Comment by cryophobic
2 years ago
I've observed some negativity in this discussion, and it appears that many comments might be based on assumptions about Shimmer. While some criticism centers on how the service is worded, I think looking at the bigger picture is essential.
How many of these commenters have founded a business that has faced the level of scrutiny they're applying here? Have they taken the time to speak with someone who has worked with a Shimmer coach about their experience? I ask these questions because I've actually done so, unlike many here.
Since my diagnosis last year, I've been with Shimmer, and my coach has been nothing short of amazing. While I can only speak for my experience, I urge others to think twice before criticizing a service that many active users, including myself, rely on and appreciate.
I've even written a blog post about my positive experience with Shimmer, which I'd happily share. Discovering Shimmer was a pivotal moment for me when I was tackling a significant challenge, and it helped me gain the momentum I needed to start my own business.
Was Shimmer the only factor? Certainly not! But would I have made such transformative changes in my life without it and my coach's guidance? That's unlikely.
I was at a loss for where to begin, and choosing Shimmer was the right decision for me. So, I urge everyone to be thoughtful and considerate before leaving critical comments. Give those who use the service a chance to share their perspectives. I've witnessed Shimmer's evolution over the past year and the hard work they've put in to make their service valuable.
Let's honour that effort by engaging in a respectful and balanced discussion.
Edit: forgot to include this -> https://satellitemtl.com/blog/adhd-coaching/
Agree. Shimmer is currently in the "assume good faith" category and it would help everyone if commenters gave feedback and asked questions from this perspective.
From what I've seen of Shimmer, the rapid-fire negativity in this discussion is not warranted. I have run a mental health startup. Criticism is constant and highly energised, and it really wears you down after a while. I expect they're also copping it from established practitioners, their industry bodies, and various regulators.
I currently use Shimmer, I have used BetterHelp and TalkSpace. These last two are... not in the "assume good faith" category. Perhaps they could show up to HN for some "robust discussion".
The thing I would like from Shimmer is a policy and mechanism where if you stop accessing the app and showing up to coaching, they stop billing you. Of course this would be startup poison, businesses are built on subscription revenue from non-users. But only billing for care you provide is the strongest show of ethics and consumer-centering I can imagine. Especially when your client base is ADHDers! Shimmer, if you currently do this, put it on the front page in bold.
In my opinion all of these mental wellness apps start out in the good faith category but will transition to borderline scam. Same as most VC startups. Mental health service providers are expensive, and trying to get equivalent services at rock-bottom AppStore prices isn’t going to work. They’ll build up some reputation using VC money, and then when the time is right they’ll sneakily reword their site and introduce some “AI” component. Mark my words.
We hope to stay in this good faith category, and unfortunately are not able to offer "rock bottom app store prices". We believe in the power of human connection (with others, with coach) so we will not be replacing humans with AI. However, I will say, we already have AI components (on the back end to help with coach efficiency—e.g. helping coaches summarize notes, helping them schedule sessions, prioritize their messages, etc.) so hopefully it's not a surprise when we say AI!
1 reply →
Thanks for having us in the "assume good faith" category—we are committed to staying there! And I appreciate your sentiment. We have already made changes to the website, communication, flows, and processes based on this megathread, so I'm very grateful (even if emotionally hard)!
And re: auto-cancel, we've also debated this internally at length. We believe that the worst "startup poison" is not adhering to your customers, so we definitely don't mind shutting off subscriptions and have done it numerous times.
Currently I will admit it's not automated fully yet but my co-founder & CTO tracks whether members have been inactive 40 days (since some users might be paused for a month) and then he goes through this every week or so and double check their meeting with their coach (and if needed, check if there's a pre-agreed situation with their coach) and then will unsubscribe them. We are already in the processes of solidifying the protocol here to make it fully automated. A bit of context on why we don't cancel right away: holding the member's spot with their coach and ensuring the coach has the time/capacity to serve them is important, and sometimes members just don't show up for 1-2 weeks and when they come back, their coaches work with them to either catch up or sort something else out. If we were to just take their spot away, it can be really jarring (especially in harder times for our members) to not have their spot with their coach anymore (e.g. recurring time in calendar held) or support with that coach all together (e.g. coach capacity). Thinking more about it, one of the options we threw around was to have members be able to set this up early on: e.g. "If I don't do X for 30 days, please pause my account, I acknowledge I may not be able to access the same coach after", something along those lines. Very open to ideas.