Odd subscription policy
I have a subscription that is ending on 1/3/2025. So I wanted to extend it by getting a 2 year subscription to Max. But if I bought it now, I would lose the last few days of my current subscription rather than having the new, 2-year subscription active until 1/3/2027. I thought the text on my cart was an error, but CS confirmed it.
Does anyone else find that odd?
Comments
-
The two-year subscription begins on the date of purchase. The price you pay for that subscription will be discounted to account for the time remaining on your current subscription. Thus, it would be more accurate to think of it as the last few days being refunded rather than lost.
1 -
If that were true, the amount discounted would change from day to day. But it doesn't. I would just lose days I've paid for.
However, that's beyond the point. My question was whether anyone found it odd. It is odd (a) that a subscription purchase doesn't extend the subscription rather than wipe out the current one, and (b) that we don't get an option to begin the purchased subscription automatically when the current one ends.
The current method carries with it a nasty catch-22: Since the LFL requires continuous subscription, if we don't overlap the subscription some or don't time our purchase perfectly, we'll lose the rights to the LFL. (Assuming here that one opts for two consecutive one-year subscriptions.) I'm sure there's no nasty intent, but of all "re-up" subscriptions I've encountered, this protocol seems odd to me.
1 -
Based on her engagement in this post, maybe @Celeste Fiorillo can help with your questions.
0
