Patron or Consumer? Lover or Nuisance?

On boutiques, bundles, and being a true supporter...Including on Substack

When you discover an independent creator, how do you support them? Where artists offer exclusive stuff when you subscribe, are you paying more to help their cause or your own? How much is love, and how much is transaction? And do exclusive offers feel like boutique findings with a unique edge?

Boutique-Full

Boutiques are about rare, even one-off, delights. If the term is either overused or rejected, there's not much hope in thriving with the 'boutique' element as the main driver.

After all, when everything is exclusive and unique, the term 'boutique' doesn't mean much when everything's a boutique! The One Thing newsletter explains a lot of what's going on, so check that out for the lowdown.

🟧 Is boutique a bad word?

Boutiques could also inadvertently (sometimes deliberately) alienate consumers based on price. There's tension, push and pull, making our choices REALLY DIFFICULT! And it goes beyond boutique buys.

One Thing suggests that the internet "can route customers toward a sensibility that provides exactly what they want". While that's a reasonable point, I think people also find their tribes on the internet, leading to unique purchases of a different kind. Not so much lacking surprise, but more delighting in the surprises around what they already know. Limited edition merch, perhaps?

A subtle difference, or worlds apart?

I'm not sure, but stuff like this may remove more of the allure of the unique boutique.

Bundles of access everywhere!

Then you have the digital-only stuff, like games and online media and...well, Substack subscriptions, of course! More on that below.

So we've gone from enjoying physical exclusivity to needing digital accessibility, which has shifted how we perceive value and connection.

Recently, Microsoft announced that some 'community-driven' Xbox games will be made more widely available, across other gaming platforms.

A move away from exclusivity to full-access everywhere is unsurprising. It's a natural progression given that you don't even need an Xbox to play many Xbox games. One of my kids pays for the £12.99 monthly Game Pass that lets you stream games, so he can play high-end console titles on a low-end PC. Buying an Xbox console alone would set him back the cost of nearly 2 years of Game Pass. For him, it's a no-brainer.

In some ways £12.99 looks way too expensive, and in others ways it looks like a bargain. I see the confusing perspective in so many offerings in today's world.

Value has become complex. Ambiguous. Confusing. Frustrating. Guilt-inducing.

Some of our needs can only be met through buying items and memberships that cost far more than they used to, or have long been priced higher than we'd like.

That means everything else is less accessible, even when we'd like those things.

And that includes Substack subscriptions to writer's we would like to support. Told you I'd come back to this!

Can you tell I’m your biggest fan?

It only takes two or three Substack subscriptions and, unless you have a lot of disposable income, you're paying impossible amounts to support a handful of people.

I call it support rather than access, because many newsletter subs are 'nice to have' rather than 'need to have'. In most cases, we like the writer/artist or we appreciate their work. If I could, I'd subscribe to tens, if not hundreds, of people's memberships, forums, Patreons, and Substacks.

But I can't. And I'm guessing neither can you.

Welcome to the dizzy dance of identifying as a supporter!

In my curious journey, I keep wondering whether the small creators I support most in non-monetary ways see my acts of support as irrelevant to their needs.

It's just a thought, with no firm conclusions. Just to be clear, I've not got secret shame or some irrational fear that the online peeps must hate me every time I celebrate their creations or link out their stuff on the socials.

But I do think to how this subscription economy is still new in the grand scheme of things. And that impacts what it looks like to be a true supporter when juggling our own financial situation with those we'd like to champion.

Is a top fan someone who appreciates the output most, who engages the most, or who gives the most financial support?

This may sound weird, but one thing I do in this strange situation is to make random gestures of support from time to time. As in, I may buy a sub for a month or two when I enjoy a particular line in someone's Substack. Recently, I paid a small amount in support because I loved how the writer asked in a comedic and assertive way. No big reason other than that.

But then I go further down the curious rabbit-hole...

If I sub for only a month, is my appearance as a 'high-churn' consumer (someone who quickly joins and leaves) more annoying for the creator than if I hadn't bother to sub at all? For me, it's an act of support where I can't do much more than that. But unless I go into detail to explain my reasoning, all the creator will see is that I subscribed and then unsubscribed in a matter of weeks.

Hardly a supporter, eh? And yet that one month of payment is more than the majority of readers will do.

So what makes a top fan?

Unique boutique doesn't necessarily do it. Loyalty to a particular brand doesn't necessarily do it. Even supporting individual creators doesn't necessarily do it.

Numbers Game

I'm in Discord servers of filmmakers, music artists, writers, content creators...These servers may have a few hardcore fans and supporters compared to the sometimes millions who follow across other social channels.

Case in point, I was on a live video meetup on a musician's Discord this week. Their socials amount to millions of followers, with loads of support and listens and likes and...y'know, all the stuff you'd expect.

On their public Discord server, however, the max audience number I noticed on the 2-hour call...was 27.

This is an artist with a following, with radio play, giving full access for fans to turn up and chat about anything we want in a casual setting. TWENTY-SEVEN OF US!

But that still doesn't make me one of the top-27 fans.

Sure, I may be one of the few showing support and appreciation by showing up, sharing the enthusiasm, and listening to the music, naturally. But I stream their music along an eclectic mix of all sorts. All the while, some fans listen almost exclusively to that one artist. And they buy the exclusive merch (that's right, boutique, you don't own the rights to exclusive!). And they go to their live shows.

My level of knowledge and connection to someone doesn't mean I'm a big supporter.

Except, of course it does!

But it shows how there's a lot of nuance in support and exclusivity. Is it patronage or is it consumerism? Is a like an act of love, or just another statistic?

I'm fascinated at how the dynamics of culture and commerce keep changing. Everything seems related to each other. I keep reflecting and reevaluating how these situations alter the definition of value.

Because value spans more than the economic. There's value to be had not just in monetary terms, but in the richness and engagement of our contributions to the people, and the ecosystems, we cherish.

---

BONUS CONTENT BELOW!

I got ChatGPT to check this piece and, while it said my narrative was "cohesive and engaging", it suggested I add the following sentences to the article. I'll add them here instead...Let me know what you think!

⦁ "Does digital accessibility democratize content consumption, or does it simply shift the boundaries of exclusivity?"

⦁ "As digital services redefine our understanding of ownership, they also prompt us to question what we truly value in our digital and physical spaces."

⦁ "This economic dance of support not only reflects our financial realities but also shapes our identity as fans, challenging us to find balance between desire and responsibility."

⦁ "As we navigate these shifting sands of support, exclusivity, and value, one wonders how future generations will define their loyalties and support in an increasingly digital and accessible world."