Proposed Updated Pricing Model

After lots of complaints, and a few suggestions, from the upper 1% of Streamtip users, I guess we’re considering changing the fee model.

Here’s the newly proposed pricing model per month, which should be more appealing to both large and small streamers:

2% of transactions until you hit $9.99 + a variable rate fee per transaction or 2% of tips (whichever is lower)

The model for the first option above is as follows:

The variable rate fee per transaction will differ based on the total number of transactions you receive in the month:

$0.05 per transaction variably decreasing to $0.02 per transaction until hitting 5000 transactions, where it remains at $0.02.

The formula used to work out this entire fee is as follows:

monthly_fee = 0.02 x total_earned or 9.99 (whichever is lower)

scale = number_of_transactions / 5000 or scale = 1 (whichever is lower)
total_transaction_fee = (0.05 - (0.03 x scale)) x number_of_transactions

total_fee = monthly_fee + total_transaction_fee

The model for the second option is the following:

total_fee = total_earned x 0.02

I created a calculator to help aid those whom are unable to work out the math on their own:

Please leave your feedback below on this new, proposed model. And yes, I’m aware it’s more complicated. That tends to happen when people want things.


Hopefully this will solve the majority of the communities frustration with the old 2% model.

1 Like

I like this proposed system. It seems fair to me, and is also less than half the price for me of a strait 2% model. I’m happy to pay to use this service since it’s treated me so well over the last year!


I do think this is the best solution. I rather have just a montly fee. But it is a better solution then 2% over everything.

1 Like

Now your just trying to confuse us with maths! lol. I don’t mind a % taken out. i really would love it to be taken out immediately. and not Billed.

What happens with different currencies?
2% till you hit 9.99 USD, or 2% till you hit 9.99 (insert whatever currency your donations are accepted as)?

I would also like to edit this;

I made a post yesterday in that other thread that blew up regarding the pricing model. I was basically stating that 2% is outrageous and following a lot of fellow posters in their mindset.

But then I decided to go ahead and see what Paypal takes out of EACH of my donations, from 5 Euros they took out 12% of that donation, from 50 Euros they took out 2.7%.

The smaller the transaction is the higher % Paypal charges for that transaction, the bigger it is the smaller the fee.
I realized that a flat 2% is actually nothing, it really isnt. I would earn money with a 2% fee for Streamtip than I would if I paid a 9.99 monthly fee.

So in essence, the 2% was peachy keen, as Paypal takes the “huge” chunk out of my money. I also said that I wouldnt mind reverting to the old way of personally updating my donations on my stream. Let’s be honest though, this service is sweet as ***. And I’m prolly staying around for a while. :3

The new proposed way takes the best of both worlds.
If you do more then 2% of your total tips, it will check how many it would be with 9.99 and transaction fees. It will then charge you the lower of the 2 for those rare instances.

1 Like

I share a few of the concerns.
We did some maths, and you’re still getting a large amount of money that, for a service is more or less the same as pre-beta. If charges are going to be made, then the service has to be competitive to warrant the pricing.

We (my friends and a few streamers) all agree that we have no issues with paying. But having a fee that taken from any donation just feels very…leechy? as we said, unless the service can remain competitive to the market then many people will go off to find cheaper alternatives. Even if the money taken is small.

I do hope we find a nice solution that everyone or the majority can agree with.
On a side note this feels like it’s going to impact the small time streamers the heaviest rather than big time ones.

How can paying for someone’s time and effort be “leechy”? There have been very generous people donate directly to Nightdev to help maintain some of the server costs, time, etc to even keep this service active, but you can’t run a business based on the possibility of receiving tips for that month.

If you would like to seek cheaper alternatives, that’s your choice and we can respect that, but there aren’t any. Every donation/tip tracking site actually charges way more than what we are even coming into the market at. I’m confused on why people just want to point the finger at someone trying to earn money for their business when the person hasn’t researched other competitors pricing.

Who exactly will this effect? I don’t make over $300 (in tips) per month and definitely not over 15 transactions. I don’t see an issue with paying $6 for earning $300. If you don’t make any tips for that month, guess what you have to pay? If you guessed NOTHING, you’d be correct.

