We got a great view of the different opinions, options and preferences in relation to a support model through the (many) forum posts we received over the last 10 days and we’re considering those too.
As Collis mentioned in the “timeout blog post”, the idea of the survey is to understand support behaviours to add to the research we had already done. We’ll be doing the same in the buyer survey.
Thanks to those who have done it already….much appreciated!
The link to the survey for authors has just been put up as part of an announcement on the Author Dashboard. If you’re a TF or CC author, please complete the survey to help us understand support behaviours even more…it will only take a few minutes…the more data we collect the better.
Thanks in advance!
We really do appreciate your feedback on this topic. We are listening but obviously can’t respond to everything.
Many of the questions you have raised were discussed by Collis here.
In particular I want to call out the section about Acceptable Use, Guidelines and Policing which we are still working through.
The other thing that has been coming up a lot again is the 72 hour response time and vacations/holidays. As we said in the original blog post, our aim here is to set clear expectations with buyers without placing unreasonable expectations on authors. This remains our aim and the 72 hours was a starting suggestion. That said, we’re hearing your feedback clearly and also still want everyone to have happy holidays and time with their families, friends and loved ones
Last but certainly not least is to remind everyone that one of the key goals of this change is to reduce the amount of support work for the majority of authors. We strongly believe reducing the unsustainable lifetime support that many authors provide down to 6 months will help a lot. Being far clearer with buyers about the definition of support and its acceptable use along with managing their expectations through the site and purchasing experience will go even further.
We won’t have an exact definition of support and its acceptable use straight away, so we’re definitely keen to hear your thoughts on both of these.
Thanks again for your feedback so far.
Enabled saidAny response to this one?
@collis, what about an opt-out button? A lot of authors have asked about this! Can we have an official response to this, please?
Hi there…as part of making support expectations far clearer to buyers on Themeforest and Codecanyon, we don’t think its a good idea to allow opting out.
On the dates: Our thinking here is that 1 Dec is better than 1 Jan (really right smack in the middle). We wanted to give everyone enough time to prepare (~3 months from now) and that because we are time-limiting the amount of support, the later we start the new policy, the longer authors will need to continue supporting historical purchases which advertised support. So 6 months from 1 Dec is 31 May next year vs 6 months from 1 Feb being 31 July.
We know there is going to be lots of discussion about a change like this which is partly why we made this announcement early and although we are not responding to every specific comment, we’re watching closely and will contribute too. Thanks for your comments and feedback so far.
@eneaa and @jonathan01
We worked with a number of our elite authors (including data from their support systems) to understand all of the data points you mentioned in coming up with this plan.
Regarding the 30%, we wanted to offer our highest possible platform fee so that even non-exclusive authors who have a platform fee of 33% would receive 70% for the support packs.
On applying the new policy more broadly, as Collis mentioned in the blog post:
“We’re making the changes universal and required because we believe it will create the fairest, clearest marketplace for buyers and authors. Lack of clarity around support is a well-known issue. From 1 Dec, everyone will know what they are signing up to sell, and to buy when they come to ThemeForest and CodeCanyon.”
We already know that it is only a minority of buyers that ever request support and that by being clear about what support buyers are entitled to this should not change. As Collis mentioned earlier: In regards to complaints and the like, more detail on that coming in the next couple of months, but we’ll have some clear guidelines for both authors and buyers to make sure authors aren’t asked to do things outside of scope and that buyers understand what recourse to take if they are unsatisfied.
So we believe it will still be a small minority of buyers requesting support and that support will be reduced from lifetime support to just 6 months….so all in all, as Collis mentioned in the blog post, it should reduce the amount of support work for the majority of authors.
(Just stepping in for Collis) Glad you like this!
Good point regarding “acceptable use” – definitely something for us to think about in more detail – as Collis mentioned – we need to make sure user/buyer expectations are set correctly.
On the API – this will be updated to include whether a buyer is within the support period or has a current “support pack”. Ie – they are entitled to support at that time.
Hey @stewboon, this is a very promising feature. My question: If a buyer send a PM to “Author Team”, would the also be a link for this Author Team member to verify if the sender was actually a buyer or not ?
Hi there….glad you thinks its promising.
To your question: yes, it tells the Author Team member that “[username] has purchased the item.”