dipping.”

3 Likes

Same here. I also did the same myself. I can do nothing but apologize on behalf of patreons’ lack there of. I feel terrible that my patrons are seemingly stuck with this and i will also have to stop supporting some creators because this is going to bump me over my budget for support. It’s an all around sucky situation. :frowning:

1 Like

I have never been able to directly support people from my patreon account directly but yeah, if this is a thing, this is a very important question. o.O

1 Like

As far as I can tell, this increases Patreon’s cut of gross payments. If this costs me more than 10% of my Patrons, I will come out worse off.

2 Likes

I just had a patron who’s been with me since launching in October 2014 decrease their pledge from $20 to $14. I have a lot of international patrons, and they’re especially frustrated because they also pay VAT (as was the case with this patron). Some of my patrons are in the “I’m upset but I’ll wait and see” category. Some are saying “that sucks but I’ll stick with you.” One informed me of other crowdfunding options in the event that “Patreon goes out of business (and they might from this).”

My end goal isn’t for patrons to say “that sucks but I’ll stick with you.” It’s for them to say “I’m sticking with you and I’m thrilled about it.”

I’m just sharing this so you’ll have some feedback as to how my patrons are reacting so far. I do hope things get better and not worse after the official Patreon email goes out.

7 Likes

I’m sorry. Especially considering that we have no clue about the nature of your control group, I have to react to this comment with skepticism. The reaction you claim to have accumulated from creators over a number of months seem to be unhealthy, especially considering how this blew up upon announcing it to everyone else.

5 Likes

One of the core recommendations for running a successful patreon is a high number of patrons. 100 $1 patrons is more stable than 10 $10 patrons, which is more stable than 1 $100 patron. It’s also easier to accommodate lower tiers as they often have less major rewards.

These changes, especially considering the flat fee portion on every single pledge, flies in the face of the 100x$1 model and prioritizes a few big spenders instead of a big community.

This also isn’t something you would adequately be able to test in a control group because I’d imagine control groups only have a handful of patrons and patreon pages to begin with. You don’t have situations where you have one person pledging to 10+ pages.

At the very least it should be processed for the overall transaction and not per pledge. If someone pledges $1 to 15 people, it should be treated as a $15 transaction for the purposes of fees (total fee would be $0.785). If calculated individually per pledge, the fees instead come out to $5.685.

Even if a portion of my earnings still has to go to fees, that’s still much more agreeable than sticking a person with a $0.35 charge for each pledge. That’s far better for the patron and pledge retention, which in turn is better for me as a creator.

4 Likes

Zedrin, I was wondering about exactly that. One of my patrons just informed me they’re pledging to 80 creators. I think that sort of generosity should be rewarded. I’m also wondering if there was a logistical reason why the charge can’t be made as a lump sum, given a one-transaction fee, and then distributed among the creators? It’d really help if we could know why this isn’t possible, so we can inform our patrons. (Or if it IS possible, that’d be even better!)

5 Likes

Thank you so much on the update. It’s a lot easier for patrons and creator understand how the payment works now. :slight_smile:

However, I think patron shouldn’t chip in as much as they should’ve already. As this is a place where they want to support an artist, it’s not compulsory for some of them (unlike food, car, loans, college,etc.), therefore, some aren’t willing to pay more than they need to.

Plus, what about the ones who pledge into multiple artist, they can’t afford that few more cents (it adds up really quick, 3 $1 pledge to different is almost (exclude the percentage) a dollar, they might want to drop one of the artist even though they really don’t want to. Since the fee could potentially pay for more than 1-2 more artist that have a $1 tier (with the old system).

Can you stop telling us how we should be with our patrons and how our patrons should look at this change, and take reality into account instead. You are not listening.
As for having researched this for months with many creators, that’s such an obvious exaggeration. This forum is supposed to be for community feedback, but you certainly did not ask for opinions here. I distinctly remember this being mentioned in passing, and getting very concerned reactions, but there was no discussion, it got buried. The staff did not want to hear feedback. And what on earth stopped you from doing a site-wide survey to get a proper perspective on how many people wanted this? The problem with you guys is you have a handful of pet creators, probably massive ones, and they’re the only ones you ever seem to consult. And you’re far too in love with your own ideas to make sensible decisions.
I cannot explain this to my patrons and I won’t. The site already made it all but impossible for me to get anyone new on board; now if they start leaving, they will do so with my blessing and an invitation to follow me to a more grown-up alternative.

8 Likes

@carla, if this was so heavily researched, why has not a single person in this thread heard about this change until yesterday? Where are the creators who were part of this research?

4 Likes

Finding new ways to “explain” this to my patrons won’t change their budgets. I can’t magically use words to make an extra 35 cents per $1 pledge appear in their bank accounts. “Talking to our patrons” isn’t going to fix this problem.

I know that I, for one, am going to have to cut back on the number of pledges I make. I’m supporting 12 people right now because that’s the amount of money I have to give. Four of those people are going to get cut because my $1 pledges are now costing me $1.35 and the new total goes over my budget.

The math isn’t something you can argue with, so can you stop acting as if it is? It feels like gaslighting. It’s not respectful. You’ve instated a change, without consulting most of your userbase, that’s going to impact our businesses in a negative way and now you’re trying to tell us it’s for our own good. We’re telling you it’s not. At least admit that you didn’t understand that because your apparently much smaller test didn’t prepare you for it.

3 Likes

This. Totally gaslighting and also, dare I say, incredibly patronizing. I too have to have to cut down on pledges to other creators, seeing as I already pay VAT and that was aggravating enough.

2 Likes

Wait wait wait. Patreon engineers are not seriously so clueless as to charge your credit card 12 times are they?

And furthermore they’re not also so seriously clueless as to charge you at all if you’re actually also a creator and receiving the money from other Patreons?

Tell me it ain’t so. I mean, the mind boggles that they could get such a simple bit of engineering wrong.

I was hoping someone would mention the VAT! Yes, this will be a test, I think, of how good Patreon are at listening. There must be a way of standardising/reducing processing fees other than simply passing them on to the patron.

I think this explains it nicely.

2 Likes

The charges were definitely messed up this time, with more being taken from my bank account than usual. (Usually most or all is paid from my pledges.)

2 Likes

Just adding my voice to the discontents.

Patreon, you just slapped all our small-pledge patrons in the face and are now asking us to explain to them why it’s a good thing. You made us look like poopheads to people we care about.

4 Likes