Now that the update is live, there is precisely zero change to anything around the text on the support dashboard OR the ink shop. There is no updated information in the terms or on the help pages.
The help article on "How to Make Money" still says:
When readers use Ink for Support, roughly 85% goes to creators (after any 3rd party fees) and the remaining 15% helps fund Tapas.
And in trying to find if anything had been added to the terms, I found this little gem:
You acknowledge that any virtual currency you receive on any of Tapas Media's platforms is not "real" currency or any type of real world financial instrument. Furthermore it is not redeemable for any sum of money from Tapas Media at any time.
Which directly contradicts the fact that 1) you are paying creators with this virtual currency for their ad revenue 2) you have a dashboard that automatically converts it to a real world currency, and 3) you do, supposedly, pay "real" currency in exchange for the virtual currency.
But the important part is, mostly to stress the point, there were no updates to any user facing or user accessible information regarding ink, with the web 2.0 update.
Local crackpot alert, here to necromancy this thread because it never got any definitive responses from staff and I have new information to present.
3So, I was supported with 1000 ink today. All well and good. I made 83 cents.
(this is the only ink support I've gotten in April so far so that's how I know I can depend on this being an accurate figure).
But uh, are we not going to talk about the obvious inflation that's been created on Tapas' part to make ink seem more valuable than it is?
Over on LINE Webtoons, $1 = 10 coins. That's how it's advertised in the shop. They give that $1 value without having to make you jump through hoops to do the math to figure it out. Clearly and concisely advertised. And the bonus coins you get for buying in bulk do not affect the base price. 200 coins will always equal $20 regardless of whether or not you get that bonus 18 coins that comes with that bundle. This makes sense to any old Joe who knows Roman numerics and basic math because 10 coins x 20 dollars = 200 coins.
10 coins will buy you 2 episodes priced at 5 coins each. Simple. Your $1 dollar just bought two episodes.
BTW, every series sells their episodes for 5 coins. They can do this because, from my understanding of LINE's model, they expect every episode to be a certain length (something like being at least 30 panels long). They have prerequisites to what makes an episode that can be sold.
So you know that no matter what you spend those 10 coins on, if you go for the bare minimum of $1, you'll be able to buy 2 episodes of whatever comic you want.
Simple, direct, concise language.
Meanwhile, on Tapas, 1200 ink (what Michael is claiming the $1 value is) will buy you around 3.4 episodes of, let's say MNEMOSYNE, so let's say 3 episodes on Tapas priced at 350 ink each, with still a little ink left over to spare to either save aside or tip to a creator (150 ink, yaaay. So like, 10 cents without the fees deducted lmao).
But wait... that's MNEMOSYNE. What about The Lady and Her Butler OH MY GOD
Okay, what about Thick As Thieves-
OKAY SO I guess that $1 = 1200 ink conversion fee can get you either 3 episodes or it can get you 2, who tf knows? Not the consumer because they're being told absolutely nothing about what their money is worth and what it turns into on the other side ((((:"""" Can we not just, idk, expect that every episode should be made consistent to fit certain guidelines so that they can all be priced consistently as well so consumers will know what they're getting when they turn their money into ink? And think about how this is potentially screwing over Premium creators
So comparing Premium to LINE creators, we can say that maybe some Premium creators make more than LINE... but not all of them. Meanwhile, LINE creators know their episodes will always sell for 50 cents. You know how I know it's 50 cents? Because they tell us that with the simple conversions and upfront communication. LINE Webtoons episodes, at 5 coins per episode, are priced at 50 cents an episode (because 10 coins = $1). Even though that's not a lucrative cost either (on its own), you see how much easier that was to figure out? All because LINE doesn't hide its conversion rates behind inflation and questionable conversions.
Aaand speaking of questionable conversions...
According to Michael, $1 is worth 1200 ink, which would make sense if I was gifted 1000 ink and pulled out 83 cents on the other side.
But wait, 1600 ink costs $2 in the ink shop-
1So what in the world is it worth?
