Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

New pricing page (design) #2592

Open
xdamman opened this issue Nov 4, 2019 · 17 comments
Open

New pricing page (design) #2592

xdamman opened this issue Nov 4, 2019 · 17 comments
Labels

Comments

@xdamman
Copy link
Contributor

@xdamman xdamman commented Nov 4, 2019

We need to update https://opencollective.com/pricing to reflect the new business model and focus on self hosted collectives.

I'd keep the same general design with a FAQ at the bottom.
Just the table needs to change:

And we need a "create your collective" call to action somewhere, or a button below each column?

@xdamman xdamman added the design label Nov 4, 2019
@xdamman

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@xdamman xdamman commented Nov 8, 2019

FAQ and copy for the email announcement / blog post: https://docs.google.com/document/d/18vHDQLGz6aCgcdoGxKRlk_4MTZWYBwzTErGoYxC1EzM

@danielcompton

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@danielcompton danielcompton commented Nov 18, 2019

It is sometimes easier for people to read pricing pages if each tier only includes the features that are unique or different from the previous tier. If you did that here, it would make it much easier for people to see that there are only two metrics that change between tiers: number of collectives, and the amount of financial contributions you can record.

Given that there currently aren't any other features, it might look good to have all of the features in one list, and then the two features + price on each tier?

@xdamman

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@xdamman xdamman commented Nov 19, 2019

That's good feedback. Is there a pricing page somewhere that you particularly like to illustrate that?
Also I've seen your comment in the google doc, thanks for contributing! :-)

@danielcompton

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

@danielcompton danielcompton commented Nov 20, 2019

https://www.campaignmonitor.com/pricing/ has an interesting way of adding a + to features which are additional from the previous tier:

Screenshot of Safari (21-11-19, 10-56-26 AM)

https://freshdesk.com/pricing has the more traditional "Everything in tier -1 and..."

Screenshot of Safari (21-11-19, 10-57-33 AM)

Profitwell/Price Intelligently have done a lot of writing on this over the years: https://www.priceintelligently.com/blog/topic/saas-pricing-page, https://www.profitwell.com/blog/pricing-page-examples.

@alanna

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

@alanna alanna commented Nov 20, 2019

@xdamman sorry it took me a while to watch the video where you go over this, but I'm catching back up slowly.

Here are some initial notes. Basically I agree with the comments from the team members that it's going to be very confusing as currently designed, but I think we can make it a lot better by finding out about the user and only showing them pricing info that makes sense for their situation.

  • Clarify who pays - not only for OSC, but also WWcode and all other fiscal hosts. Select options like a wizard and then and show details, otherwise it's going to give people confusing info.
  • We need to empower fiscal hosts to set their own pricing for Collectives, who should never really think about OC's pricing, with fee options beyond just % ($x/mo, free, etc). Without that info in our system we can't give people accurate info about what they'll pay.
  • Record financial contributions - expand this description to say 'other payment methods (bank transfer, Paypal, etc)' because people probably won't get it.
  • Logically, all pricing is for hosts only (including hosts with only one Collective). Collectives should not be the target for pricing at all, because the answer to "how much" for Collectives is "it depends on your host". The issue is that most people don't know if they are acting as a host or a Collective and it's hard to explain. Our logic and the user's logic are different here and that's what's causing the issue.
  • The divide is not "open source" vs another type, it's "fiscal hosted" vs "self hosted". It's not only OSC that will get caught up in this confusion if we don't get it right.

I have more concrete ideas about how to resolve some of this. I will jump into the Google doc and work there on specifics as soon as I can.

@alanna

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

@alanna alanna commented Nov 21, 2019

OK I have had a go designing a pricing wizard in the google doc, and at the first part of the FAQs. - @xdamman and @piamancini please have a look.

I haven't had a chance to get into the fiscal hosting FAQ, email to fiscal hosts, and blog post content yet but I will soon.

