Patrons buy future production

Authors of an online Public good will often add a “donate” button with language like “if you enjoyed this (free) content, please consider showing your appreciation with a donation.” Sometimes it’ll be framed in a slightly forward-facing way, but still a sort of quid-pro-quo: “If you enjoyed this content, please continue supporting my future work with a contribution.” But I don’t think patronage is motivated by paying for consumption of past work. Instead, they’re altruistically contributing to the production of future work.

In December 2020, I surveyed my patrons (open-ended) about their motivations for supporting me. About a quarter responded, and the overwhelming majority articulated a wish to fund future work.

From this angle, it makes sense to think of the production of the work itself as a product. What are patrons buying when they buy that product?

In its most compelling form, a patron’s purchase causes future work to be produced which would not have been produced without it. Perhaps without that patron’s contribution, the creator must spend some of their time freelancing to pay the bills, so their projects were limited in scope; but with that patron’s contribution, they can work full-time on much more ambitious projects. Or maybe they can hire a freelance artist to illustrate their game, etc. This is like a Kickstarter crowdfunding campaign, except in an ongoing fashion instead of for a one-time effort. This type of behavior will still typically be altruistic in nature, if what is being produced is a Public good.

Patrons may also be purchasing non-public goods by paying for production:

• a closer relationship to the producer, either implicitly or through activities like Q&A or a patron-only discussion forum
• the opportunity to influence the producer’s work
• extra content, e.g. “behind the scenes,” “work in progress,” bonus material
• attribution, early access
• “swag”: t-shirts, hats, etc

What types of offerings work best? Looking at some patterns…

• 3blue1brown frames his Patreon mostly around altruism. Some of his reward tiers include perks, but they all seem to be relatively minor. An excuse to “upgrade” to a higher level, maybe, but not the core motivation for his patrons. He’s got plenty of funding (at least for himself) with just that.
• Vi Hart mostly frames the proposition around altruism, but her higher tiers are about larger targets: funding her internet connection, paying for her piano, paying her mortgage, etc. Because they’re bundled as individual large units (rather than as divisible funding goals), they seem not to have gotten traction. But overall, using mostly an altruistic-plus-bonus-content angle, she appears to have raised a fair amount of support.
• Nicky Case frames his Patreon entirely around the concept of donation. He offers some products in exchange for higher tiers, but they’re clearly just tokens. Yet he’s raising a (somewhat) sustainable monthly amount.

References

Eghbal, N. (2020). Working in public: The making and maintenance of open source software. Stripe Press.

Applied Divinity Studies correspondence, 2021-02-19