I started a monthly-donations-to-artists company around the same time as @Patreon. How you manage monthly payment fees is the core of the business model, and deciding whether or not to make $1 donations viable is a huge philosophical decision. We talked about this for months. 1/6
$1 is the amount you donate to an artist without expecting anything in return, and for an artist much more valuable than that $1 is the fact that it's another person on your mailing list, following what you make, and supporting you enough to pull out their credit card. 2/6
There's no way that @Patreon didn't think about this either. It would've been crazy to start that company without doing so. And their original batching system was smart and $1-friendly. They made the choice to allow for small donations and the newer artists that receive them. 3/6
The updated payment model shows that those priorities have changed, making a bid for bigger name productions and higher cost "get your money's worth" donation tiers. I think this ties into the underlying problem of a company like Patreon taking VC-funding. 4/6
VC-funded companies are expected to grow, but the expenses of artists (rent, food supplies) are relatively static. Artists shouldn't be expected to shoulder Patreon's growth by pushing their patrons into higher donation amounts. It's ok for Patreon to not be a huge company. 5/6
My company was pushed out by the success of Patreon as a space where everyone from small artists to giant YouTube channels could support their work. I was fine closing up shop because it looked like our mission was still being carried out. I'm sad to see that's no longer the case
