Probably two issues. One-time vs recurring, and fixed vs per-subscriber.
And vendor probably sees it as giving the little guy a discount otherwise he wouldn’t be able to afford the software until he was bigger. But customer maybe sees it as why should you get more revenue for the same amount of work. Like WISPA charging big WISPs more in dues than small WISPs, for arguably the same amount of work. I remember a farmer with a crappy grain leg thought he should get 50% of my revenue, not a fixed rent. Sorry, only owners get a cut of revenue or profits. Were you there putting up seed money, buying equipment, and contributing labor every day to build the business? No, you are a landlord, you get rent, and maybe free Internet, not a piece of the action. Bottom line, there has to be value to justify the price. So Microsoft wants to sell Windows as a subscription. Is it like paying for a cellphone in 24 payments? Or does Windows truly get better every day with new features that make it worth the recurring cost. Either way, if I’m getting value for my dollar, and everything is transparent, we’re good. Not sure comparing to the WISP business is apples-to-apples. Yes, customers think all we do is bolt a metal thingy to their roof, and they wonder why they have to pay us every month. But in actuality it’s more like the power company or the grocery store. We do stuff every month that costs us money and labor in order to deliver them Internet service. Yes, there is an element that customers expect their Internet to automagically get faster to support all their new devices and apps, but they are not really paying for innovation. Maybe it’s like a lawn service. Yes, you pay them every month, but they come and cut your grass every month. And when they do, it costs them for gas and labor and equipment maintenance and landfill charges for dumping the clippings. It’s different than having them do a big landscaping job and then paying them in installments. From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of ch...@wbmfg.com Sent: Friday, August 14, 2020 1:43 PM To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] QB for billing Exactly. We want their recurring revenue. And we don’t want recurring payments. Seems perfectly logical to me. From: Cameron Crum Sent: Friday, August 14, 2020 12:32 PM To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group Subject: Re: [AFMUG] QB for billing What is your business model based on again? Why would you deny someone else the same model? I think most people don't realize that you are always going to pay one way or another. Just because it is big chunks every once in a while vs small chucks over time doesn't make a difference. You may pay in other ways like increased employment costs, multiple platforms to perform all the same functions, time in doing triple data entry into those platforms, etc, etc. On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 11:53 AM Seth Mattinen <se...@rollernet.us <mailto:se...@rollernet.us> > wrote: On 8/14/20 5:46 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: > SAAS is a developer's lazy way out. Traditionally, you had to innovate > with your product to entice people to give you more money. Now they have > to give you more money to keep operating. I find it frustrating because *everyone* wants a piece of recurring revenue. Am I just generating revenue to feed to subscriptions? -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com _____ -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
