Lifetime Product

[Mike I]

Hello.

I have a suggestion I think IPS is in need of. While adding a product, you're given the flexibility of choosing any subscription term (renewal) you'd like - well, all except one. Lifetime purchases should be added a feature to the product feature instead of limiting it to only subscription plans. It's a huge flaw in my opinion. @bfarber suggested to make a new product that copies the main product, with the exception that it is appended with '(Lifetime)' - this won't work for me for many reasons, and it also seems like a band-aid fix; it'll look very out of place and hacky. I'd like to do this properly by having the lifetime option added natively into the product system instead.

 

Thank you.

[Joel R]

Some thoughts:

1.  Isn't this just a Product with no renewals? 

I'm confused by your request.  Create a product in Commerce.  Leave renews off.  

 

2.  IPS doesn't believe in lifetime products *cough cough*

 

[Mike I]

8 hours ago, Joel R said:

-snip-

1: No, it's not. Because some people would like to pay a month for something, to try it out. If said person likes what they bought, they might come back and buy lifetime. I think you misunderstood the point of the post completely.

2: Doesn't really matter what they believe. If people are buying your product (especially for the amount that IPS costs), I'd hope they'd have the respect to listen to suggestions and potentially add them (it's a good idea anyway!?). Other forum softwares have integrated such functionality, and IPS is lacking. This isn't to undermine the software, this is just to show that people will appreciate more customization with some of the systems IPS has.

[Haku2]

10 hours ago, Joel R said:

1.  Isn't this just a Product with no renewals? 

I'm confused by your request.  Create a product in Commerce.  Leave renews off.  

Not necessarily. Using this workaround for products provides an unfriendly and disconnected interface to the user. Aside from the possibility of users inadvertently purchasing the lifetime version of the product while still having an active renewal-based version of the product, there may be likely more work for the administrator to routinely perform such as:

• managing cancellation or refunds for the renewal-based product
• creating a custom invoice for the user requesting payment for the difference between the price of the lifetime product and the remaining time left on the renewal-based product
• transfer any user-supplied information in the renewal-based product to the lifetime product

[Joel R]

9 hours ago, Haku2 said:

Not necessarily. Using this workaround for products provides an unfriendly and disconnected interface to the user. Aside from the possibility of users inadvertently purchasing the lifetime version of the product while still having an active renewal-based version of the product, there may be likely more work for the administrator to routinely perform such as:

• managing cancellation or refunds for the renewal-based product
• creating a custom invoice for the user requesting payment for the difference between the price of the lifetime product and the remaining time left on the renewal-based product
• transfer any user-supplied information in the renewal-based product to the lifetime product

You create two products.  One renews every month.  One renews never.  

If clients want, they can upgrade from one product to another.  

Not trying to criticize your suggestion at all. Just wondering what the current framework doesn't allow.  

11 hours ago, Mike I said:

Doesn't really matter what they believe. If people are buying your product (especially for the amount that IPS costs), I'd hope they'd have the respect to listen to suggestions and potentially add them (it's a good idea anyway!?). Other forum softwares have integrated such functionality, and IPS is lacking. This isn't to undermine the software, this is just to show that people will appreciate more customization with some of the systems IPS has.

Calm down.  It was a jab at IPS not peer clients, who used to sell lifetime / perpetual licenses and then promptly told clients they would no longer honor those licenses.  

[CoffeeCake]

5 minutes ago, Joel R said:

who used to sell lifetime / perpetual licenses and then promptly told clients they would no longer honor those licenses.

I'm wary of lifetime purchases for anything. It's a money grab and unsustainable. Your costs will continue in perpetuity for as long as you operate your site, and the expectation of the purchaser will likely be that they'll never pay another cent to use the thing for the rest of their lives. What provisions do you have in your contracts for fulfilling your potential obligation to provide your service indefinitely?

I assume IPS did this at a more immature stage in their existence and learned some important lessons. I hope they made it right for their customers when they had that realization in some way. Let's hope.

You should have the option to do whatever you'd like though, and I fully support a one-time purchase that puts you into a group indefinitely. This is a useful concept if you removed the word "lifetime" and simply stated for a fee of $X, you get access to Y with no time-based commitments.

