So which part of this statement are you being sarcastic about?  I'm
confused now.....

On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 9:44 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm <
[email protected]> wrote:

> I hope im not coming across as thinking this guy is anywhere near his
> right mind in his expectations
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 10:26 AM, David <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> If you are only looking at the actual usages yes this looks great, but
>> what about how much time will used to maintain said such infrastructure and
>> the infrastructure it attaches to.
>> So, Yes I would be looking for more on a monthly rate.
>>  Especially if I deployed it and installed it. Of course you could give a
>> $10.00 charge for service access only and a $100.00 monthly maint contract.
>> Or apply a contract where they pay each time a truck is rolled.
>>
>>
>> On 06/01/2016 11:15 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:
>>
>> Man, thats a good, point, I should take that to management, we dont want
>> to come across like rip off artists. Thats only like  .3% of the day so it
>> would be unfair to expect them to pay for the unused 99.7%. Boy, we almost
>> look greedier than the presumptive GOP nominee
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Chris Wright <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> $39/month is pretty steep, don’t you think? If the iPads are being used
>>> for POS - credit cards take, what, five seconds to process? Say they do
>>> sixty transactions a day which means they’re using the internet for a total
>>> of five minutes. You’re going to charge someone $39/month for only using
>>> the internet for FIVE MINUTES a day?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Kappa
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris Wright
>>>
>>> Network Administrator
>>>
>>> Velociter Wireless
>>>
>>> 209-838-1221 x115 <209-838-1221%20x115>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Jason McKemie
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 01, 2016 9:00 AM
>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Seems legit
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sounds like a very high maintenance customer for no more than he's
>>> probably going to want to pay. Also, he wants a residential plan? Really?
>>> This is quite clearly a business situation.
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016, That One Guy /sarcasm <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I would say 150k sq foot wireless coverage between 42 buildings for 39
>>> bucks a month is a pretty fair deal. This is the request that came in to us.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> XXXX has a business location in XXXX at another address that he has
>>> questions about getting service for. It is at XXXX. It's a shed he rents
>>> from someone and he would like internet to cover his office, a toolshed,
>>> and up to 40 outside of his buildings since he's going to use iPads and
>>> barcodes everywhere. Up to 2 1/2-3 1/2 acres he needs covered. He's tried
>>> XXXX and they weren't working well. He wants to use us for POS system. He
>>> said he's more interested in residential plans than business because he
>>> doesn't need the other features as he gets them from whoever supports his
>>> POS. He doesn't want to sign up until he knows the cost of what his
>>> monthly/annual service would be.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team
>>> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team
>> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team
> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
>



-- 
*Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
[email protected] | http://www.packetflux.com
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian>  <http://facebook.com/packetflux>
<http://twitter.com/@packetflux>

Reply via email to