When I think about the target market for an RSS reader at any price point, I think that "technical" is the first descriptive word. Someone has to know a bit about "tech" to even know to use RSS, for example. When you put a "$19 per year" price tag on it, you really are polarizing your market to be "only those who are completely addicted to RSS". Which is fine - nothing wrong with niche marketing/products. But let's talk about those potential users...<p>The average RSS "user" doesn't spend $19 per year on an RSS reader. Most used Google Reader or another free version. Some, like me, spent $30 on FeedDemon (one time cost). I would put myself in the "addicted to RSS" group for sure.<p>Your hard core, addicted RSS people in 2013 have spent 5+ years, I bet, using RSS. So when someone who is an RSS junkie looks at the price point, they think, "I've used Google Reader for ten years and it's been free. I'm looking for a replacement that will hopefully last at least five years, maybe ten. This service is $19 per year - that's almost $100 over the next five years..." If you are charging someone $100 for the service, then you'd better "bring it". This page/site just doesn't do that, and it doesn't do it so spectacularly that it calls into question the entire product. Sorry but I think this needed a few more weeks to really get it together before launching it.<p>* Oh sure, there are always some who don't take such a long term view - "I'll just try it for a year." If that's your approach to marketing, cool. You'll miss out on the really smart and technical users, I think, but that may be best actually. It's fairly logical to think "Things that appeal to the really hardcore users" and "Things that appeal to the mass market" are quite different.