MyFonts and families

Have any of you with families on myFonts noticed a drastic reduction in sales since Monotype started pushing their subscription service? Before they took over my family sales were pretty healthy, now it's mainly singles with the occasional family. Anybody else noticed the same?


  • Nick ShinnNick Shinn Posts: 2,144
    When did they start the subscription service?
  • Late January 2016.
  • Ray LarabieRay Larabie Posts: 1,379
  • Yes. I have observed the same.
  • My sales are too small to notice such patterns. Is this issue exclusive to Myfonts, though? I would think offerings at Myfonts influence sales at other vendors as well.
  • Botio NikoltchevBotio Nikoltchev Posts: 31
    edited January 2017
    Yes I have about 55% reduction in my sales compared to 2014. I´m not sure if  just Monotype´s  subscription service caused it. I think its also the Bundle Sales. Also meanwhile its a lot easier to produce fonts, so I guess there are much more type designers releasing fonts than few years ago.
  • Nick ShinnNick Shinn Posts: 2,144
    My 2015 and 2016 were fairly similar.
  • I did see a bit of a drop at MyFonts starting in mid-2016, but I can think of other reasons for it.
  • My earnings are too volatile to draw such a conclusion. I’m more concerned about the increasing “clearance” strategy by which they sell 30-fonts packages for 29$ every third day. Where is this going to?
  • I have an idea.
    Care to share?
  • edited January 2017
    Some ideas are just too good to. :-)  I have to be a bit selfish too once in a while. Sorry for being a tease... I do want people to know we haven't given up though.

    (Not sure why Stephen would vote that down.)
  • I have been thinking for a long time that we need not so much a new vendor but an online catalogue, where type buyers can view and search typefaces. Once they want to buy, they get redirected to each foundry's own website. The catalogue website would have to be paid for by all participating foundries (equal amount, or depending on the amount of fonts on offer?).

    That way, the 'vendor' doesn't take a cut of the profit, and doesn't have to pay nearly as much taxes. It would have to be orgnized as a non-profit.
  • edited January 2017
    I think this is the sort of thing Typographica has been talking about. It's a good idea, if a bit conservative. And something the stillborn Tyd* would have done.

  • edited January 2017
    It added hope. Something that does not have to be loud and explicit.
  • I’m under the impression that the scenery is about to change these days, more rapidly than the three years before. The problems are not new. MF seems to aim at becoming the world’s clearance house for font sales, working more and more on pushing masses rather than focussing on quality and value for money. They are working on destruction of the market. Not to mention recent random experiences with getting bullied by dinosaurs who seem to have them in their hands, more or less. - There will be alternatives (there are some already) for us indie fontists, I trust. I think the days of MF are counted.
  • Although certainly not as bad as "90% off", I don't think rental outfits help value perception.
  • edited January 2017
    Great insights, thank you!

    Maybe renting is harming sales too. (It would be interesting to learn what proportion of Fontstand renters end up buying.)
  • Shouldn't unit price be considered in the context of sales volume? If I'm making $34/unit when I used to make $40/unit, but moving 25% more units than I used to, I'm winning.
  • Winning in the short term, but the damage to value perception festers.
  • Stephen ColesStephen Coles Posts: 996
    edited January 2017
    @Max Phillips, Definitely. Volume may spike for those who cut prices, but I'm not sure it is sustainable. Continually pumping out promotions in which the discount is central seems a poor way to build a reputation.
Sign In or Register to comment.