Long-term financial sustainability for Loomio
This continues to be a very rich and multifaceted discussion. A big thanks to everyone who has participated! Here’s a high-level summary so far (but this isn’t the end! please keep sharing your thoughts).
We asked the community for input about scalable, sustainable financial models aligned with our values and mission
We had a temperature check proposal where the vast majority of people affirmed the basic idea of some people paying to use the software - with some concerns raised about how that might be implemented in practice
We reiterated some basic facts about how Loomio is set up, to consider in the context of business models (with the software under AGPL3 and the company incorporated as a worker-owned cooperative social enterprise with a constitution that puts the social mission first).
Great questions were asked, great ideas were shared, and we had a wide-ranging discussion about not just Loomio’s situation, but the larger questions around funding large-scale mission-driven projects and open-source tools.
We shared details about our current financial situation and why we need to bring in resources
We explained the business model experiment we’re currently testing (asking people to self-select as commercial users, putting them on a free trial, and reaching out to learn from them), and showed the screens new users see.
Some highlights from the discussion
Ideas for revenue streams
“Pay as you can” where people can pay zero, or what they are able to.
Consulting and training around collaboration and engagement. We already do this work and enjoy a bit of income from it, but it’s not scalable in the same way a SaaS business model is, because it relies on people’s time directly.
Online facilitation services, and a network of facilitators that can help groups on Loomio to be effective. This is a potentially scalable idea, and we’re excited about it, too. But it takes quite a long time to build something like that up, and it still only scales to people’s time. We’re taking first steps to develop training materials now.
Straight up asking for donations. People in the community say they are willing to give. But overall, even the most successful donation campaigns only have moderate conversion rates and only turn into significant funds at very large scale. Running a campaign takes significant resources in itself. And we need to be wary of donor fatigue.
There are some innovative funding models out there we should look at, like Gittip, Gartipay, Patreon, Flattr, crowdfunding for specific costs (like features or servers), etc.
Relatively traditional SaaS model, freemium/premium. Need to find a way to make these successful models work that’s aligned with our values. There are some services - like custom domain names - that businesses care about a lot but that don’t affect others that much. However, we never want to deny core functionality to people just because they can’t pay. Ideas like “you have to pay to make your Loomio private” aren’t a good fit for us because we support, for example, activists in politically volatile situations who need private spaces to deliberate.
We should consider and learn from the business models of other free software projects, such as paid turnkey solutions for private servers, or help setting up your instance. Examples: Discourse, Github Enterprise, Wordpress.
Another alternative funding stream could be the Loomio API, with a decision-making engine supporting different UIs, embedding Loomio in other platforms, etc.
Philanthropic funding is a natural fit for our social mission vision, and we have already gratefully received grants and are on track to potentially get a large amount of grant funding down the line. Long term, Loomio needs a business model, even if we’re also supported philanthropically. So it’s part of our plan, but can’t be the whole answer.
Things to consider in implementing a business model for Loomio
Sharing stories and case studies might inspire people to pay even even they don’t strictly have to, to support others who can’t. The idea that you could “sponsor” groups doing great work through Loomio has appeal.
There are ways other than money to support the project, such as raising awareness to potential new users and growing the community. We could ask people to contribute in a range of ways, money being just one.
Transparency around Loomio’s finances is an important factor in people feeling good about supporting the project with money.
Many users here are very positive about their groups paying to use Loomio, since they get a lot of value from it. Some are able to right now, some aren’t, but many want to.
The main people who many expect to pay are those who use Loomio in a commercial context, but many community groups, NGOs, government, and other groups might be able to pay, too. And some people using Loomio in companies won’t be able to pay. It’s not black and white.
Users really want clarity about “how much does it cost” and it’s important that we do good messaging about whatever revenue model we try out.
We have to be careful what we incentivise and what we tax with the revenue model. If we make things we actually want to see more of less appealing by charging for them - like people inviting more users into their groups to collaborate - it could be counter productive. Many software companies focus on getting lots of users before nailing down the revenue stream for a reason.
A model that helps users who pay feel more like members than customers seems like a natural fit for a community-driven project like Loomio run by a worker co-op. Something inspired by a consumer co-op maybe. Involving users in decision-making about Loomio is an important value for us already (and we don’t want to limit that to paying users).
Maybe everyone should get messaging that sets an expectation that they will pay, but if they really can’t, they can opt for free access.
Making access and payment easy (recurring payments, robust user support, great user experience) is key in people feeling good about paying money.
It’s super important we constantly check back in with values and mission alignment - a really successful business financially that fails to achieve Loomio’s social mission and stick to its values is not a success in the sense we care about.
