I don’t know what I’m missing here. The pricing looks fair. Longer term agreements usually mean cheaper per month pricing. It looks like OP is on a 24 month plan that I assume is expiring. What the infuriating part? It’s it that the ad popped up on the first place?
It looks like OP is on a 24 month plan that I assume is expiring.
That’s why it’s annoying, OP is most likely on a plain monthly plan, and to get the same price they need to pay for 2 years upfront. That’s 120€. And this amount is not written even in small print.
Also I looked it up and it’s 70% off for me, at “2.99€” (72€ for the first 24 months then 84€/12mo). So dynamic pricing bullshit.
It looks like the monthly price is 10€ per month. I just looked mine up and it’s $9.99. my 1 year option is $4.99 (50%) and the 2 year option is $2.99 (70%). So the percentages don’t line up with mine, but they are consistent in that 1 month is $10. If OP is paying monthly with no commitment, then I don’t find volume pricing infuriating, but I do find it odd that the percentages aren’t the same across the board. Of course if you’re already on a $2.99 plan and they’re grandfathering you into pricing, then I have no problems with any of it. That’s how every subscription like this works, discounts for longer commitment.
Also, the pricing is listed as per month with a month based commitment. That’s also standard practice. Yes, it’s all required up front, but they are more or less itemizing the fees. I agree that having the total listed would be an upgrade, but this is how all of my subscriptions operate.
Like I said, it would be better if they listed the full price. My only argument is that it shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone that’s had a subscription. Mildly irritating is a fair assessment, it just doesn’t bother me personally.
I don’t know what I’m missing here. The pricing looks fair. Longer term agreements usually mean cheaper per month pricing. It looks like OP is on a 24 month plan that I assume is expiring. What the infuriating part? It’s it that the ad popped up on the first place?
That’s why it’s annoying, OP is most likely on a plain monthly plan, and to get the same price they need to pay for 2 years upfront. That’s 120€. And this amount is not written even in small print.
Also I looked it up and it’s 70% off for me, at “2.99€” (72€ for the first 24 months then 84€/12mo). So dynamic pricing bullshit.
It looks like the monthly price is 10€ per month. I just looked mine up and it’s $9.99. my 1 year option is $4.99 (50%) and the 2 year option is $2.99 (70%). So the percentages don’t line up with mine, but they are consistent in that 1 month is $10. If OP is paying monthly with no commitment, then I don’t find volume pricing infuriating, but I do find it odd that the percentages aren’t the same across the board. Of course if you’re already on a $2.99 plan and they’re grandfathering you into pricing, then I have no problems with any of it. That’s how every subscription like this works, discounts for longer commitment.
Also, the pricing is listed as per month with a month based commitment. That’s also standard practice. Yes, it’s all required up front, but they are more or less itemizing the fees. I agree that having the total listed would be an upgrade, but this is how all of my subscriptions operate.
Murderer is brought to court: “I don’t see the problem judge, i just do what every murderer does.”
Like I said, it would be better if they listed the full price. My only argument is that it shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone that’s had a subscription. Mildly irritating is a fair assessment, it just doesn’t bother me personally.