We'd be better off with no Patreon in today's marketplace. The problem that Jack Conte founded Patreon to solve was the frustration of not being able to monetize YouTube, a frustration that 11 years later doesn't exist along the same lines.
A younger Jack today wouldn't will Patreon into existence, not only because the ad revenue would be there for him on YouTube but because internet payments are ubiquitous: Stripe is here, PayPal's still here, and beyond. I didn't choose Patreon to launch my subscription product. Why would I shell out 12-15% in fees to Patreon when I have only a few subscribers (all in my country) and I can use Stripe with my website hosting service?
Even the big YouTubers and podcasters, who want a convenient service and make up the head of Patreon's long tail, have better options now. YouTubers have channel memberships directly on the platform, a pipe dream in Conte's youth. Podcasters have subscription tools made specifically for podcasts.
So even if Patreon was bootstrapped, it seeks a reason to exist in 2024. And yet it has raised nearly half a billion dollars.
I wrote about local Patreon creators two years ago for Subscriber Fridays at Rhythm Changes. At the time, I wrote:
"In the music category alone, Patreon moves more than CAD 1.25 million a month in earnings, to over 15,000 users who have at least one patron.
However, the category isn't growing; it boomed in 2020 but has been flat since the start of 2021."
Those numbers are now CAD 1.1875 million and almost 16,000 creators; the money pot is smaller and the pool of creators looking for a slice is larger. Stay away, you won't have a wave to ride on this platform. An alternative path where it went bust would stimulate the creator-membership world, addition by subtraction of a now-redundant player.
Also, I like Conte's music and would welcome him doing more of it relative to the desk work.
For more, YouTuber Tom Nicholas tells an engaging story about Patreon's history.