Simple answer is "affordable for the customer does not necessarily mean profitable for the proprietor." I'm not saying it can't be profitable, but there is a lot to account for in developing and proposing a business model that is so drastically different than what BMC has provided in the past. If such a model were developed, the revenue provided by the new model would have to exceed that of the current model. Introduction of a new business model would impact the existing pricing model, so that has to be taken into account in determining the overall viability of a different business model.
Support services entail things that BMC can not avoid being a part of: - product maintenance - product licensing With the proposed model you have above, I could probably drop tens of thousands of dollars of my current annual support costs. More work, reduced revenue... The counter to the above statement is that the product is no longer a viable option for it's customers and sales plummet. This will force an adjustment to the pricing model that makes the product marketable. You have to consider the existing forces that are already in play. Axton Grams On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, of course Remedy is called a "Help Desk application" BUT THAT'S > WRONG! That's part of my point. It's NOT just a Help Desk application. > It's an application development platform that just *happens* to commonly > run Help Desk apps because that's the niche it fell into. > > My point is, to survive, it needs to break that paradigm. And the best > way is to get people writing apps that are not just Help Desk. Need to > track monthly sales? Use Remedy. Need a visitor sign-in log? Use Remedy. > Need a company web page? Use Remedy. Need an equipment checkout form? > Use Remedy. Need to track pending orders? Use Remedy. Need a > company-wide list of handy telephone numbers? Use Remedy. Need to track > employee training? Use Remedy. > > That's the way the marketing should be, in my opinion, but the problem > is, the expensive licensing makes all of that impractical. Why make > your visitor sign-in log in Remedy and burn up costly user licenses when > you can make a similar app (certainly not as good) in Access? Now > please don't bombard me with messages saying something like, "Well, the > reason you'd use Remedy and not Access is because Remedy is so good > at..." That's not my point. My point is that people will use other > tools (Access is just an example) and endure a lesser resulting product > because the other tools are so much more affordable. Access doesn't > have all the awesome capability of Remedy, but it's AFFORDABLE. > > Then people say, "Yeah, but if they reduced the cost of the ARS, they > wouldn't make any money!" To that I contend that ARS is such an awesome, > robust, and easy-to-use solution, BMC would make much more money by > selling in VOLUME. > > Here's what I envision: Sell ARS at around $500 with NO support. If you > buy this version, you have to pay for support on a case-by-case basis > like Microsoft. Or use the ARSList. Or you could buy a support > contract for X amount of dollars for unlimited support. Then think--ARS > could be anywhere and everywhere. You could buy a copy and take it home > and use it to stand up a personal web server. Or smaller development > companies could buy it, write apps, and then sell the apps with the ARS > bundled into the price. Say you write a shipping system. You could > charge $1000 for the app you wrote and $500 for the ARS to go with it. > Total bill: $1500. One stop shop. Right now there are a few third > parties writing ARS-based apps (ESS @ Work) but how frightening is that? > You pour your heart and soul into writing an app in Remedy and then get > an interested party who wants to buy it but then have to tell them, > "Yeah, we sell this awesome product, but to use it, you first have to go > to ANOTHER company and buy THEIR product for $25,000." Man, that's a > tough sell. > > And the reason why people get thrust into Remedy without training is > because management doesn't realize what Remedy truly is and what it is > truly capable of because of the *paradigm*...that is, the Help Desk > STIGMA. If the ARS was more affordable, it could be marketed to a much > wider audience and the paradigm could be broken. > > That's my point. Please excuse the long rant. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Goralczyk > Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 1:31 PM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build > > ** > Fred, > > I have been using Remedy for over 8 years, and it has always been called > a Helpdesk application by people outside of the Remedy world. Granted I > never describe it as such, and I correct everybody I can, but the fact > remains, if you are not on the backside of Remedy, you seem to relate it > to a helpdesk application. That might be because that is how it has > been pushed and utilized for a decade plus. > > I have to say, I am not sure that ARS is dying either. Granted I know > the "in" thing these days is ITSM, but that doesn't mean that once they > get it into a company that they company doesn't realize they can use it > for other things. I think of the problems is that there are a lot of > people who gte put into the feed and care part of the system and only > get trained on what they need to know i.e. ITSM. I have also found that > there are many cases where these people don't know anything about Remedy > and don't get any formal training. They are given books and told to > figure it out. In fact, most projects that I have been on, the FTEs > don't even know about the list. > > So where is the fault? Is it BMC for