So are we saying, mathematically speaking, $1 is actually worth 800 ink? ($2 = 1600 / 2 = 800 ink per $1). Do you see the issue this causes? People are giving pennies when they think they're giving dollars. And that's all still before those fees come out, the month of April is a perfect time to really get down to brass tacks with the conversion math on it all because for once, we're not having to take those fees into account. So a reader buys, for example, $2 worth of ink and donates 800 of it thinking they're giving their favorite creator a dollar ... nope, you've just given them, like, 60 cents. And that's with the fees removed; after fees it's undoubtedly closer to 40-50.
My main concern is that Tapas ink is more inflated than the Mexican peso and it seems to be built that way on purpose to give readers and contributors the sense that they're contributing more than they are. Contributing 1000 ink sure sounds like a lot, especially to those who are primarily watching ads/filling out surveys and get anywhere from 4-10 ink for each one (1000 ink will feel like a lot to anyone who endures that level of MMO-style grinding), but it's really not that much (83 cents, in fact) and the inflation seems to be intentionally creating this idea of wealth that simply isn't there. Add to the fact that because you can't just pay $1 (the base price is always set to $2), and the conversion rate is obviously dependent on the amount you buy (without there being a static "base rate"), no general consumer really puts in the time and effort required to really dismantle it and see what their money is actually worth on the other side. The one thing Tapas could have copied from LINE that would have made sense - a far simpler conversion rate of $ = ink that's honest and direct and clear on the surface without any tacked on nonsense that makes the math and conversion rates go wonky.
Maybe I've just missed some things, though. My math/logic could be wrong, I wouldn't put it past me, but that 1000 ink I got translating to 83 cents has been on my mind since I woke up to the notification this morning and I felt it a perfect opportunity to get discussion on this going again. Especially considering there are valid questions/concerns from the OP that still haven't been answered after over a month of silence. Even if my math/logistics regarding the specifications of ink = $$$ is wrong, it doesn't change the fact that these concerns that OP had, and I have, as well as many others, exist for a reason, and much of it boils down to Tapas' advertising and communication about what ink is actually worth to consumers on the front end and how it translates to creators on the back end.
Top that off with my biggest concern that staff still hasn't cleared up a lot of questions regarding this despite assuring they would. So... yeah. Let's not see this thread die, please. People need to be informed of what choices they're making and what they're really contributing when they give someone ink. I don't want to see these valid concerns and questions go unanswered, hence the mild necromancy.
To make one final thing clear, I'm not mad that 1000 ink only translates to 83 cents on the backend, nor am I mad that Tapas built a broken cryptocurrency system that's overinflated and has some sketchy conversion systems that aren't entirely honest on the front end.
I'm just mad that you, Tapas, keep lying to us about it.
2I'm still going to give @michaelson a benefit of a doubt as I'm assuming the avenues he has to go through to get the information have been disrupted by the pandemic and things have been delayed. I just hope he and other staff are keeping an eye on this thread and not ignoring it completely.
yeah, my understanding from what Micheal mentioned earlier in this thread (I don't remember where) is that the ink has a code that remembers how much you spent for it (so whether you bought in bulk or not)--so the ink you have is all worth different amounts, although you can't really tell. The fact that apparently that's no longer a thing and they're saying 1 cent is always 12 ink is what's confusing to me.
Either way I wish there was an option to just use money if you wanted to.
Okay - and this isn't a personal jab, it's a legitimate question - why are we tagging Michael then? The fact of the matter is that Michael is simply no longer the "main guy" when it comes to these questions. He was back in the day, when you and I and many others were still starting out with the platform, Premium was Prime and the ink system was but a glimmer in the distance. At this point turning to Michael is more a force of habit than actually helpful because, judging from his responses on this topic as well as others, he's just not the guy with all the answers (or legal ability to give them out). And it would be unfair for us to expect that from him. He's the Editor-in-Chief, for crying out loud, I don't think the Ink system and how it functions is exactly in his job description. It would be like asking the shift supervisor at Starbucks to fix the plumbing in the building; I wouldn't blame the shift supervisor for the leaky toilet. My concerns with this (and the many other issues I've pointed out in the past) aren't aimed solely at Michael and I really wish people would stop assuming they are just because he happens to be the forum-facing guy. It ends up translating to "An issue with Tapas is an issue with Michael" when that simply isn't the case and never has been.