Utimately, successful businesses thrive based on the value they provide to customers, not based on their internal needs. Loomio wants to not only scale up itself, but hopefully generate surplus that can go toward supporting other aligned projects too.
People see the essential tension between needing revenue and wanting as many people as possible to use Loomio. A model where a small number of people pay more and feel good about it, so many more people can pay nothing, might be good. But we need to make sure we don’t then skew our focus toward only the needs of that small number of users who are paying.
Wider issues affecting this discussion
Finding “patient” scaling capital that’s values-aligned is a very common problem for a lot of social enterprises and cooperatives. Out there in the world, mission-driven financing is still under-developed. This is a problem we all should think about if we want more mission-driven ventures to succeed in our society.
We recognise some serious issues with mainstream venture capital funding. This also touches on really big issues with the capitalist system, centralised currency, and other deep problems in society (mostly out of scope for this particular discussion).
There’s discourse going on online about a fundamental shift of users understanding that if they don’t pay for the product, they are the product (such as on advertising-based social networks that sell user data). But no one really has the answers about that yet.
There is a big and diverse community of people out there working on various ideas in the space, including Snowdrift.coop, fair.coop, P2P Foundation and Commons Based Reciprocity Licenses, the Open Value Network, and many others.
Original Post
As we get closer to completing the massive six-month working bee that the generous support of the crowdfunding campaign enabled (on track for the end of November!), we’re thinking a lot about the long-term sustainability of the Loomio project.
We’re a social enterprise, meaning we place our social mission first: making it easy for anyone, anywhere to participate in decisions that affect them. Our software is open source, and helping all kinds of groups collaborate - not just those with money - has always been our vision. At the same time, we think we can best achieve that social mission if we have the resources to scale, and to keep improving Loomio.
We’re figuring out how to make Loomio financially self-sufficient, without resorting to pushing ads on people, selling user data, or other unfortunate business models that so many online tools use. Up to now, we’ve gotten money via donations, loans, and the team doing some consulting around collaboration/engagement - but these are not sustainable and scalable solutions. We’re committed to keeping Loomio free for noncommercial use for all the community groups, social movements, and other people using it to do great things in the world.
Right now we’re writing lots of grant applications and talking to social impact foundations who support tech-for-good projects like ours, so we can find some bridging funds to keep going while we figure out the business model. The funding landscape for social enterprise isn’t as developed as capital for nonprofits or for-profit companies, but we’re committed to pioneering in this space because we think that should change.
We’re finding out more about the many companies, government departments, and other formal organisations using Loomio in their work. Over the next couple of weeks we’re going to try out some ways of making it easy for “commercial” groups like these to pay a modest per-user subscription for using Loomio. We don’t want this to come as a shock, so we’re hosting this conversation with the community now.
If you’re part of a group that is using Loomio and would like to pay for it, we’d love to hear from you. Also, if you have any questions or suggestions about our revenue model, this is the place to share. Transparency and community input is incredibly important to us, and we deeply believe that the answers to complex questions like this are best discovered by listening to all the voices.
Here are some questions for you:
- How do you think Loomio should go about charging some users to use the software so others can use it for free?
- How can we communicate this commercial/non-commercial differentiation so that users can self-select effectively, and both types feel welcome and appreciated?
- Do you have any brilliant ideas about revenue models for Loomio? How would you go about making the project financially sustainable in a way that’s consistent with our values?
Don't want to be spamming, will make this super-short: I've mentioned it before. I still (in my totally biased view) think that the answer is for Loomio to fund development through Snowdrift.coop — perhaps nobody wants to really think about options that aren't yet available, but this is a long-term issue. We will be launching soon and our fund-drive to cover our final launch expenses is currently live at https://snowdrift.tilt.com !
Hi @deadsuperhero, fancy seeing you here :-). I assume you like the emphasis on self-hosting and one-click installs onto Heroku? Further thoughts?
@elimisteve Yeah, in the past there have been discussions of making Loomio federated in some way; I think perhaps giving users an opt-in directory that they can put their groups in would really empower those that want to self-host.
The directory itself could be on Loomio.org, and some of the entries could point to self-hosted instances. If Loomio still wants to go the federated route, it would in theory be possible to make it so that user@loomio.org could join group@selfhostedinstance.com and participate in discussions.
Additionally, having some kind of turnkey service for large organizations that want a customized loomio instance might not be a bad way to go, although that might require putting your ear to the ground to find consumer demand.
