A Thoughtful Discussion on Blynk’s Pricing Model and Potential Enhancements

A Thoughtful Discussion on Blynk’s Pricing Model and Potential Enhancements

It appears that many users are grappling with the significant cost of Blynk’s cheapest package now available. This understandably raises concerns about affordability and cost justification. The pricing model seems to place the cart before the horse, creating challenges for cost-conscious organisations and individuals alike. While this could be a short-term strategy to recalibrate their offerings, the longer-term implications might not be as favourable and could even prove counterproductive. Many businesses have seen their hard-earned reputations tarnished by decisions focused on short-term gains.

That said, these are merely my personal observations. With that in mind, I would like to make a suggestion:

Blynk has likely conducted extensive due diligence to arrive at their current pricing strategy, analyzing the data available to them. Assuming their decision aligns with their internal goals and is unlikely to change soon, how can individuals with aspirations for small automation businesses best address this challenge?

For such ventures to thrive, the approach must benefit both the individual and Blynk. In this context, individuals are almost compelled to scale their operations as quickly as possible to reach economies of scale. While this places significant financial pressure on startups, it is constructive pressure if managed effectively.

Questions to Consider

  1. How far away is the milestone of 40 devices for most startups?
  2. How can the time required to achieve this milestone be minimized?

If reliable statistical data could quantify these unknowns, the uncertainty surrounding the investment might diminish. Entrepreneurs could then plan their budgets and business strategies with greater confidence, leading to higher levels of success and satisfaction.

Request to Blynk
To support budding businesses, Blynk could consider providing relevant data and insights, such as:

Average Time to Scale: The average time for startups to reach 40 devices, based on the top 50% of current clients.
Device Metrics: The average number of devices operated by the top 50% of clients.

  • Promising Sectors: Insights into the best business sectors for device deployment, including applications likely to result in rapid adoption and growth. Historical data would bolster confidence in these recommendations.

Proposal for a Growth Reward System
To further incentivise growth, Blynk could introduce a reward system for startups achieving predefined growth milestones within a specified period. This system could offset initial costs and encourage users to scale efficiently.

Example: Growth Credit System

  • Startup Cost: $100/month for 40 units.
  • Credit Mechanism: For every additional device added, the startup receives a credit calculated as $100/40 multiplied by the months since startup (maximum of six months).

Illustration:

Month Units Monthly Cost Credit Earned Net Usage Cost
1 3 $100 $7.50 $7.50
2 8 $100 $40.00 $20.00
3 16 $100 $120.00 $40.00
4 29 $100 $290.00 $72.50
5 35 $100 $437.50 $87.50
6 40 $100 $600.00 $100.00

Summary:

  • Total Credits Earned: $600
  • Total Costs Paid: $600
  • Net Effective Cost After Credits: $327.50

This model implies a one-time credit of $272.50 upon reaching the 40-device mark. Blynk benefits by onboarding more active devices per month, while the client experiences a fair return on investment and improved growth potential.

Final Thoughts
The suggested 6-month growth period could be adjusted based on statistical analysis of average startup performance.

By implementing such measures, Blynk could foster an ecosystem that aligns the interests of the company and its users, driving mutual growth and sustainability.

All comments and feedback are welcome!

Hi,

it seems that blynk has remained silent on all the comments and suggestions made by the community since the price changes.
this leads me to be very cautious about blynk’s ability to continue to provide the service in the medium and long term.

BrunoG

Personally (I’m nothing to do with Blynk, just been a user for the past 8 years) I think that this is the issue - many businesses were using the cheaper accounts for business purposes.
With Blynk Legacy, the business offering was very expensive, and the regular user account used one-off purchases of “energy” which gave assess to widgets. Business users were subsidising everyone else, but many people were using the regular functionality for business purposes.
Having the local server source code freely available didn’t help either, as it allowed businesses to use Blynk for free.

Blynk IoT was a change of direction, and Blynk clearly didn’t understand the best way of rolling this out at the time, as there have been many many restrictions placed on the various subscriptions types since it was originally launched, so its been a learning curve for them.

The recuring theme has been that business users need to pay business prices for functionality which would otherwise cost them far more to commission than a regular Blynk business subscription.
But, it’s clear (at least to me) that many people were using either the free or the plus/maker subscriptions to do tasks which were clearly business orientated. Whether this be monitoring/controlling commercial greenhouses, food storage facilities, production lines or dozens of other activities.
Blynk’s decision to cripple the free account and remove the plus/maker account option for new users is the only practical way to stop that happening.

How that will pan-out for them remains to be seen, but it’s created a lot of ill-will from genuine makes who now have no choices if they weren’t already maker plan subscribers. That can never be good in terms of reputation, but it’s clearly a calculated gamble to force the hand of the people who were using Blynk for business purposes without a business subscription.

As far as the rest of your comments are concerned, I have to say that personally I find them laughable.
Asking how long it takes for their top 50% of clients to scale to a certain point is like asking a driving instructor how long it takes their top 50% of students to pass their driving test. The answer won’t tell the average student anything useable, because it depends on so many factors - how much money they throw at lessons, age, experience, ability etc etc.
The same applies to marketing an IoT product. How much money goes into R&D, marketing and distribution, as well as the size of the market, the competition and the USP of the product are all variables that Blynk will have no clue about in most cases.

