Tweetbot and Twitterrific Users Can Support the Developers by Declining Subscription Refunds

[MacRumors]

Popular Twitter clients Tweetbot and Twitterrific stopped working overnight in January after Twitter disabled the API used by third-party apps. Twitter gave zero warning that the apps were being blocked from accessing Twitter content, and in fact made no statement on the situation for well over a week.

Twitter then officially updated its terms of service to ban all apps similar to the Twitter app. Twitter clients that had been operating for more than a decade were all of a sudden banned, with no communication from Twitter, no heads up, and with no way for the developers to figure out a way to carefully unwind their businesses and communicate the shutdown to customers.

Tweetbot and Twitterrific, two of the most used Twitter clients, had subscription offerings and thousands of customers that paid for subscriptions on a yearly basis. With the apps unable to function, pro-rated refunds are set to be automatically issued to subscribers next month, which will heavily impact businesses that had no warning their income stream would be cut off.

Those refunds are going to be paid largely by Tweetbot and Twitterific rather than Apple. As John Gruber points out on Daring Fireball, this is akin to a person getting fired and then having to pay back their last six months of salary. It is a significant financial blow to app developers put out of business by Twitter's snap decision.

Tweetbot and Twitterrific have teamed up to offer multiple options to customers who are due refunds, and customers who want to help need to do the following:

1. Open Tweetbot or Twitterrific (or redownload the apps if they've been deleted and open them).
2. Choose the "I don't need a refund button." Alternatively, for Tweetbot, choose to transfer the subscription over to the new Ivory app for Mastodon.

Because refunds are being issued automatically, Tweetbot and Twitterrific customers who have been happy with their service and want to help the developers out will have to manually opt out using this method.

Customers who do want a refund can do nothing and will receive a pro-rated refund on March 28. Anyone who does not hit that "I don't need a refund button" will get their money back for the months that were left on the subscription at the time that the apps stopped functioning.

The apps have already been unavailable for more than a month, which means Tweetbot and Twitterific have no way to contact customers who are likely no longer even opening up the apps, or who have already deleted them entirely. Many customers will be issued refunds without even electing to be refunded as it is an automatic process without the manual opt-out.

Twitterrific developers Iconfactory and Tweetbot developers Tapbots both have other apps, but Tweetbot and Twitterrific were their main apps. Apple will require them to pay between 70 and 85 percent of each refund, depending on how long each person was subscribed (70% for those subscribed for less than a year, and 85% for those subscribed over a year). Apple will pay the remaining 15 to 30 percent, as that is the cut that Apple had been taking from subscriptions.

Tapbots has already transitioned to Mastodon and offers the Ivory client on both iPhone and Mac, while Iconfactory is focusing on its other apps like Linea Sketch.

Article Link: Tweetbot and Twitterrific Users Can Support the Developers by Declining Subscription Refunds

 

[LawJolla]

You have to be pretty scummy to ask for a refund.

 

[vertsix]

They made millions off of subscriptions. Just ask for a refund.

 

[Vespi]

This is why I only use official apps, and would never pay for subscriptions in 3rd party apps

 

[icanhazmac]

Those refunds are going to be paid largely by Tweetbot and Twitterific rather than Apple. As John Gruber points out on Daring Fireball, this is akin to a person getting fired and then having to pay back their last six months of salary. It is a significant financial blow to app developers put out of business by Twitter's snap decision.

As they should be! While I feel for both companies passing the buck to consumers that paid for a service they can no longer provide is a bad optic.

Perhaps both Tweetbot and Twitterific should have had better contracts/agreements with Twitter? If you base your business model on a rug that is that easily pulled out you kind of get what you deserve.

Edit: LOL @ all the "disagrees" not one of you has offered a reasonable explanation why consumers should foot the bill for a poorly planned/executed business model. They were happy to accept subscription money knowing full well this could happen. If they had API access contracts with Twitter, and based their subscription durations against these contracts, then this wouldn't have happened. Geez, lots of triggered fans of these two apps.

Edit 2: Still waiting for a rational response, that means one that doesn't start with "But teh Elon bad man!"

Edit 3: I don’t have Twitter nor have I used either of these apps. Just chiming in on principle.

 

[RalfTheDog]

As they should be! While I feel for both companies passing the buck to consumers that paid for a service is a bad optic.

Perhaps both Tweetbot and Twitterific should have had better contracts/agreements with Twitter? If you base your business model on that weak a relationship you kind of get what you deserve.

It's not like Twitter is living up to their contracts anyway.

 

[Syk]

You have to be pretty scummy to ask for a refund.

How so? You paid for a service you no longer are receiving. There's nothing scummy about that.