I have an example to share: Sublime Text 2
It's a great code editor, and anyone can use the program on their computers while it's unregistered. You're reminded occasionally that your copy is still unregistered, their purchase page is simple and asks a fair price:
http://www.sublimetext.com/buy
@deadsuperhero Yes federation is on the cards for the future. Starting with a simple way for 3rd party loomio instances to publish public content to a central place would be a good start.
Long term I'm really interested in getting familiar with the google wave protocol.. after a first read it seems like it would be pretty useful for Loomio purposes.
However I think that plugin support should be built before all that.
Four groups of users
proposal by Jacob Gadikian Closed Tue 6 Jan 2015 10:05PM
Okay, here goes:
Loomio is going to form the backbone of my business. I have been referring to our Loomio page as our "governance engine." It is 100% open right now, but will eventually be open only to collaborators. Here is how Dawn defines a collaborator:
*Investors
*Customers
*Suppliers
*Super-users who contribute back to the project, even if they're not customers
*Orgs that produce code that Dawn repurposes
(Eg: It is intentionally a very, very wide definition)
Like Enspiral, Dawn is a SocEnt. Right now we're broke. Would I pay you folks down the line, say, in three months or so when we've been shipping product for a while? You bet. Loomio is best in class of an emerging set of tools for the flat management of distributed organizations. Here are the user groups, as I see them:
Self-hosted users - They shouldn't pay, because they're using the Loomio Source code and ya know, that's what GPL is for. Plus, they're likely to contribute back to the product. You should certainly solicit donations, though.
Charities - Free, of course. Donate if you'd like.
SocEnt - Free, find points of alignment and exploit them. There are probably many. Earn greater value from the socent customers by being paid in cash OR exchanges. I know I'd do either.
Traditional Businesses: Guys, profit oriented businesses need this code too. This is the group that pays, but only for the Loomio.org version.
Okay, that's my proposal!
Results
| Results | Option | Votes | % of votes cast | % of eligible voters | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agree | 1 | 11 | 0 | ||
| Abstain | 4 | 44 | 0 | ||
| Disagree | 4 | 44 | 0 | ||
| Block | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Not voted | 890 | 99 |
I think this is a pretty good summary in general, but it leaves out non-commerical users who actually want to pay. Turns out there is a fair number of them!
These are quite interesting ideas, but I'm not qualified yet to judge Loomio's long-term financial sustainability options to this level of detail. I do agree with providing free options as well as mandatory payment for some commercial uses.
Abstained because loomio's a consensus-making tool. Maybe there was consensus before I posted this. Thanks for helping me learn the tool :)!
I don't understand what standing I have to vote of this decision. It is not that it will not affect me, but that I don't have to implement it or use it to create financial stability. From my limited point of view it is a reasonable suggestion.
I think these are good ideas and I support them but don't think that I have the appropriate standing to vote on this issue.
I note the need to be financially sustainable - essential. To support community groups the free aspect is good. For community projects a 'success-fee' may be useful. For commercial usage a fee-ramp-up-period may be an idea (Year1=xx, year2=y, etc).
see comment
Many commercial organizations will balk at paying for a service like this until it proves itself worthy. I wonder if anyone's recommended a pay model similar to the one Sublime Text uses: https://www.sublimetext.com/buy
@robertguthrie, in addition to the Google Wave protocol, check out http://tent.io. The Tent protocol was used to create https://cupcake.io -- which is actually where I met @deadsuperhero, coincidentally.
Tent tries to solve a similar set of problems, and has a stellar team behind it.
@robertguthrie Admittedly the Tent team is a bit scattered and focused more on building flynn than Tent.
@robertguthrie Unfortunately the Google Wave code hasn't been touched since 2011: https://code.google.com/p/wave-protocol/source/list
@richarddbartlett and @matthewbartlett are going to be focusing on testing pricing models in the next couple months. Would be good to hear their take.
My take: fascinating to hear your thinking on this @jacobgadikian and amazing to hear Loomio described as the planned backbone of your business. I'd love to keep talking as your project gets less broke :)
I found @robertbeck and @adamlake 's language of 'standing' helpful in clarifying an uneasiness I have with the proposal (and in fact with many or most proposals in the Loomio Community group). Does this group have the standing to make decisions about potential charging structures for the software?
@matthewbartlett , I'm quick to agree that this community doesn't have the standing to make binding decisions about the continued development of the software. I think it generally depends on how proposals are worded. I hope that most participants understand that some people are much more invested in Loomio, in labor, finance and ongoing commitment, than others.
