INK Concerns (with MATH!)

[jensrichard77]

My Ko-fi campaign is over.
I have updated my episode.
From now on it is all about Inksgiving
https://m.tapas.io/episode/1577929

[Cavechan]

I love how @michaelson has been active in this topic, it sparked a "company wide discussion" and he explains as best he can, yet people will still claim "TAPAS STAFF IGNORE THE COMMUNITY/AREN'T ACTIVE ENOUGH"

[vothnthorvaldson]

You should see it more as a compliment, in a way: 1) we did not gave up on them yet; that's when I start to be blase about a company's shady methods that the disrespect on my part starts; 2) communication with the community is pretty much an extra service compared to the competition, so it's both something that we value, but also that we expect.

One is only disappointed in something one had reasons to have some faith in; and one will only ask explanations if they have a chance to get some.

[dan]

At $1.99 for 1,600 Ink, the exchange rate is roughly (rounding) $1:800 Ink, all the way to the highest tier, $49.99 for 60,000 Ink which is roughly (rounding) is $1:1200 Ink. When that person decides to spend the Ink, a second exchange rate is applied when in transit to the creator, however the second exchange rate is not dynamic and is fixed at the highest tier of $1:1200, which explains the discrepancy outlined in this topic.

See, that "discrepancy" problematic for me. The company is taking out their fees at both ends, both when ink is purchased (and I assume when earned via ads/surveys that the company takes some of the revenue before awarding an amount of ink to the watcher/surveyed) AND after it is tipped.

The system seems intentionally opaque to allow the true fees to be obfuscated. A supporter recently gave me 100 ink. That translated into 8 cents before the "Est. Fees and Tapas' Share" of 1 cent was taken off. If all the fees are taken there, why is Tapas also taking some off the top when the Ink was purchased?

A more transparent system that allows everyone from time or purchase to time of donation to have a better idea of how much $$ is actually getting to creators per dollar spent, and where and why fees are taken off each time seems to me to be necessary.

If the transaction fee when ink is purchased is significant and explains that amount taken by Tapas at that point, say so. Make it clear upon purchasing that due to a transaction fee with paypal or credit cards or whatever this much of your purchase is taken off the top. Or frame it in such a way that supporters can understand how much Giving Power they're actually purchasing.

I don't have much financial skin in this game, mostly using Tapas to try to expand the audience a bit, but this lack of transparency with Tapas history is definitely scaring creators away from using the service.

[rajillustration]

a second exchange rate is applied when in transit to the creator, however the second exchange rate is not dynamic and is fixed at the highest tier of $1:1200, which explains the discrepancy outlined in this topic.

Will this second exchange continue to be not dynamic from this point forward, now that this is something that can make such a discrepancy? Is this something that Tapas will change at some point so that way the amount spent equals the amount in transit to the creator so then the fees applied after will match up?

It's very confusing to explain to our readers.

[Rosso]

big words big charts big numbers...

i just have one major request... @michaelson, please:
can you please make it quite clear to everyone how much value their favorite creators will actually get from ink donations BEFORE they go through with the transaction?
if they're cool with how little is left in the end and go through with it, then that's fine.

But if they're expecting they're donating, say, $5, but in reality their creators are getting significantly less. Then idk. This is a sensitive matter and there has to be much more transparency for all sides involved.

[Yoon]

can you please make it quite clear to everyone how much value their favorite creators will actually get from ink donations BEFORE they go through with the transaction?

I think this is a great request. We can add it to this area. We're planing to revamp creator dashboard in next year. We'll probably have your request.

It's a sum of this list.

I think Tapas already shows all information to creators but we will try to provide more clear data to our awesome creators. Also I as a CTO of Tapas, it's pretty much impossible to build to track every single Ink to understand how much of a discount was applied for which specific case. I've worked for 8 years and Tapas has been always trying to build/work for our community not using creators for Tapas's profits....
A solution to solve this conversion rating issue (if community satisfies what @michaelson said), we need to not use Ink system for Support program. I think it means that Tapas might need to sunset this Support program unless we become a big player as Naver Webtoon

I hope our community understands it and Tapas will try to find the best solution for the community.

Thank you,

[jensrichard77]

Wow @Yoon
You just made my day even greater than it was before.
Thank you ️

[colinmooredraws]

A solution to solve this conversion rating issue (if community satisfies what @michaelson said), we need to not use Ink system for Support program. I think it means that Tapas might need to sunset this Support program unless we become a big player as Naver Webtoon

I wasn't even after a means to change the Support system. Just a clarification of language and transparency. As it stands, from the supporter side all that is seen by digging int stuff like the TOS is a statement that the exact value will not be given and that creators get 85%. The creator dashboard does nothing to inform the people who are actually spending the money.