So all I'm asking is, where are the people who can answer these questions without having to go through those extra avenues? I understand that the forums don't necessarily reflect the community as a whole, there are only about 40-50 of us who use them regularly, so accessing the forums may not be a top priority for the staff at large, but that's merely due to the fact that the forums are desktop only and aren't advertised. If there's this much constant concern/questioning among 40-50 people, could you imagine what would happen if the forums were accessible from the front end and open to the thousands who use the app every day? It's why I stand so firmly by the idea that Tapas really needs someone who's trained in proper PR management.
And that's horrifying if true lol But again, I can't exactly take everything Michael says as hard fact because he's not the guy who developed the system. What we know now is this:
What's confusing is that if 1 cent is going to equal 12 ink, okay, that's fine, at least we have a base rate (although it's a silly one making it per cent rather than per dollar, w/e)... so why then, by that logic, imply that $1 will equal 1200 ink (12 ink x 100 cents per dollar = 1200 ink per dollar) only to then advertise that $2 will net you 1600 ink? (rather than 2400 ink if we doubled that $1 value to $2 with the ink increasing respectively with it). That implies that ink is worth 800 per $1 on the front end, not 1200 per $1.
I can't help but feel half of these issues wouldn't be issues if Tapas would just simplify it to $1 = 1000 ink. And offer those $1 base prices at the minimum vs. the $2 one that's mucking up the base values (or at LEAST display that conversion rate per dollar rather than per cent). Though I understand that transaction fees/Apple/Google fees could be playing into the reasons why they'd want to start selling at $2 rather than $1 (like how they help you avoid constant PayPal fees by requiring you be at $25 min before you can pay out) it's the $2 = 1600 ink vs. $1 = 1200 ink that's fogging it all up.
It just depends on what you and Tapas define as 'a lot'. As I said in my post from earlier today, 'a lot' can be as 'low' as 1000 ink (aka 83 cents lmao) if you've been spending hours grinding through ads and surveys to reach that number (seeing as how you only get 4-10 ink at most per ad/survey, yeah, hitting 1000 can take a shitload of time so it can inflate 1000 to feeling like 'a lot') or as 'high' as 40,000 ink if you actually buy from the ink shop (or just save up for that much) which, according to Tapas' ink shop, translates to roughly $50 (for $50 you get 40,000 ink + 20,000 bulk bonus ink)
But again, this highlights those discrepancies in the ink shop, how ink is actually valued, and what we're actually giving to creators in terms of monetary value. Is 40,000 ink actually worth $50 on the other end, or is it only worth $50 because the Tapas Ink shop says it is? (like how it 'says' that the $2 value = 1600 ink even though the value of $1 = 1200 ink directly contradicts that). Will that 40,000 ink, if you gave ALL of it to a single creator in the form of support ink/tipping, translate to $50, before you subtract Tapas' cut? And is that bonus 20,000 ink taken into account when determining that monetary value?
It's all very concerning for both readers and creators alike, because readers (such as yourself, as well as anyone else who wants to support their favorite creators and comics) should know what they're actually giving their favorite creators on the front end in tangible dollar/cent amounts, and creators should know what to expect post-translation (with or without Tapas' fees involved) on the back end.
Anyway, I'm going to try not to comment on this any further until staff (hopefully) addresses it, just so that the point of my post doesn't get muddled along the way or I don't end up making too many assumptions on Tapas' part when replying to your guys' posts. Anything I respond to from this point forward will simply be to clarify points I made in my original post that might have gotten lost in translation or just might not make sense.
Just to add because I've delved a little further into the 'conversion rates' of the shop's prices vs. what we've been told ink is worth, let's say that you buy their $50 "best value" package, which gives you 40,000 ink + 20,000 bonus ink as a "bulk reward". That "best value" stamp implies that you are, indeed, getting some kind of bulk bargain deal. That's what "value" implies to a consumer. Tack that on with the +20,000 that implies you're getting a "bonus" 20,000 ink on top of that base value of 40,000 - to draw people in to buy those packages that come with extra spending ink to get you to spend more $$$.
But... if the base conversion rate truly is 1200 ink = $1, that would mean that $50 = 60,000 ink.