 

[drew0020]

If I had either of these apps I would decline the refund as well. This change came out of nowhere with no warning to the developers. I think many of us take for granted what are phones/tablets/computers can do (mostly due to independent small developers). Gotta support them especially in this type of situation.

 

[xEODGuy]

So, let me get this straight...I should opt out of getting a refund from a company that didn't supply what they said they would because it's someone else's fault that they can't deliver it? How about this: they stop whining, give back all the money that they were given for nothing, and sue Twitter for what they think they're owed?

 

[swrobel]

You can see just how few developers read MacRumors by the complete lack of empathy in these comments 🤦🏼‍♂️

 

[drew0020]

So, let me get this straight...I should opt out of getting a refund from a company that didn't supply what they said they would because it's someone else's fault that they can't deliver it? How about this: they stop whining, give back all the money that they were given for nothing, and sue Twitter for what they think they're owed?

Yes exactly you should decline the refund!

 

[LawJolla]

You can see just how few developers read MacRumors by the complete lack of empathy in these comments 🤦🏼‍♂️

Completely. It's all about them and what they did or didn't do for "me."

 

[Puonti]

That's an easy "Do not need a refund". Tweetbot was great.

 

[drew0020]

You can see just how few developers read MacRumors by the complete lack of empathy in these comments 🤦🏼‍♂️

I mean let’s be honest most people on here balk at paying $0.99 cents for an app that is essential to them. I wouldn’t want them as my customers with this sort of attitude lol

 

[PauloSera]

You have to be pretty scummy to ask for a refund.

LMFAO. They made tens of millions off subscriptions for an app that was a wrapper around unauthorized APIs from a 4th party service. They were dumb as rocks to actually believe this would go on indefinitely. Everyone is entitled to a refund.

 

[PauloSera]

You can see just how few developers read MacRumors by the complete lack of empathy in these comments 🤦🏼‍♂️

I'm a developer and have no sympathy for this scenario.

 

[antiprotest]

You can see just how few developers read MacRumors by the complete lack of empathy in these comments 🤦🏼‍♂️

I can't tell the number of developers because there might be some developers here who have backbone and integrity, and who do not feel entitled to be paid when customers could not receive the product or service promised, for whatever reason.

 

[compwiz1202]

So, let me get this straight...I should opt out of getting a refund from a company that didn't supply what they said they would because it's someone else's fault that they can't deliver it? How about this: they stop whining, give back all the money that they were given for nothing, and sue Twitter for what they think they're owed?

Exactly! Twitter should pay!

 

[YankeeSR23]

I think they said I had 29 days left in my subscription, so that would get me what? 48¢? Honestly I just declined the refund as it won’t affect me too much, plus I know others will ask for their refund.

 

[coolfactor]

LMFAO. They made tens of millions off subscriptions for an app that was a wrapper around unauthorized APIs from a 4th party service. They were dumb as rocks to actually believe this would go on indefinitely. Everyone is entitled to a refund.

No. Twitter just changed the rules under Musk. These apps are victims of that.

 

[jarman92]

The entitlement and utter lack of empathy in this thread is actually shocking. A Tweetbot subscription cost $6 per year. It is eminently reasonable to ask—and expect—users to forgo a refund of a few dollars to help developers who were blindsided and screwed over by a petulant and capricious billionaire.

 

[PauloSera]

Perhaps both Tweetbot and Twitterific should have had better contracts/agreements with Twitter?

Or you know...any whatsoever....before trying to build a business around free APIs.

 

[PauloSera]

No. Twitter just changed the rules under Musk. These apps are victims of that.

False. There were no rules. They simply pulled the plug on something Tweetbot was never guaranteed access to in the fist place.

 

[HarryPot]

If a company takes a risk to charge for a service they can't guarantee, I don't see why they should expect their clients to deny the refund.

If they had a contract with Twitter, they surely would receive compensation for this. If they didn't, it was a risk they decided to take.

I understand why they ask. And I suppose losing $15 bucks for the subscription you never received won't be as bad as the money problems they must be having right now.

But judging people that do accept the refund.... better judge the company that couldn't guarantee their service.

 

[compwiz1202]

I think they said I had 29 days left in my subscription, so that would get me what? 48¢? Honestly I just declined the refund as it won’t affect me too much, plus I know others will ask for their refund.

They should allow you to pick how much. If you got an annual sub a day before the apps were axed, you shouldn't have to forfeit it all, but you might want to give a portion.

EDIT: From what I read it may not have been too much. Was that number someone stated a monthly or annual? And if you forfeit it, does Apple get there share back. If I had these apps and forfeited the refund, I want it all to go to the devs or I keep Apple's share. And I still think Twitter should be paying.