I see this as the point to any subscription model. Of course they want you paying for more than you use/consume.
Id rather buy things.
I don’t want a car subscription. I want to buy a car.
I don’t want a book subscription. I want to buy a car.
I don’t a compute subscription. I want to buy compute hours.
Etc etc
I'd like to pay a reasonable monthly subscription with a small fee per mile once I go over some minimum for my tier.
Once autonomous vehicles are stable, I'm presuming I'll be able to hail a car in 5 or 10 mins via app. I guess the only question is what to do in full-on emergencies. For example, when the zombie apocalypse begins, or the aliens final attack. How do I get out of town?
If you look at a car as an investment, "you're holding it wrong" is the best I can come up with as to how I feel about it. To me, a car is just a really specialized tool. I don't expect my wrenches and socket sets to appreciate in value the longer I hold them. Cars are made by the thousands every day/week/month/year. We don't expect our mobile devices/laptops/desktops to appreciate either. This whole depreciating argument confuses me. Maybe some people just have a hard time equating something with that kind of price tag as simply a tool?
There are very few cars that are investment worthy, and if that's the kind of car you're after, then so be it. But to the 99.99999% of people looking for a car, it is simply something to serve a purpose.
Forecasts give days of notice, so I guess an autonomous vehicle ride-hailing service could have a million extra cars drives themselves in overnight. But refueling them would be a challenge. It's already a challenge for normal cars today (without using more fuel by rearranging fleets of cars between cities).
Also, sometimes they change traffic flow for evacuations, like contraflow lane reversal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraflow_lane_reversal) or using the shoulders as extra lanes. I wonder how well autonomous vehicle software handles that.
I use a car that it’s more efficient to buy it. Not because I love buying cars. Cars are just an expense and having a fixed cost is nice.
Id love to live in a city that doesn’t require a car. Maybe one day again.
Or a computER.
I barely know 'er.
There would be many customers buying on different schedules and that would aggregate into a predictable cash flow.
This is a solved problem as companies have sold software for 50 years.
Subscriptions are more profitable, that’s why companies do it. Not because there’s any realistic business reason (other than wanting more money for less work).
Using dark patterns like subscriptions at this point seems to me that kagi doesn't trust their product or its users.
Just like you can go to the gym every day - if everyone with the membership did that they would not be able to function. But it doesn't mean you can't.
Unlimited isn’t real, especially for something like search where it’s not like I need unlimited searches.
The best gyms are pay per session. Gyms are also special because people who buy memberships and never use them subsidize real gym goers who would have to pay more for 20 sessions per month.
Sure, most gyms let you buy a day pass but compared to the monthly membership it’s very expensive.
My current gym is £40 a month which gives you access to every gym in the country as well) or £10 for a day pass just for that single gym for that single day.
The fanciest gym I’ve ever been to was the equivalent of £30 for a day pass and like £300 for a monthly membership.
Also you example of gyms being special isn’t specific to gyms, that’s also how insurance works, spread the cost out over a lot of people and everyone pays less.
I agree Unlimited PTO is a con though, just give everyone an allocation and let them choose how much they use (most will use the maximum)
I guess you can bake that into the credits price. But if you say, purchased 100 credits today and don't use it for a year...well, who is paying for that year? Adding a small monthly fee, oddly enough, keeps the customer engaged.
Airline miles are a perk.