Subscriptions, as a concept, are linked to intervals of time. You pay $X for access to Y for Z interval, and you have the option to renew or not.

There needs to be more cohesion in your ability to give equal weight to the subscriptions and the single time purchases, and setting these all up as products is likely the best way to go. There needs to be logic to prevent your scenarios surrounding purchasing both the single time and subscription products. This whole thing is configured and presented from the mindset of someone worried about the internal logic, rather than from the perspective of the customer experience. Your marketing and the customer's thinking are: "Do you want X for Z time for $Y, or X until the sun consumes us all for $W?" A developer does not a user experience designer make.

The ability to have multiple durations of time for a single thing and do it smartly is an opportunity for improvement.

[Mike I]

On 1/27/2021 at 8:55 AM, Joel R said:

You create two products.  One renews every month.  One renews never.  

If clients want, they can upgrade from one product to another.  

Not trying to criticize your suggestion at all. Just wondering what the current framework doesn't allow. 

Except that is inadequate. Why are two products needed just to separate between a monthly/renewable subscription, and a permanent one? Unfortunately, that will make no sense to the average consumer who has to click on two different product links. It's quite an inconvenience and I think the preference of attaching the lifetime option directly into the main product page is much more appropriate. Also - I have software that relies on the product ID; if we used your idea, my software will now have to account for two product IDs that are tied into the exact same product. It's senseless.

On 1/27/2021 at 9:11 AM, Paul E. said:

I'm wary of lifetime purchases for anything. It's a money grab and unsustainable. Your costs will continue in perpetuity for as long as you operate your site, and the expectation of the purchaser will likely be that they'll never pay another cent to use the thing for the rest of their lives. What provisions do you have in your contracts for fulfilling your potential obligation to provide your service indefinitely?

100% in agreement. I'm not a fan of "lifetime" purchases for anything either - by definition, they're absurd. The thing is, I've been constantly asked to add them in by customers, and not having the ability to elegantly add them into the product page without some ghetto workaround such as creating a "10 year subscription" is quite upsetting. Furthermore, I believe extending your product page or terms of service to construe what exactly a "lifetime" subscription is should be sufficient.

On 1/27/2021 at 9:11 AM, Paul E. said:

You should have the option to do whatever you'd like though, and I fully support a one-time purchase that puts you into a group indefinitely. This is a useful concept if you removed the word "lifetime" and simply stated for a fee of $X, you get access to Y with no time-based commitments.

Absolutely, I'm sure there is a better word for it. Most people do go by the term "lifetime" though.

 

Anyways, I truly don't think this is a suggestion that requires arguments on the logicality. IPS does not currently support a method of adding a permanent subscription to a renewable product - my suggestion is to add it. I currently don't see any downfalls of adding this.

Edited January 31, 2021 by Mike I

[Jordan Miller]

On 1/31/2021 at 9:08 AM, Mike I said:

Anyways, I truly don't think this is a suggestion that requires arguments on the logicality. IPS does not currently support a method of adding a permanent subscription to a renewable product - my suggestion is to add it. I currently don't see any downfalls of adding this.

I agree with the consensus that a lifetime purchase is a bit absurd lol, however I do think it isn't necessarily our place to apply restrictions on clients if that's what they choose to do for their community and include lifetime offers. I'll take this feedback to the team and see what they say. Not sure it's going to be a top priority, but I will see what's up and if others find value in adding this option. 🙏 

[Jordan Miller]

Hey @Mike I, got a little update. We do think this is worth implementing, but right now there isn't a time frame as to when that will be. Just wanted to let you know we heard ya. 🙏 When I get some more information I can circle back 🙂

[Mike I]

On 2/10/2021 at 5:48 PM, Jordan Invision said:

Hey @Mike I, got a little update. We do think this is worth implementing, but right now there isn't a time frame as to when that will be. Just wanted to let you know we heard ya. 🙏 When I get some more information I can circle back 🙂

I'm so glad to hear that and very thankful you guys have listened to the suggestion. Can't wait for the update, and thanks again!

[OptimusBain]

Glad to see that the lifetime feature was considered and will be implemented in the future. Thanks