The same applies to your question about the best sectors. The market is flooded with home automation devices, and yet another similar product isn’t likely to be worth launching. Niche markets are where bespoke products will be appealing, but then its about the size of the market and the willingness of people to buy a product and pay a subscription to use it.

Businesses that are manufacturing and marketing a product that has Blynk as its app will need to charge a subscription fee of their own - otherwise they are in the same boat that Blynk were in with their Legacy product - an initial one-off purchase then a long-term commitment to support that product going forward at no cost. How businesses price the product will depend on the cost of the hardware, the R&D, marketing, distribution and support costs, as well as costs of paging fort the Blynk subscription. There is no magic formula for that, it all depends on the product and its marketplace.

The reality is that Blynk best suits business who have a need for an in-house monitoring and control system, and its these type of businesses that are most likely to operate under the radar on a maker subscription.

Just my 2 cents worth of course - take it or leave it as you see fit.

Pete.

1 Like

There is nothing wrong with this, if it were done openly and honestly.
In fact, a free account today gives the false impression that it is functional.
And only after spending his time (for which no one compensates him), the user suddenly realizes that this account is a soap bubble. It is nothing and does not work at all.

I can’t interpret this in any other way than a deliberate deception of a potential user. The impression of Blynk is formed accordingly.

It would be much more honest to use, for example, the option that you suggested - full functionality for a month, then - either a subscription or deletion of the account. Such a scheme is not misleading, it is open and understandable.
And what was done today - I don’t even know what polite word to use to describe it…

Agreed. That’s exactly what I said in December…

Pete.

I have just started to use Blynk again for the first time in some years.

I noticed I have used 30% of my data in just a few days from debugging, so I thought I’d set up a subscription for a few months, at least while I am developing the project then throttle it back when I have the project finished.

I don’t expect to get everything for free and am quite prepared to spend say $5-10 a month but when I saw it was a jump from “free” to $100 a month I almost fell off my chair!

Maybe Blynk should consider that many of it’s hobbyist customers also work in the tech industry and are in a position to select solutions for their companies projects?

I’ve work in R&D for over 20 years and I’ve often use products at work which I have previously used at home because I am familiar with them.

I know other companies understand this, when I was a student (with no money of course!) I often ordered samples from Microchip to my student accommodation and was always surprised when they actually arrived!

I questioned a Microchip sales rep about this, the rep told me they knowingly supply students and hobbyists with free samples hoping that they will potentially use the same devices later on in their careers in a business application.

So my task for today will be moving my project from Blynk to Arduino’s IoT service, I know the Arduino UI isn’t supposed to be as good as Blynk, to be hones I just need the functionality rather than looks.

It’s a shame, I was making good progress with Blynk and was quite excited about working more with it but now I feel I’ve wasted a lot of my time.

Apparently the struggle Blynk has is too many free or low cost users developing commercial projects and not paying for them, taxing Blynk server resources & support without seeing adequate compensation. You could spend a lot of legal resources chasing them down for EUA violations or just gate them off from being able to use your product for anything other than a short duration trial before paying the commercial market targetted fees.

One option (I’ve been shot down before for suggesting this by Pete) - license for a small token fee the original version of Blynk (1.0) - called maybe Blynk Legacy, to either a university or non-profit and let them run their own servers, support app & users, etc. That version is a way for students & hobbyists to get their feet wet without all the complications of the Blynk 2.0 moving pieces. Doing this would I think better naturally limit those trying to exploit Blynk for commercial uses since the old version compared to new is pretty limited in what it did… BTW - a licensed Blynk 1.0 could even be crippled further by eliminating some app widgets that tended to appeal more to commercial users and maybe prevent templates from easily being shared?…

Just an old fart thinking out loud…

Does Microsoft allow people to take Word 2019 and licence it for a token fee, for people that don’t want to buy a subscription to Office365 ?

Obviously they don’t, and for the same reasons that Blynk don’t give away their intellectual property for Blynk 1.0 and let people licence it for a token fee. In fact, Blynk has done exactly the opposite, making it harder to access the Blynk 1.0 local server and Android /iOS apps, to make it more and more difficult to keep the legacy version running.
Do you really think that they’re going to do a U-turn on that and create competition for their product?

Pete.

Microsoft offers a totally free version of Office 365 to students and educators. A way to promote its use to future business employees… Just sayin’…

You can give as many examples or logics…… Blynk is not gonna consider it.
This is how it is. Pay n Use or look for an alternative.

2 Likes

the activity on this forum has dropped to an alltime low, I assume that is exactly what Blynk is aiming for. No more hassle with amateurs/DIY/…, only paying business customers with individual and personal support.

Or maybe we don’t even need help with the new Blynk app anymore,
because it’s actually easier to use than the legacy one!
Thanks, Blynk! :rofl:

I think what we’re seeing is the drop-off of students using Blynk for their assignments.
Previously, we’d get lots of people asking similar questions, with briefs that were to use an Arduino Uno and a certain piece of hardware to produce a specific result.
The fact that the hardware wasn’t suitable for use with Blynk didn’t matter to these students - they were hoping for someone to hand them a ready-made solution to their project.

You could argue that exposure to Blynk at this point might translate to a professional sale later down the line, when these people are working in the commercial sector, but personally I’d say that the conversion rates on this type of user are virtually zero.
Anyone who is sufficiently tech ally minded to prototype a business solution is likely to have come across Blynk via a different route.

Pete.

2 Likes