So a lot of us that have been server admins for a long time and don’t really use any of the Plex streaming content have been rather frustrated with Plex’s direction towards heavily promoting their ad-hosted content.
Just throwing this out for some conversation - what other ways could Plex generate revenue? I think most of us know that the lifetime Plex Pass hasn’t turned out to be a great deal for Plex as a company (although it has been great for us).
Obviously these software companies need to continue to make money, at least to cover the expenses of development, infrastructure, support, etc. (and those costs continue to rise, just like everything else).
As much as people have bitched about the fee for remote access, at least that’s a start, and it doesn’t have a lifetime option (other than getting a Plex Pass), just wondering what other avenues people think they could maybe approach?
I purchased a lifetime pass back when it was $75, around 2014. I have more than gotten my moneys worth out of the app over the years. I want nothing more than to see Plex continue being the amazing personal media server that has always been.
I would be more than happy to begin paying a monthly subscription in order to keep that dream alive.
I personally feel it would be in their best interest to have a proper poll of all of their current users. They need to send out emails, in app notifications, and post it on the forums. Really get it out there for all to see.
Just ask people if they’d be willing to pay to keep Plex as it is. I understand there are users who want to have a VOD streaming service, and that’s fine for them. That is a very lightweight app that Plex could offer as a secondary service. Or primary service. As long as we get to keep the PMS.
Yeah, I would be as well…especially if those fees could go towards better apps with features that the users want, not necessarily what the VC partners want.
Wondering if there are other companies they could somehow partner up? I think they tried to tie in existing streaming services but don’t think any of them seemed too interested. That would have at least made sense - I imagine if someone had a subscription to Netflix, it would be kinda cool to tie that into what you can see inside Plex.
They’re a big enough name now that I would be shocked if they couldn’t get some parntnerships like that. I think what scares away most other companies is they may see Plex as a platform that encourages piracy, which is not the case, but execs aren’t going to see past that.
Monetizing features as you said would be a good idea. Maybe subscription tiers they include different things. For example base tier just for basic PMS and go up from there, a tier that includes remote, and one more that’s everything (including remote watch and live tv).
It’s really hard when you start making paywalls but if it’s granular enough you will start seeing more adoption for why people want.
I also wouldn’t be opposed to just à la carte features so I could pic a “kit” that works for me and just pay for those. So like, each major feature is $3/mo or something.
I also wouldn’t be upset if they made remote watchers pay that $3/mo to access my server.
There has to be ways to make money that aren’t just slowly killing off what makes Plex great in favor of “market changes” because the market will always change and in a few more years we could see a total push away from VOD.
This. I would happily pay a media streaming subscription fee equal to some other current services out there to have a really nice experience again.
Maybe time to end “Plex 1.0” and keep it maintained until they can’t anymore, and call that the deal for all the current Lifetime holders. Start Plex 2.0 and get back to what they were originally trying.
Some of the new features they rolled out seemed a little cursed for me. Just when I wanted to roll on checking out Plex Cloud, they killed it. I was just getting ready to roll in on Plex Arcade when they announced that one going down. I was a subscriber for the Plex/Tidal partnership as I thought they played really well together.
There are ways to get a revenue stream going again. May not be a firehose worth of cash flowing in, but if they have revenue coming in from the ad supported version, and it’s making the investors happy, then roll hard on that for Plex 1.0, and roll a smaller more targeted project for us.
Great topic, I don’t think I’ve seen a thread with a honest conversation from the user community on what they think about ongoing financial support for the company. I’ve a couple of thoughts but I’ll drop my top three for now
I’ll get what might be considered the most controversial one out the way first. Plex should never be free if your running a server. I’ve don’t understood why plex would not plug the hole of admins running a server indefinitely, for free. Madness. Do Something like what unraid have, free trial for a month or two, then you have to buy a license / plex pass whatever with some tiered options. Also, do it retrospective even if you have no plex pass today. Announce it, give folks a year and then your plex server needs a license, no more freebies. You want a free media server off to jellyfin with you.
Make one of the paid tier licenses expensive, $/€500+ lifetime or even make it yearly only but give it a kill switch to completely remove all online deep linking content from plex. Also have it include LOCAL ACCOUNT SETUP & MANAGEMENT. Completely your content, nothing else.
As a client only user, Plex should be free to sign up as it is today to watch online content and as it is today. If you want to remotely stream from a server and your NOT the admin you need a remote pass OR the license on the server from point one above is from one of the higher tiers that allows remote access to x number of shared users. When they announced remote stream, I said to myself, good on you, great idea. Again, weed out the freebies and those selling access to plex shares (it happens, we all know it does).
