> So are you then implicitly setting the price yourself because anyone who doesn't charge enough can't get more credits?
Everyone can get more credits. The idea is that when we think we need more subscriptions to sell, every developer would get a number of additional credits that is proportional to the number of credits they have (with active subscriptions converted to credits for the calculation).
> But to do that you'd have to let them sell a hundred million subscriptions for $0.01 each.
That would be very difficult for them to do since the number of subscirptions they can sell is limited by how many credits they have.
> Some app which is specialized and requires a million dollars of developer time but only has a market of 10,000 customers.
If you make software for only a few people and you need a lot of money then I don't think this system is for you. It is mostly for developers who make software for everybody.
> Everyone can get more credits. The idea is that when we think we need more subscriptions to sell, every developer would get a number of additional credits that is proportional to the number of credits they have (with active subscriptions converted to credits for the calculation).
This is what I mean by implicitly setting the price. You set it indirectly by rate limiting the number of subscriptions.
A service with high cost and low volume gets priced out, even if it's only somewhat above average, because people can buy a subscription from someone else for less.
Conversely, if subscriptions are rate limited then no one has any incentive to sell them for less than the market rate, which is in turn set by supply and demand (and you having your hand on the supply knob). Why would anyone charge less, or pay more, than the median price?
Then anyone who needs more than that is priced out, and if you allocate credits based on how many people sign up or use a service, the service that provides only trivial value but to a large number of people gets a ton of credits disproportional to the value of their service.
Everyone can get more credits. The idea is that when we think we need more subscriptions to sell, every developer would get a number of additional credits that is proportional to the number of credits they have (with active subscriptions converted to credits for the calculation).
> But to do that you'd have to let them sell a hundred million subscriptions for $0.01 each.
That would be very difficult for them to do since the number of subscirptions they can sell is limited by how many credits they have.
> Some app which is specialized and requires a million dollars of developer time but only has a market of 10,000 customers.
If you make software for only a few people and you need a lot of money then I don't think this system is for you. It is mostly for developers who make software for everybody.