I tend to think the Paddle checkout flow is clear enough on how their free trial period works, and I don't recall anyone else taking issue with that in the past.
But if the sentiment is shared that Paddle's checkout copy needs improvement, I can certainly pass that along to the Paddle team.
Was the OP here talking about Premium or Pro though? b/c I'm still wondering where that $592 came from.
From context though, it sounds to me like maybe they meant to look at the trial for Premium (i.e. personal use) but accidentally started checkout for the Pro version. I wonder if just hopping into the free sandbox might have been a better fit for what they wanted to do.
Anyway, if others find Paddle's free trial / checkout copy problematic, or have other changes to recommend, just let me know.
Paddle looks pretty normal to me but I think some people find that norm offensive. "Free trial then we auto charge you" definitely feels a bit dark compared to, say, "Free trial then we put you back on basic". I think that would be good for Paddle to consider.
I guess another workaround for now would be to start the trial then cancel right away -- should have the same effect I believe.
It doesn't seem very clear on the pricing page that Pro is for professionals; this is mentioned in the copy, but deemphasized there (smaller, low contrast type between black-on-white title and feature bullets). Until I read the passage I quoted I did not realize there was such a distinction, and it wasn't till I went back and looked hard that I spotted the copy that clarified it.
You already have a "For Advisors" page on the site. If Paddle makes it straightforward, perhaps consider listing the Pro plan there and just Basic and Premium on the main plan page, or something like that, and have some sort of secondary CTA (eg "Looking for personal/advisor plans?") on both, to help redirect folks who end up in the wrong place.
Or something like that, anyway - I think the root cause here is that you're addressing two separate markets that have separate sets of concerns and cost expectations, but aren't always being intentional and specific about which of those markets you're addressing at any one time. Due to this you're inadvertently violating one market's expectations with another market's offer, in a way that isn't deliberately shady but shares enough commonality with a pattern that is shady that it takes care to distinguish what's actually going on.
edit: You might also and more simply consider renaming the "Pro" plan; that word doesn't mean very much these days. If it was called something like "Advisor", I doubt anyone would've turned a hair at the price; a name like that does much more to help me as a potential customer understand whether or not this plan is meant for me.
If you just add a 10$ a month option most people will just shrug it off even if they never touch the site again. But you start at 108 for the year. That's charge back territory.
If I just forget about this after the free trial but see a 108$ mystery charge I'm asking questions.
I wonder if the fact that there are now voices on both sides could indicate that it's finally in the right territory. Or perhaps that there should be additional tiers. Just not sure how best to carve up the feature set in that latter case.
The obvious counter example is water. We need it to survive, often. Yet it's basically free. So don't tell me you can just charge based on how important and useful something is.
(Also, water is definitely not free unless you’re literally collecting rain or going down to the river yourself. And even that has costs associated with it.)
I have tons of friends that tell me to price my saas through the roof because "look at the value!!!" ignoring that there are alternatives to it that are basically free, like a piece of paper.
It has been worth every dollar! They added custom taxes with auto import for various countries and they have been clearing out suggestions over the years.
I'm very proud of this HN solo founder. Borderline jealous that they were able to have the discipline and commitment to continue doing this.
Yup. It's a manipulative dark pattern. It makes the path of least resistance automatic spending of money rather than making a decision.
> Billed annually for $540 + tax.
The dollar amount doesn't quite line up, but it's close. Unless there's very clear confirmation before pulling the trigger on the trial, I would agree this feels on the shady side - at that price point after a 7-day trial, and without a lot of messaging at every stage, I would expect to see an elevated rate of chargebacks.
If it helps, this is via the "Upgrade" option when the app is trying to recover a sandbox session from localStorage; I haven't navigated to the pricing page any other way.