I’ll be curious to see how this topic goes so will be keeping an eye on it.
I completely agree, especially with point 1. It made sense back when it was an open source fork of XBMC but those days are long gone and they have none of that code anymore. Hosting a server should not be free.
I agree with the first bullet point, if you want to host a server mandate the Plex Pass. That’s easy monthly revenue or a quick payday that buy the lifetime pass.
If people want to use Plex as a streaming service with ads or however works the best finally, run that along side it.
I could see someone who bought a lifetime Plex Pass within the last year or so having some manner of grounds for complaint, but I don’t think many of us who have rocked it for years would complain much, if at all.
They could say if you purchased a plex pass within a year you’re grandfathered in until the next year and then pay the difference. I’d be okay with that myself.
I bought a lifetime pass more than a decade ago. I wouldn’t mind if the life-time pass turned into a decade pass. Doesn’t have to be crazy. But without a “donate” button, I struggle to give them money. I typically buy lifetime passes for friends who don’t need it or want it.
Actually now that I’m thinking about it. Why not sell two versions of the Plex Pass?
Keep the main one as it is, and it’s the “server” version to host.
Sell a “user” viewer Plex Pass. This gives the access for using skipping intros/outros and the pass out protection. This being way cheaper, with a monthly/yearly/lifetime variant?
It baffled me when I started using Plex about 13 years ago and it baffles me even more now.
The other thing I’ve always found irrational is that you can share your libraries with quite a lot of people. This is a quote from a Web search but I think it’s valid.
You can share your Plex standard library with a maximum of 100 total users, which includes anyone in your Plex Home.
Here is a breakdown of the limits:
Total Shared Accounts: The hard limit for a single Plex account holder is 100 people with whom you can share libraries.
Plex Home Members: Up to 15 of those total users can be members of your Plex Home (which requires a Plex Pass to add regular Plex accounts).
Standard Friends (non-Home members): The remaining number (up to 85 if your Plex Home is full) can be regular Plex accounts you invite as “friends” without adding them to your Home.
I mean, not to infuriate those who have many friends, but sharing your libraries with 100 people? And then, there are those who profit from this without Plex seeing a cent.
There are already working models for streaming from a host.
Netflix for example allow you to play material locally on a set number of devices. Streaming that material externally is allowed but the device needs to return home regularly or the streaming is locked out. If devices are used by the host externally/remotely to the main account and want to premanently access that material remotely, they have to get their own paid access.
Plex could easily follow this same model. The server owner pays a hosting sub and can play material locally and externally. However, any device used by the host that is used remotely has to return home regularly to continue to be authorised.
Any user who wants to access the host has to subscribe to a remote sub. If they want access to PlexPass special features they need to pay for add ons.
Edit - I have a lifetime PlexPass and would be happy to move to a monthly/annual sub. One that allows me to stream locally and remotely for my devices and the current PlexPass features. For those who have recently purchased a lifetime PlexPass, it is either suck it up or Plex would have to offer a period of grace before a sub kicked in.
Wish I could roll back some of the changes Plex made in recent years. Splitting off photos and videos by itself is bloody annoying. A huge part of my use case is hosting family videos and photos and requiring separate apps for videos and photos is a pain.
I know that is 100% the reason behind the implementation of a “remote watch pass”, and I will go to my grave preaching that is the reason. It was 100% a way to either “reduce the revenue of” or “get something back from” the people that churn up a server, invite hundreds, and sell access to this server to others.
I’d be fairly aggravated if Lifetime Pass became something it wasn’t advertised as when purchased. I realize this is a trend but it smacks of false advertising tbh. Plus causes a sudden exodus of users.
I do feel that some areas should be trimmed down in being freely included. The 100 limit on users for sharing content with takes it well beyond the intent of Plex imho. But to reduce that and generate revenue from it becomes problematic unless other similar services do the same. And frankly if you were a competitor would you follow suit or take advantage of a potential surge in sales?
Where revenue could / should be raised are in items like for example PlexAmp. There’s no reason that’s not an add-on purchase tbh. It’s a great app and deserves to be something paid for.
Another area Plex could easily pursue as a source of revenue is to create a service similar to Trakt. Many of those using Trakt already have Plex and import data from here to their Trakt. So most of the data is already available. It would just be a more enhanced Watch List type of environment / service. And potentially a source of revenue if Plex could negotiate a referral type of service for users choosing to pay and watch something they had Watch Listed that wasn’t in their library and required a payment.
They could definitely do that IMO…don’t make it overly expensive, maybe $5 or something? They could include some sort of trial period or restrictions on a free version for someone to be able to try it out though.
