Edit: Roger that, we're showing the full price now.

--

This is super helpful, thank you! The last thing we want to do is to deceive people.

There's a lot of information we want to convey in those little artwork thumbnails and we've been struggling with how to cram it all in. We thought that two prices in that small space would be confusing –– but I think you're right that it was a mistake and we need to find a way to work it in.

I'd take a cue from pretty much every other retail business who does financing. "Low-cost financing available" in some general place, then on each tile just have "(or as low as $X/mo)" or something like that. When I look at it now, it's apparent that the the totals are different between up-front and financed prices, which makes me think I need to break out a calculator, which tells me there's about a 10% finance charge, which then makes me second-thought the purchase in general. K.I.S.S.! ;)

Please add this to the search as well. Searching by monthly price is nearly useless. I want to search by price and then decide how I want to divide up my payments. Searching for say, under $50 is really frustrating because I see things priced $1000 and $100 mixed in together. Most people do have a budget.

Wow. Seriously impressive turnaround time, and thanks for listening!

Kudos to the quick switch! Can see full prices now

Not to mention the fact that I suspect most people interested in purchasing fine art aren't exactly the type who care to finance the purchase.

I think part of their idea is that the sometimes-alienating "fine art" distinction, and the expectations around pricing that go with it, is keeping available art from people who would get a lot of pleasure from living with it. I think there's a type who thinks fine art isn't for them but will be shocked and pleased to be able to get a real, individually made art work for such a low monthly cost.

I mean, anecdotal data ra ra ra, but this is super appealing to me, and I'll probably be making my first art purchase >$500 as a result.

Used to work in an art gallery. Lots of people finance art.

I dont fully agree with this statement, but perhaps the sentiment. I think there are those who are on the fence and doing it monthly can always help. However, I think the bigger struggle is that those interested but not major collectors still get sticker shock whether or not its monthly or not. This is the challenge with all rental models. They advertise "only $25/mo" however when that person says yes I like this, its still $2000 and they are like no thanks.

You could be right! But if AiR is right they might be able to prove that there is actually demand for financing in this context.

Perhaps, but the first (and only) original painting I ever purchased was on layaway.

I see this differently. Buyers are given a choice. Choose what works best for you. It's similar to buying an annual subscription vs. monthly installments. Overall, I like the product... much needed.

"I want to love this idea, but I struggle to get past the lack of full price when browsing. It says "$48 • 24 months" and expects me to intuit that the product costs $1152."

This seems like kind of a nitpick when lots of expensive things (not just cell phone plans) are priced this way. Apartment leases, car leases, internet/cable service, and insurance all come to mind. Saas subscriptions also commonly frame pricing in per month/per user terms (even for annual plans) and leave it to the buyer to figure out the total cost that entails. As long as it's clear that the price is a monthly installment and not a total, which does seem to be the case for Art in Res, I don't see a problem.