Although it looks like we are still some time away from the official launch, the pricing is still unknown.
I would prefer a one-time purchase of the app and the favorite themes, with a monthly or yearly subscription for those who want to keep changing themes.
I don’t think free downloads and subscriptions are a good idea. I’m sure if Clear1 was subscription-based, there wouldn’t be as many people still using it as there are now.
All in all, reasonable pricing would be the icing on the cake for this great app.
5 Likes
We have some ideas/plans for pricing starting to firm up here, but I am very interested in hearing the community’s thoughts on this ahead of us announcing things. Let’s see what others think as well on this thread.
1 Like
I totally understand why devs would want to move to a subscription model. What I don’t like and I’m assuming most people is when features that were originally free get rolled up into a sub model and then as a user you’re left with a choice. Pay the sum or find an alternative.
In my opinion one way to go about it from a sub perspective would be a lifetime price, and several subs options.
If you take the route of free then have a reasonable limit of amount of lists that can be created.
I think Castro and Apollo have done a good job with subs
Castro, I paid for the app and had all the features then when they moved to a subs model I kept the features I had before and happily paid the subs price for removed ads, Watch support etc
Apollo is a superior product to Reddit so it made sense to go for the lifetime
3 Likes
I think the most important thing is to keep it sustainable. Sure, we’d all love to pay five bucks once and have the app forever, but I think we’ve seen it just isn’t financially viable for developers. Keeping these apps up-to-date with the platform takes work, even if you’re not adding new features. $10 or $15 annually seems in line with other apps and I’d be happy to pay that if it keeps Clear in active development.
4 Likes
I don’t think it makes sense to offer a subscription for only $10 or $15 per year. For users who want to keep trying new themes, it’s much more affordable than buying themes frequently. But for those who only want to use the basics, they’re paying for features they’ll rarely use.
I think this pricing is more suitable for apps with complex features, unless Clear2 can analyze todos with ChatGPT. Otherwise I don’t think this price is suitable to attract a large number of users.
2 Likes
Base pricing and optional in-app purchases makes a lot of sense to me. The price of a coffee per year for maintenance of functionality could work if the user base is big enough. It’s really hard to cancel a subscription when the price is really competitive. Also a free ad-supported version to try and hook new subscribers. I’d love to see a lifetime once only price - perhaps the equivalent of 10 years subscription.
4 Likes
I concur. I much preferred buying an app outright… even if it was pretty expensive.
With an app that is only subscription, once you end the subscription, you lose all use of the app. I’m looking at you 
ADOBE!
I’d much rather buy the app (w/ incremental updates), then maybe pay additional for full version upgrades.
3 Likes
I dislike ad-supported apps. They just seem sketch.
5 Likes
(Just noting that I am continuing to lurk on this thread and reading up on all your feedback and thoughts! Appreciate them so far.)
6 Likes
Personally, I think a base cost for the app that includes all functionality would be best. Then sell themes, app icons, and typography for additional revenue. You could also sell the complete app for a one time increased fee that includes everything: the ability to unlock new themes, app icons, and typography similar to what we have with the TestFlight. Unlocking the new items is fun so I would keep that somehow.
IMO this works because someone can get the functionality of the app for a base, low cost fee. You can catch those who may want to try it and may or may not use the app. If they like it they can upgrade or piecemeal it along the way. The heavy users will pay more for unlimited lifetime usage of the app. Subscriptions, I believe, push some users away.
Of course, this is dependent on your operational costs and projected need for continuous revenue streams.
5 Likes
I prefer apps that have a base cost then upsells extras for additiona/recurring revenue. I am not a fan of locking “premium” features behind a paywall unless its something that incurs ongoing costs or “power user” features that most users would not necessarily need
6 Likes
I’ve been using Clear for many years but only as a personal “now and then” tool. My every day tool was OmniFocus. However I recently retired and don’t have the need for all the features (and complexity) of that app anymore.
Enter New Clear! 
So I’m trying to learn more about an app of which I only used the most simple features.
But back to topic, I also don’t have the finances to subscribe to a todo list app. I can justify a onetime purchase and if I feel a font or theme might make it better for me then maybe buy that.
I’ve continued my subscription for 1Password and TextExpander, two apps I feel I’d be unable to function without. However I’m even reconsidering TextExpander and using system text replacement instead.
That’s my 2¢ for what it’s worth… maybe not even 2¢. 
3 Likes
The subscription model fits some apps, but not others (it’d be a no starter for me). With the new Clear offer options (some may wish subs model — I’d drop using it if that were the only offering). Offer the new Clear at a reasonable price ($10-12) and then have us pay for updates — this forces the updates to be of value, causing people to want to spend the added cost for new/improved characteristics and expanded options. A lifetime option should also be considered. I do have four or five apps that I’ve paid for lifetime because they are of high value to me (most apps are not), Clear could be.
5 Likes
Some scattered thoughts:
I’d much rather pay a decent base price for a well made app over subscriptions, unless it can be justified with a recurring cost for the developer (i.e. server fees to support cloud features or something.)
Interestingly, if I fall out of my rhythm and stop using the app, I’m more inclined to stop using it completely as I’m reminded monthly that I’m paying for it because of the receipt e-mail.
I’m okay with having some features behind a paywall (if the base price is somewhat low)
I’m hoping that if the app will have a subscription model there will be a lifetime option like Apollo did, and I hope that would give me the option to get every unlockable or continue the “progression” like normal for those tiny dopamine hits 
3 Likes
I agree with a subscription for some sort of cloud feature (e.g., backups, collaborative lists, etc.). But there probably aren’t too many when it comes to a To-Do list, right?
I agree that I would prefer to pay a good amount for the product outright and up front. I’d expect incremental bug fixes for free, but I would pay for full version upgrades.
OR… you could have in-app purchases for icons, themes, fonts, & styles.
2 Likes
Since it’s being asked, I’m pretty avidly anti-subscription. In a time where wages aren’t even coming close to keeping pace with cost of being alive and no one’s allowed to own anything, a thousand different hands reaching into our pockets for that last penny every month is honestly pretty gross to me. Some products are small and simple and should just be purchasable.
I don’t make apps so I’m not sure if this would work implementation-wise, but I think 3 tiers would be an alright idea. A larger up-front amount that gives you access to future everything forever, a medium up-front amount for the app and then you have an item shop for cosmetics, then, thirdly, a small monthly subscription.
9 Likes
… I’m on a fixed income.
I’m an avid non-subscription person as well. Don’t go down that road…
1 Like
I’m not categorically opposed to a subscription existing, but subscriptions need solid justification before I’ll consider paying for them. For example, the need to maintain infrastructure that supports functionality I want to use can justify a subscription for me, so I would be alright with the web sharing feature requiring a dollar or two per month to use—those lists aren’t just going to host themselves. That feature isn’t essential, though, so I would expect users to have the option to subscribe if they want sharable links, or not subscribe if they don’t need the feature.
Providing some kind of frequently updated content can also justify a subscription for me, so I’d be OK with the option to subscribe to regularly receive themes and other cosmetic goodies, maybe alongside packs of cosmetics available as one-time purchases. Subscribe and get instant access to cosmetics as they’re released, or wait a few months and buy the season’s cosmetic pack if you like what’s in it.
I can’t think of a way to justify a subscription for core Clear functionality. I’m happy to pay up front for the app itself, irrespective of what I might pay later for these optional things, but a subscription there would be a dealbreaker for me. That’s like IKEA threatening to come and dismantle my chair if I don’t pay them a monthly usage fee.
2 Likes