TEASEDocs
ProductsClubTroubleshooting

A strong-subs source with weak revenue

Why one traffic source can show a healthy subscriber count and still trail sources with far fewer subs — and which number actually tells you the source is working.

Symptom

One traffic source's subscriber count looks strong, but its revenue trails far behind other sources that brought in fewer subs.

Cause

A $0 free-trial subscribe counts as a fan the instant it happenscore/fan/roster.py classifies a fan's sub_type as trial the moment their earliest subscribe entry is either typed trial or priced at 0, and that fan is counted in subs immediately, before they've paid a single cent. A source that's mostly trial traffic can rack up a large subs number while contributing close to nothing to revenue_net_cents, simply because none of those trials have converted yet.

This isn't a bug in the count — subs genuinely means "distinct fans," and a trial fan is a real fan. It's a read error to treat subs as a proxy for revenue quality on its own.

The number that actually tells you the source is healthy

Every source row also carries trial_subs (how many of its fans entered on a free trial) and trial_to_paid (how many of those later produced real revenue). For judging whether a subs-heavy, revenue-light source is actually working, read trial_to_paid relative to trial_subs, not the headline subs count — a source with 400 subs and a 60% trial-to-paid rate is healthier than one with 100 subs and a 10% rate, even though the second looks smaller on the leaderboard's front page.

The full field definitions and where they appear in the leaderboard response are in Source attribution and the account-wide Trial → paid section of the attribution leaderboard read.

What's next

On this page