trying to make more money (and > they seem to be selling a lot of ITSM licenses) or is it the companies > for not sending their employees for proper trainiing? Or as is often > the case, does the blame fall a little bit on everyone? > > Brian > > > On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hmmm...we'll see. I don't think just releasing a new version of > the > Admin tool (based on existing open source code) will do much to > reinvigorate the ARS when BMC has discarded the "Your Business > -- Your > Way" approach. > > I've seen just one job posting for a custom developer > recently...before > that, it seems every single one was for an ITSM configurator. > With > fewer custom development jobs, developers are bound to leave the > field > for other toolsets where pastures are greener. When they leave, > the ARS > loses its biggest advocates of "Remedy as a rapid app > development tool." > As you lose advocates, you lose word of mouth, which is what > grew Remedy > into what it is. > > I honestly don't think ITSM will drive anyone to think, "Hey > look at > this cool development tool we have at our disposal." Instead, I > think > the mentality is more and more becoming, "Hey, cowboy! Don't > touch that! > It's too complicated. We don't want you breaking our OOTB > solution." > > I think lowering the price and attracting new people in to build > apps of > all sorts and sizes is the only thing that will make the ARS a > viable > platform in the eyes of many businesses. > > Think about it...ask just about any outsider about Remedy and > typically > (not always) they say something along the lines of, "Oh > yeah...that's > that Help Desk thing, right?" not, "Oh yeah...that's that > awesome rapid > app toolset!" I can't ever remember talking to an outsider (a > network > engineer, a CIO, an IT specialist, etc.) who knew you could > build > applications with Remedy. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Cook > Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 10:12 AM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build > > > ** > I have to take some exception to your first remark, Norm. If > the ARS > were dying a slow death, why would BMC bring out a new > Administrator > tool (7.5) that will EXPAND the developer's ability to do core > ARS > development? I know that part of the reason for that is that > it's old > technology that's in the way of some architectural advances that > need to > take place, but that's my point. AR System developers will, > with 7.5, > have the ability to build things we can't even imagine doing > now. How > many software companies give developers like us that much power > over > their OOB applications? > > In my opinion, the core AR System development, which has taken a > back > seat (maybe in the trunk) to OOB apps for a few years now, WILL > be > making a renaissance in the next few years as companies that > bought ITSM > increasingly realize that with it, they got a pretty good > workflow > engine that is easy to integrate with their ITSM products. I > take great > pains to point out to new Remedy/ITSM customers that every part > of that > application suite was built with the same workflow engine they > have at > their disposal, and that a skilled and experienced development > team can > build an application to support any business function with it. > > I don't see AR System ever being the financial driver that it > used to > be, as the revenue model will always be more robust for OOB > apps. But > it can and should return to being more of a technological driver > in the > next 2-3 years. > > I do agree that an MSDN-like arrangement would be a net win for > both BMC > and for the developers. I have heard Doug say he's proposed it > many > times. I hope he continues to do so until his wisdom is > accepted. > > Rick > > > On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 5:50 AM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 > CS/SCCE > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Shawn/Bing: > > You guess hit the mark squarely. The ARS is dying a slow > death, > and > unfortunately BMC is doing nothing to stop it. > > Think on it for just a moment. If BMC would lower the > price of > the ARS > down to, say, the price of the Visual Studio (somewhere > in the > range of > $500) and abolished ARS user licenses (they could > continue to > sell the > user licenses for their OOTB apps), think of how many > copies of > ARS they > would sell. > > I've written apps in a variety of environments, and to > this day > the > fastest and easiest I've found is ARS. Build an app in > Remedy > and > voila! Instant app that runs in Windows and Unix > environments > AND is > client or web-based. When people see how easy and quick > it is > not knock > out a complete application, they'll flock to it in > droves. > > But as is, the licensing model blocks newcomers to the > platform. > It's > the "thanks but no thanks" effect. True, ARS has its > diehards > (us), but > we are a very small community. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com > <http://www.rmsportal.com/> ARSlist: "Where the > Answers Are" html___ > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > _______ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > <http://www.arslist.org/> > > Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com <http://www.rmsportal.com/> > ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" > > > > __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" > html___ > > _______________________________________________________________________________ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" > _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