@matthewbartlett @gregorycassel This might not be the best channel for any of this but if I get it out there, maybe you can point me to the best channel-- so here goes:
I was sort of wrong to say that my organization is a business, and sort of right at the same time*. What I mean is this: When it comes to governments (which I regard as below pond scum-- pond scum is far more useful than most governments on earth today. One serves a function, the other is a destructive force) I'd mostly like Dawn to continue to be nothing (not register with any of them as any thing). Dawn is a network of individuals, organizations, and corporations working together in differing capacities towards the goal of a better world, realized through open source. Dawn is modular-- people can work in it full or part time, but they can never be employed by it. People can get paid, but only in the form of dividends, which are paid out as such: 1% ownership of dawn = 1% of the monthly dividend = 1% of control over Dawn. Early stakeholders are required to agree to dilute their ownership of Dawn as new stakeholders are added. In designing this business structure for running a value network, I tried to emphasize aligning incentives for collaboration. So far there are Dawn Nodes in three countries.
Loomio truly is the only product that can handle governance needs for an organization like Dawn. While running Dawn I've run into a number of other "network businesses." I think that this is very much a thing. The only thing that is unique about Dawn thus far (and it seems each network business has its own take on this concept, as they indeed should) is the stakeholder ownership concept. Here's how it's going to be done:
I'm going to make a 1 trillion unit cryptocurrency. When customers buy things from dawn or its affiliates, they receive some of that crypto. It's not cash, though people could use it as cash and it wouldn't really have an up or down effect on dawn organizationally speaking. It's an access and proportion token-- to Loomio, or whatever we fork Loomio into. I toyed with the concept of BDFL-hood, but I wouldn't trust someone else to do it, and I don't think I should trust myself to do it. I want users and collaborators (collaborator is the Dawn replacement term for "employee" and "vendor") to hold this Crypto, too. In fact, I have Enspiral in mind for this. The crypto is like a stock. It could possibly appreciate in value but that's not its purpose. Instead, it is to help Dawn to run a community well.
So curious if you folks have feedback on this......
BTW: One open source person to others, thanks so much for all of your work. Loomio is as functional as it is gorgeous on mobile devices. You've given humanity something awesome here.
*I think Dawn fills a role between a business, a charity, and a design firm. It is an attempt to use the best features of all 3 to have maximum impact. Here's what I mean-- Dawn is going to try to make a profit, and reinvest that profit into its nodes. Everything else will be paid to stakeholders as dividends as a non-slavery-esque replacement for a salary-- you own it, not the other way around.
Dawn has recently released its first hardware product. I would like to make a Loomio to run on that hardware if that is okay. You'd only need to choose a price for the device, and a split for the profit. Fenix's business model is one that funds the open code it relies upon. When we base a Fenix spin on one codebase or another, we go to the authors of that code and ask how they want to handle pricing and allocation of profits. Like you guys, Dawn is struggling to stay afloat, but hopefully, Fenix can be a bit of a liferaft for anyone in Open Source while we struggle to change the world for the better.
dawn @ itdawns.org
fenix @ fenixer.org
I should point out @jacobgadikian that I have no formal relationship with Loomio, but Matthew certainly does. Despite my lack of affiliation, I'm quite grateful for your fine tribute to Loomio-- that's how I feel too. :)
So many interesting ideas! @alanna's summary was very helpful, thank you.
In an attempt to solve many problems in one fell swoop without creating too many others, I was thinking: since
(1) Loomio is open source,
(2) you're worried about getting more users than your servers can handle,
(3) you are looking for legitimate reasons to charge money to support hosting and development costs, and
(4) many companies would likely pay more than $2/user (as @wolftune mentioned, especially after certain features are added),
how about you:
(a) make it very simple for non-techies to run Loomio on Heroku's free tier (with Heroku Button);
(b) make it relatively easy for technical users to host their groups' own Loomio instances using Docker (started here by @robertguthrie);
(c) turn loomio.org into a site that showcases and provides a list of interesting Loomio groups kind of like it does now (except the groups are on different Loomio instances and hosted elsewhere), Team Loomio's blog/tutorials/FAQ, and a big fat Heroku Button for launching one's own Loomio instance for free; and
(d) charge companies and individuals (an average of > $2/user/month) who want to pay for a hosted solution, guaranteed support, etc at loomio.com (yes, dot com), perhaps at different tiers.
The result: Team Loomio ensures that non-paying users get the full Loomio experience by providing them 3 options ((a), (b), and (c) above), Team Loomio doesn't have to spend money supporting said users (Heroku does), Team Loomio can support itself with users/companies who do pay, and user data isn't centralized on Team Loomio's servers.
Thoughts?
/cc @alanna, @elaineclermont, @richarddbartlett, and... everyone else.