This is what Rosso was referring to. Even if it isn't listing out or tracking each level, being clear and up front about the $1:1200Ink thing would change a lot.

it's pretty much impossible to build to track every single Ink to understand how much of a discount was applied for which specific case.

This right here, however, doesn't sit quite right with me. I've worked in accounting before. Tracking these sorts of things is built into the system. And given there's enough in place to track where individual transactions were made, even once given to a creator, to know whether to take out the web or the app based transaction fee...it stands to reason there is already something in place to take that one step further.

But what else concerns me here is that there is no actual discount being applied. In fact, it's the opposite. If once Ink is in the system $1 is worth 1200 (As Michael confirmed), then users are being charged a penalty fee up to 33% for buying too little at once.

A simple solution would be to change the pricing structure at purchase. If Ink has a set value, then it should be purchased at that value. When converting your currency in a different country, you don't get a bonus for having more money. So users should just be able to put in a dollar amount and they get that value in ink at the 1200 mark. It would remove the issue entirely.

[sambeawesome]

Apologies if I get something wrong, I'm new to Tapas, Ink, and skimmed a bit of this thread.

I'm just confused as to why this is so complex? As an avid Twitch user, 100 bits (their currency) ALWAYS equals 1$, no matter any discounts/sales/etc. The fees are placed on the buyers (not necessary, just how they do it), so it costs 1.40$ to buy 100 bits. And that's it. That's their system. No other fees, no other steps, nothing.

Tapas seems like it has way more steps and explanations to get from buying Ink to transferring your balance, and I'm not sure why it's necessary. But I'm also kind of lost. Twitch's system just makes way more sense to me.

[machimaquiaveli]

100 bits (their currency) ALWAYS equals 1$, no matter any discounts/sales/etc. The fees are placed on the buyers (not necessary, just how they do it), so it costs 1.40$ to buy 100 bits.

So, 100 bits is $1 or $1.40?

[sambeawesome]

It costs 1.40$ to buy 100 bits (that's the only place with fees), but if you give 100 bits to anyone, the receiver will always get 1$.

[Larslaustsen]

When @michaelson and team have free time, there will come something about this in the dashboard/support pages. Please give the Tapas some times and go to have fun in the inksgiving.

To clarify this process, we’ll be adding additional language on the creator dashboard and help center to outline what the exchange rates are (this is due to ship soon).

[colinmooredraws]

I'm just confused as to why this is so complex? As an avid Twitch user, 100 bits (their currency) ALWAYS equals 1$, no matter any discounts/sales/etc. The fees are placed on the buyers (not necessary, just how they do it), so it costs 1.40$ to buy 100 bits. And that's it. That's their system. No other fees, no other steps, nothing.

That's such a clear and simple system. Makes me want to actually use Twitch more! Definitely more than Tapas.

When @michaelson and team have free time, there will come something about this in the dashboard/support pages. Please give the Tapas some times and go to have fun in the inksgiving.

That doesn't mean we can't continue to discuss it.

And what do you mean by "free time." Tapas isn't run like ComicFury or pre-NHN Smackjeeves. It's not a couple of friends working on the weekends to give people a community. They're an actual company. A for profit company with employees and investors. They work out of offices in 2 different countries. They've received over $15 Million in investments.

[jensrichard77]

And what do you mean by "free time."

Knowing @Larslaustsen that’s just a lost in translation from Danish.

He means ”when they have the time”

[colinmooredraws]

He means ”when they have the time”

That still means essentially the same thing.

If this is what they claim, an oversight, then they should be making it a priority to fix. An "oversight" that takes so much money away from creators without informing the buyers is a big deal. Pushing it off to whenever they do the dashboard update (which has no timeline beyond sometime in the next year) means they're okay just taking in all that extra money for however many months there are until then. And not informing people about it.

Because that's really all the "fix" it would take: information. No changes needed. Just give proper information to the people spending and receiving money. Problem solved.

[jensrichard77]

No changes needed. Just give proper information to the people spending and receiving money. Problem solved.

Got a point there. .

[Maps]

Isn’t that what Michael said they were going to do though?

[jensrichard77]

Yep. But that might take time. And I think it is a question about patience now.

[colinmooredraws]

But Yoon’s statement suggests otherwise