@alanna

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

@alanna alanna commented Nov 22, 2019

I've now worked on the FAQ, email, and blog content, so I think I've addressed everything. I hope it's helpful! Please let me know if you need more feedback @xdamman @piamancini

@xdamman

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@xdamman xdamman commented Nov 27, 2019

Here is another proposal to make the distinction clear between creating an independent collective or joining a fiscal host where each fiscal host could have their own pricing.

Note that it has been decided that the open collective platform should only have a billing relationship with the host moving forward to simplify everything. So instead of showing 5% platform fee and 5% host fee for the open source collective host, we will show 10% host fee and then we will charge platform fees to the host.
So it’s up to each host to come up with their own pricing strategy. For example, the All For Climate host will most likely offer the service for free but will be funded by various foundations.

PDF version: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1txJh75MkOfC8Gf8Wqbvf3CdAUT4Od_SF/view?usp=drivesdk

@znarf

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

@znarf znarf commented Nov 27, 2019

"Independent collective" makes me think it's just for for a single one, it's difficult to understand why you would host multiple collectives as "Independent collective".

@alanna

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

@alanna alanna commented Nov 28, 2019

This is a step in the right direction for sure @xdamman

Although I don't understand why it's better than asking them in plain language how they will be set up and showing them the relevant info (the wizard approach). In your design, we still need a way to communicate about what a fiscal host means because the majority of people looking at this will have no idea which category they fit in and won't be familiar with our language. Most fiscally hosted Collectives don't even understand they are fiscally hosted. That's why the wizard was designed to walk them through to the right category.

@znarf is right - there are actually three options: independent Collective (self hosted, show only starter and small info), fiscally hosted (show options for joining different hosts and their fees), and becoming a fiscal host (show medium, large, network info).

@piamancini

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

@piamancini piamancini commented Nov 28, 2019

This is my proposal for content:

This is my proposal for the design of the pricing page https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y--R5DMaEf4v_iWBmuY1wRA-IawjvGILmF4wur4bGEM/edit#

@alanna I think it's closer to what you are suggesting with the wizard, without having to implement it.

It's more descriptive but I think it's clearer. Let me know if there are any blockers, I'd like to start working with design to sketch this.

@alanna

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

@alanna alanna commented Nov 28, 2019

Looks really good @piamancini - I made some phrasing and formatting changes to make things a bit more clear. I agree with your approach. I think it succeeds at simplifying things without oversimplifying them and risking misunderstanding.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

@piamancini piamancini commented Nov 29, 2019 — with Octobox

ok great. I had a quick call with @raulgrafico yesterday, we'll do some basic wireframes to push this forward.

@piamancini

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

@piamancini piamancini commented Dec 4, 2019

To keep record, these are the initial wireframes done for this page.
Image from iOS

@raulgrafico is working on better ones on figma - we'll update here before the end of the week.

@znarf we can already put together a project to share with the community to see if someone wants to take this on. We are not too far from having a good enough page to get us unblocked.

@znarf

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

@znarf znarf commented Dec 5, 2019

Work In Progress in Figma: https://www.figma.com/file/KinuveYf4WUlRIXzMTnmIsmO/OC.COM-XX1-%2F-Lab?node-id=4158%3A591

Screenshot 2019-12-05 at 14 15 42

Any plan for a mobile version?

@piamancini

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

@piamancini piamancini commented Dec 5, 2019

@znarf
We feel there hasn't been a lot of enquiry on this so at this stage we are using this page to reach out to existing an potential hosts with the pricing to gauge their reaction. Once we get some feedback, we'll close the initial pricing option, iterate if needed and close design.

@xdamman

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@xdamman xdamman commented Dec 9, 2019

Looks great so far!

Small wording comments:

  • "The starter plan includes" should probably be "All plans include"
  • On the "Add funds received through other channels", the limit should be "per year" or "yearly budget".
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
5 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.