So... Tapas is advertising an additional 20,000 ink as a "bulk reward" when really the 40,000 + 20,000 ink is what you'd be getting for $50 anyway if we stuck with the 1200 = $1 conversion rate?
So what happens then if we take that $50 = 40,000 metric (assuming 40,000 is the 'base value' as its advertised, dismissing that 20,000 'bonus' ink tacked on at the end) and convert it to a $1 conversion rate?
We come out with that same number that the $2 value is marked at. $1 = 800 ink.
5So if 800 truly is the actual conversion of $$$ to ink...
1. Why are we being told $1 = 1200 ink/.01 cent = 12 ink when it's in fact $1=800 ink on the ink shop side? Most importantly, is it still applying the 1200=$1 conversion rate when you tip despite that shop purchase value of 800 ink = $1? Obviously it has to be - the proof is in my .83 cent to 1000 ink conversion (sans fees) I highlighted earlier.
2. If the conversion rate is truly 1200=$1 as we've been told, why are we being led to believe that 40,000 + 20,000 is the 'best value' when it's what that 1200=$1 would equate to anyways? This implies that 40,000 - and the subsequent $1 = 800 ink conversion - is the base deal with the 20,000 being some sort of 'bonus reward' for buying that package. It is a bonus 50% reward if ink is truly worth 800 ink = $1. But we've been told it's 1200 = $1. So which is it? And how is this potentially affecting the payouts for creators on the other side? This basically means that readers, from the shop side, will see that ink = 800 per $1, and tip accordingly thinking they're tipping out more than they are (i.e. pennies instead of dollars).
It seems to me that they're artificially modifying the price/value of ink = $$$ on the shop side so they can muddle up the translation and pass it off as 'discounts' or 'bargains' only to payout less on the creator side. I'm pretty sure this qualifies in the same realm as false advertising. This is why we do the math.
Yes, we've already saw earlier that, as much as we can see, the 'special price' is false advertising. If I remember well (but it's some time ago so I'm not 100% sure) we actually asked about it precisely because some of us were surprised they would do something downright illegal. Never got a satisfying answer.
I've read through the entirety of this thread, albeit a long time ago (when it was still active basically, a month is a long time in quarantine days LOL) and I do remember it being mentioned, but I think having it laid out again with the actual math will help for those who are new to the thread/topic or may have otherwise forgotten. This shit's super concerning from a consumer and creator level, because consumers are tipping certain amounts expecting it to translate to the same amount on the other side (minus fees which you can't help) and creators are getting even less on the payout as a result of that false translation.
I've made the comparison already, but at least on LINE the translations are clear. $1 = 10 coins. All episodes cost 5 coins. You know what you're going to get with $1 on LINE, and most importantly, the bonus coins are actually bonus coins. $20 will get you 200 coins + 18 'bulk bargain' coins. That original conversion is still there, though, and it's not muddied up in any way or falsified in its presentation. The 18 bonus coins are actually a reward and not used as a way to falsify or artificially 'inflate' value.
I apologize again - I haven't been keeping up with this topic due to the number of notifications hitting my inbox. I will review the ongoing discussions and respond early next next to clarify questions in regards to the deployment of the new dashboard language ($0.01 = 12 Ink) when hovering over the revenue coach marks.
edit: waiting on approvals from other teams. will have some updates later.
And? They haven't altered the conversion rates, so they're still pocketing up to 33% up front. And that's assuming that's still active.
Also, they're still taking that 15% "web fee." If they have a web based payment processor that charges THAT much, I don't trust their business sense. For contrast Paypal, Square, and Stripe all take around 3%. So where's the rest of that fee going?
3% is the cost of doing business. 15% is greed.
Suggested Topics
Topic | Category | Replies | Views | Activity |
---|---|---|---|---|
About Posting Schedules to Readers | Questions | 10 | 462 | Dec '23 |
Suggestions for hiring help? | Questions | 5 | 361 | Dec '23 |
How do I make this character better? | Questions | 8 | 390 | Dec '23 |
Am I able to get feedback for a draft on this forum? | Questions | 4 | 277 | Feb 17 |
Anyone starts their stories with protagonists waking up? | Questions | 25 | 617 | Mar 1 |