Games

This is what most companies seem to be aiming for these days as well, along with business-to-business sales as opposed to business-to-consumer sales.

For a long time now, many companies have stopped trying to increase profits by increasing the customer base, but rather are shrinking the customer base with intent to make up the difference and then some with increased costs.

I did some back of the napkin math on the price increases for Xbox Game Pass the last time around, and the numbers were basically that they could lose about a third of their customers for Game Pass and still break even, so as long as they lost less than a third of their customer base, they were still creating more profit than before. They would need to be pushing losing fully half of all subscribers for it to make a negative dent on their profits.

This is late stage capitalism. This is rent extraction where they are indeed happier to make $0 because their customer base was already so vast that they can afford to have a significant portion of those customers bail and they will still make money.

I'd argue that the ratio needs to be much higher than 1/50 to compensate for the increase in risk. It's a lot easier to lose a handful of customers than hundreds. And this increase doesn't look good at all for the customers that stay.

Same concept is behind why fast food is so expensive now.

They're fine with fewer customers if they can charge each one more.

Also, there's probably a lot of money to be made in being a font hunter for these companies. You find a company that has infringed on the font holder's rights. You bring that information to them. You get permission to sue on their behalf and then reap the rewards. And most companies will fork out the $20,000 rather than spend $50 or $100,000 on Litigation, and the font rights holder will catch the $20,000 on the year after for free