Any idea what this will look like? Will it come with Bear, or will it be part of a more premium Bear subscription?
1 Like
Iâm very curious about this too.
My personal preference would be a one-time purchase (even if that comes with only a year of updates) but can continue using it as-is as long as the operating system runs it.
However, a close second would be to have it rolled into a combined (bundled) subscription with Bear, where the cost is significantly less than subscribing individually.
3 Likes
Totally fair question, and one weâve seen come up a lot 
Honestly we havenât decided anything yet. Right now our focus is on getting the app right, figuring out whatâs working, whatâs missing, and how much interest there is; before we settle on a business model.
That said: weâve heard the subscription-fatigue feedback, and personally weâd love to land on something that isnât a subscription. Though thatâs a hope, not a promise. Nothing is locked in either direction yet.
Weâll share more as soon as we have something concrete. Thanks for being patient (and vocal!) while we figure it out.
6 Likes
If itâs a subscription, Iâm definitely not interested. You know the pros and cons, but Iâve had my fill of subscription apps that donât offer anything that requires a subscription (such as server-side processing that costs money to the developers).
1 Like
Yep, I would not subscribe. I prefer a trial period and then pay for a major version.
2 Likes
Actually you could offer both, a subscription and a lifetime license for major versions. iAPresenter is one of many apps that chose that business model.
Yeah, Iâm also interested in the pricing model; mainly because subscriptions for most apps (those that donât offer media or licensed content) end up giving you that feeling that your pocket has a small hole for every app youâre subscribed to. Most users donât want to rent software but rather purchasing it outright and knowing that, whenever they need it, they will be able to use it.
Subscription fatigue is real and when youâre paying every month for an app just in case you think you may need it that month ends up being draining.
If you release the app without a discouraging price point I will probably buy it. Iâm saying this, because many devs include a lifetime option but price it so exorbitantly expensive, like 5 whole years of a monthly subscription, in order to push people towards the monthly fee.
Let me propose you an âin-betweenâ model. It is called the hybrid subscription model and some well known apps such as Good Links already have it implemented. Maybe you already know how it works, but let me explain it: you get the app with the core features you want it to launch with. Fully functional. But you have a series of extra features behind a âproâ subscription. But you stagger the new featuresâ lainch. Then, if you get the annual subscription, you will receive the new features released during that year but you keep them forever. Once you finish your annual subscription you can keep downloading and using the perfectly functional app, with no restrictions, plus all the pro features launched and unlocked while you were a âproâ subscriber. For ever. Then you can keep launching new âproâ features to entice old and new users to get a pro subscription, for the new features.
Anyways, if you price it with a single, lifetime license, Iâll probably get that. For now, I think Iâll try thr beta by enrolling in the TestFlight beta. Expect tons of feedback! See you soon!
1 Like
I think that would be great if a one-time reasonable purchase. I think the app is great.
2 Likes
I too have subscription fatigue. But honestly, as long as the price is not outrageous, I will be paying for this no matter what.
Iâm all for the old software models where you pay for the current version, and then when the next version comes out, you pay an upgrade price.
The fact is, if youâre not making money, then you folks are not going to be around, and I want you to be around.
This idea of these lifetime, one-time software purchases just isnât going to cut it, but the subscription model has also gotten overboard, in my opinion.
What messed this whole thing up was when Apple first came out with the App Store and people were selling these apps for 75 cents and 50 cents. That distorted peopleâs idea of software and what it should cost.
1 Like
I switched to Typora when the Panda beta stopped working for me 6-7 months ago. $14.99 one-time purchase and itâs a solid app. Iâm looking forward to seeing how Lettera develops because I enjoyed Panda and have used Bear since it was released.
1 Like
Another pricing option is this:
You get access to updates for a year, and after that time you can either keep using the app as is, with no further updates, or re-up the license. Or you can renew the license every couple of years if there are new features that are worth paying for.
2 Likes
@kirkmc Thatâs precisely the hybrid subscription model I talked about just a few comments above yours. There are other developers that have adopted it and it seems to work quite well.
I donât mind paying a reasonable subscription fee, so long as the devs deliver updates. Itâs when devs fail to deliver updates to an app, or a pathetic update of a few in-app icons, is what actually breaks the subscription contract to my mind. Not naming any companiesâŚ
The hybrid subscription model is quite appealing though
What kind of price are we talking? Because historically one-off licensing prices have always been high.
People tend to think these one-off licence prices are expensive because theyâre so used to âcheapâ subscription costs, people have lost the framework of what a piece of software actually costs because theyâre used a few a bucks a month.
By comparison to the 90s, the one-off licensing today also tends to be incredibly cheap. Here are a couple of examples.
Word, the original Word 1.0 was $375, thats $1,200 today
BBEdit was around $80 in the 90s, around $160 today. This software is still developed and its actually cheaper than the 90s, being sold for around $60 (you can guess why, competition, âfreeâ options, volume, subscription pressure etc.)
notably though, standalone software doesnât come with lifetime updates. you have to pay, often for every major new version. Which is why if priced well, subscriptions often (but not always) are cheaper or around the same as a standalone license, but that can be hard to see (and obviously thats no where near a universal truth)
So what would people actually be willing to pay? whats reasonable? are people willing to pay $40, $60, more, for a one off license?
For myself, I think id see no issue paying $60 for bear, and (depending on features and scope) maybe $30 for panda (it really depends on what it would be capable of). I could pay more.. thats just a finger in the air âfeels about rightâ number.
worth maybe a note as well, that one of the issues I see with subscriptions isnât the cost exactly, but the lockin. With one off licensing, you could make a decision on what to do if they hiked the upgrade price. with subscriptions that decision is harder because access to the software is dependant on continuing to pay for the subscription.
and with mature software subscription can come across as rent extraction rather than paying for continued improvements and support, where as a developing supported software a subscription might be cost effective. Panda (and perhaps bear will reach a point where theyâre mature, and it becomes hard to justify paying a subscription for what might be perceived as essentially perpetual software rent.
Lock-in is more of a worry if your files are only accessible in an app. Something like Bear, which stores files in a database, makes it impossible to access the files if you donât pay. Lettera works with text files, so you can access them with other apps.
Just as an aside. I was using an iPhone app to store highlights from books. It was free, and was rarely updated. Suddenly, the developer added a few features - including some he had told me would be âcoming soonâ a few years ago - and made it a subscription app at $30 a year. Nope, not gonna happen. Not only because itâs way too expensive for an app like that, but also because the history of the app has been that of sparse updates. That $30 price is where a lot of single-feature apps are going, and theyâre killing the app economy. And my data is locked in that app and I canât export it.
The developer of one popular Mac app once told me that they had tried a number of different prices for the app over the years - fixed prices, not subscriptions - and the result was the same amount of gross sales regardless of the price.
In Bear you can export your notes as markdown or text files at any time, even without a subscription. Your statement is factually incorrect.
1 Like
Iâm so sorry that it is factually incorrect, and I bow to your correction. There are many apps where your data is locked in the app if you donât have a subscription, such as the one I mentioned in my post. Itâs good to know that Bear, which stores date in a database and not in individual files, is not like this.