I think the issue is people don’t want to pay anything. Everyone wants free EVERYTHING.

We appreciate people using Nightdev’s projects, like yourself, but we need to grow as a company (in the right way)

What still gets me is how you (as a company) think it is appropriate to claim percentile. Whether it is $1 or $1,000,000 that is sent through a donation your service is still doing the exact same thing, using the exact amount of resources.

“Please leave your feedback below on this new, proposed model. And yes, I’m aware it’s more complicated. That tends to happen when people want things.”

Deleting my posts that where idea’s and constructive, and examples of things that were mentioned does not make this look any better.

"If you would like to seek cheaper alternatives, that’s your choice and we can respect that, but there aren’t any. Every donation/tip tracking site actually charges way more than what we are even coming into the market at. "

There are sites that do it, but if i reply to this, it will only get deleted.

I gave examples, and ideas on how it could be done, and how it would be received better by the audience, dont censor me as if we live in a country where its normal to do so…

Also, your Pay2Use system would work, it would be better i you would take your portion before it went in to paypal, rather then billing afterwards.

Deliberately advertising a third-party service in a thread is not feedback, but blatant advertising.

If you like someone else’s service better then use it. I’m not sure why you are still here complaining if it’s as good as you make it out to be… unless it isn’t.

Then delete the link?
Its not meant as advertising, its meant as feedback, constructive criticism, not everything is meant as an attack.
I will edit and delete the link myself, but my point still stands, it CAN be done

We always appreciate the feedback, but sometimes the feedback isn’t always accurate.

This system that’s in place is not much different than paying your electric, gas, water, etc bill. You have your billing cycle and will have 2 weeks to pay the fee. I don’t see the major issue with billing after the month.

Disregard the fact that electric, water, gas is all on a set amount per unit of measurement.

What do you think we’re doing? Unit of measurement (transactions) + monthly fee (standard service fee). I’m confused on how this is not seen from the model that Night has proposed.


In my opinion my original 2 posts had valid points of concern, and examples of how it CAN be done.
The feedback was 100% accurate, and no lies were told, it was not deliberate 3rd party advertising.
It was an Example of a free service, as previously it was said there is none.
Why am i not allowed to prove the opposite?

Right now it just comes across as "don’t like it, there is the door"
It doesn’t sound like, i welcome feedback and idea’s…
Just my 2 cents tho, i will continue to use Nights services as as long as is can.

Unless I’m missing something here all the “changed” payment scheme is is 2% up till your cumulative number is over $9.99. This is ENTIRELY different from gas, electric, etc companies who have a flat number it costs you per unit of measurement/

For example, let’s say you use no water at all for the month, you will still be charged a service fee (aka the minimum amount you can pay) (The “2% model”) The 2% would mimic how the utility companies are with their service. Once you pass their minimum, you go into a unit measuring system cost/scale system.

For us, whatever is tipped to you + however many transactions you get, we’ll charge you 2% of that until you reach $9.99 for you monthly payment. Once you pass the $9.99, you’ll be charged $9.99+(transactions x .05). The $.05 will gradually scale downwards until you reach another threshold then it will drop to $.04, $.03, etc.

Does this help understand how similar the payment system will be?

I can’t talk for utility companies in the US, however that is entirely wrong to how they operate over here. You’re either charged a flat fee in the form of a set monthly bill with allowances and penalties (of which the penalties are still fixed fees), or you pay per unit and keep your meter topped up (which is still flat fees). At no point does the money you pay to them become a percentile.

Also, you seem to be getting mixed up yourself. Your example is a flat fee, not a percentile (any % of 0 is still 0).

While that is better than the 2% method, it is still bad. With 2% you were penalizing the people at the top of the earning %, who bring in large amounts through donations. This method penalizes the smaller (yet likely the higher % of your userbase) because you’re taking a larger amount out of what they earn in total (comparatively).

I point you back to the previous thread, where myself and another user (can’t remember the name off hand, apologies) suggested it is entirely based on a flat fee per transaction. There are many many examples of where this is used and is massively successful.