What do you mean by âsporadic paymentsâ? Those who want to buy the licence simply buy it, either by paying once in whole and upfront, or by paying in parts monthly if Jolla enforces so by removing any other payment options. But it is EXACTLY the same user base, the exact same number of people, i.e. those who WANT to pay rather than use the free version. The subscription model doesnât change absolutely ANYTHING in this regard - it surely wonât make substantially more people pay than those who were buying the âperpetualâ licence, especially that subscription is actually considerably more expensive already after 10 months.
On the contrary, the one-time upfront licence purchase once paid in whole remains in Jollaâs hands forever, whereas monthly payments can be just stopped at literally any time, for a multitude of reasons - dissatisfaction of the user due to bugs and issues, losing or breaking the phone, death or illness, switching to other device / OS, getting into financial problems and having to reduce expenses, and a DAMN LOT more. Are you really telling me that monthly payments are more predictable than paying all in advance? I seriously donât think so, especially in this specific case of super-tiny and rather FIXED group of paying / supporting users. That theyâve only ordered 1000 units of the Community Phone (so called âfirst batchâ but I seriously doubt that there will be a second one) is a good indication of how many of those who financially support Jolla really are out there.
Mind you, I do not think that it is a typical case. Just look at the forums and youâll notice that majority of people have been owning the 10 III now. Those who keep using ancient 6- or 8- years old phones as their main device are minority.
Thatâs obviously your free choice to keep using it forever. Still, it doesnât make you a typical and representative case. During the time youâve been sticking with your X10, Iâve used the XA2, then the 10 III, and now the 10 V delivery is pending.
Please also remember, that either those âŹ49.99 or soon those âŹ5/month are in fact for the COMMERCIAL COMPONENTS only, namely AppSuport and MS Exchange. Not even for the XT9 text prediction anymore on the new Xperias as they will remove it, allegedly due to âlicensing issuesâ.
So maybe Jolla should change something else in their business model, maybe start charging for some more components than just AppSupport and MS Exchange, or for the entire OS, as those who do not need AppSupport or MS Exchange have been using Sailfish OS completely for free for years and were never expected to pay ANYTHING.
So on one hand for years theyâve been consciously limiting the group of their PAYING CUSTOMERS to just those who pay for AppSupport rather than the entire OS user base, and on the other hand theyâve been perpetually whining about lack of funds for development. THATâS the problem, and not whether those who want AppSupport are paying for it monthly or at once.
Over a decade of no support for commercial applications in their store, of which they might be earning some 30-40% per sale, no paid applications from Jolla themselves (e.g. the Weather app whose price might easily cover its API costs + some more, but no, Jolla just prefers to remove it and thatâs it).
There have always been (and there still are) LOTS of ways for Jolla to establish some multiple stable revenue streams.
And no, enforcing monthly payments from only AppSupport / MS Exchange users (as thatâs what oneâs payment gives him in return) CAN NOT and WILL NOT bring Jolla any SERIOUS increase of revenue, because it is a further SUB-GROUP of SFOS user base, i.e. something even smaller than the tiny group of people using SFOS. The whole rest, not using those two commercial components, keep using SFOS for free and not participating in anything. For years.
So enforcing undesired and disliked by many people subscriptions only on those who have always been paying is like PENALIZING those who have always paid and supported Jolla, while the whole rest who never paid and have always used SFOS X for free still wonât give a flying **** and will continue using it for free. I wouldnât be surprised if it turned out to be a larger group than those who pay. How hilarious it is.
So, once again, Jolla should reach out for additional revenue streams ELSEWHERE than by penalizing the tiny group of their most devoted and supporting users, and expecting that they keep financing thousands of those who for years have been using SFOS for free, never bought any licence and will not pay any subscription, either. Putting the entire financial burden only upon their most devoted user group is not just economically UNVIABLE, but also simply dishonest.
What isnât working is the business model of only charging for the AppSupport / MS Exchange, while letting everything else to be used completely for free by anyone. Hence the tiny sub-group of AppSupport users forced to finance thousands of users of the âfree versionâ (not using AppSuport at all, or pirating it, or using Waydroid, or whatever). Whereas thereâs a multitude of ways those UNPAYING users could (and should) be also enabled to participate in funding the OS development.
Yeah, so letâs keep making AppSupport / MS Exchange users ONLY (a few thousand people or so) pay more and more and continue funding the entire OS maintenance and development cost, while the whole rest continues not to pay anything as there is nothing else to pay for, even if they wanted, and actually not even any incentive to do it. Pretty wise and honest, a perfectly reasonable business model.
I never said that they should continue as before. Iâm saying that FINALLY other revenue streams should be enabled: paid applications in the store (on which Jolla could easily be taking 30-40% commission), paid major OS updates, paid Jolla applications (e.g. Jollaâs Weather as a paid app, covering the API cost and maybe bringing some profit), paid services (e.g. prioritized Helpdesk support) and LOTS more. All of which they NEVER bothered to even try, but instead for many years theyâve been expecting only the CORE COMMUNITY of most devoted SFOS users to PERPETUALLY fund their entire existence. Which is quite awful actually.
You can pay as much as you want. It will never be enough to secure Jollaâs existence if it is limited to just AppSupport / MS Exchange licence buyers (or now subscribers), while everyone else is provided the entire OS for free and not required (or even just enabled) in any other way to participate in SFOS maintenance and development cost by paying for literally anything. Maybe you belong to that SUPER-TINY group of people VOLUNTARILY willing to support Jolla just because you use Sailfish OS and want it to survive and further develop, but be sure that majority of people will not pay a single buck if it is not required.
So keep being shaved like a sheep (more and more, as just switching to subscriptions surely wonât help much, and regularly increasing the fees will surely occur), it wonât do anything as long as everyone else but AppSupport users is given SFOS for free and doesnât give a flying **** about how much YOU pay and whether you pay upfront or monthly.
