8 Comments
User's avatar
William H. Dutton's avatar

This piece made me think of myself as the frog in boiling water, I sensed the increasing number of monthly/yearly subscriptions, but did not put all the pieces together, as you have here. Not sure if there is an upside to this from the consumer's perspective. Maybe it is more transparent than being required to buy new software every so often?

Ben Compaine's avatar

At least with software, the price is transparent from the start. I'm not holding my breath for Neatgear to show the price of a router as "$129 for four years" or a "Peloton bike: $1695 plus $49.99/mo."

David's avatar

I love the frog in boiling water analogy!

Jeffrey Baron's avatar

I was going to comment on the Gillette history at the start of your pancake and happy you included it. Four years ago Peloton stock was at 112. Today less than $4. They barely exist due primarily to their subscriptions.

Peter D. Jacobson's avatar

Seems similar to the path dependence that locks us into an array of unwelcome product choices because the cost (including the hassle factor) of leaving, let's say Apple for Dell, is too high.

carey cook's avatar

You write brilliantly about a task that is so broad to describe and where there are true plus and minus choices.

Keep up the great writing. The pancake sustainabiliity continues to survive and not to be eaten, even if they try to chew almost completely!

carey

Ben Compaine's avatar

Thanks, Carey. Keep up the good work with MyVocabulary.

David's avatar

The second side is simply more $ for the manufacturer and less choice for me as to how much (hardware function) do I need, what upgraded functionality is meaningful for me, etc. so you point me to focus more on how to make hardware decisions, thanks!