Opper (TBS / Mahalo / Aboweb / Dialog)
Results in the Tech Stack study
Results come from publishers’ answers and cannot be edited by the vendor. Learn more
What its users say (25)
6/10“A tool better suited to managing traditional print subscriptions (distribution, home delivery) and less suited to the requirements of digital, and above all of a B2B media company. Lacks depth on specific reporting.”
6/10“A fairly rigid tool, and it is complicated to connect other tools to it outside the Opper ecosystem. The way it works is still too much based on the print model; managing print + digital is still difficult.”
6/10“It remains difficult to get basic subscription data (number of subscriptions in real time, lifetime, churn, etc.). The tool is still trapped in logic inherited from print.”
3/10“We have a great many difficulties and problems that we are unable to resolve, in particular due to the instability of the tool, its opacity and the side effects of updates. We are also penalised by extremely long processing times for issues escalated to support (with answers that are often imprecise or incomplete).”
5/10“We often have difficulty getting the tool to evolve in line with specific business needs. The switch from Aboweb to Mahalo reduced the time taken by certain tasks but does not make the tool any more malleable in terms of features.”
7/10“Robust solution, but with problems evolving.”
9/10“Very high-performing and open. SaaS mode +++. Many automation and personalisation features. Many APIs with digital tools that are essential for developing a good marketing strategy.”
9/10“Perfectly addresses the subscription management issue.”
9/10“Mahalo is perfectly interconnected with all of our tools (shop, digital newsstand, media site, etc.). It meets all the subscription management needs specific to press publishers at reasonable cost.”
9/10“The tool meets our needs. It is comprehensive and user-friendly, with a high-performing BI tool. Responsive teams.”
7/10“Good customer service, but missing features and few improvements to the platform, and complications for automation with the website and a data platform.”
5/10“No worse than any other. In 2024, subscription management systems are still built on print logic…”
4/10“Relatively stable tool, but little product evolution and print logic still predominant.”
7/10“Very high-performing and ergonomic tool for subscription management (subscriber entry, routing, duplicate management) but technically unstable. The support has nevertheless become very responsive.”
5/10“Solution lacking stability, lots of evolutions recently that have side effects. Numerous regressions observed.”
5/10“Implementation in progress.”
3/10“Slow API, unresponsive support.”
8/10“Interoperability sometimes a little rigid.”
2/10“I would rather not go into detail on this.”
7/10“Technically stable, good follow-up from the teams.”
6/10“Old and rigid, not enough autonomy, no analysis – Mahalo migration being finalised.”
5/10“Difficult to get the right KPIs. Everything has to be custom-built. Back office not intuitive.”
1/10“It is not very flexible, not very intuitive and complicated to use; we are going to migrate to the Magellan CRM.”
8/10“Good, very practical solution – Many marketing options – Good handling of digital.”
5/10“Overly complex system, very unfriendly to use.”
Anonymised comments from study respondents.