Rick, I think you missed the sarcasm.
Rick Fochtman wrote:
------------------------------<snip>---------------------
If you think being an ISV is wildly profitable, may I suggest you get
into the business? It would have two benefits:
1. You will become rich.
------------------------------<unsnip>--------------------
If I can make enough to "pay the rent", I'll be happy, thank you. I
DON'T expect to become "filthy rich" just because I might have a piece
of software that others find useful.
-----------------------------<snip>------------------------
2. Your competition in the marketplace will lower the costs of software
for all.
-----------------------------<unsnip>-----------------------
I don't know what you're smoking, but I want some of that! We both know
that the competition will charge according to their own schedules.
I had to read his statement twice (maybe more) to understand
what he meant. I think his intent would have been clearer
if he had written:
"By competing in the marketplace, you will lower the
costs of software for all [because you will charge
lower prices]"
or, simpler:
"Your competing in the marketplace will lower the
costs of software for all"
-----------------------------<snip>--------------------------
BTW, you won't charge by CPU size, right? So people with FLEX boxes will
pay the same as Bank of America?
----------------------------<unsnip>-------------------------
I'd much prefer to use a usage-based charge system, with a minimum flat
fee that's the same for everyone, regardless of machine size. I prefer
to depend on the honesty of my customers, rather than penalize all
because of the risk, real or perceived, of one or two customers being
dishonest. I would, however, use a key-based system to prevent
unauthorized sharing. DR keys would expire after a REASONABLE period,
say seven days for the purposes of discussion. Flexibility would be a
standard practice, since 24-7 coverage might not be available.
While I might be unrealistic in my expectations and requirements, I
would try to keep costs low by keeping the marketing staff to a minimum.
I have bad memories of requesting a marketer to FAX me a sample contract
and cost schedule and finding seven marketing reps in my outer office
instead. That's ridiculous! Low-key advertising and keeping marketing
staffs small can be every bit as effective as the "Mongolian Hordes"
approach, and much less costly. And paying attention to customers' needs
and requests, within reasonable limits, can pay big dividends in future
efforts.
There has to be some balance. We are a very small
company and have virtually no advertising budget.
We rely on word of mouth and cold calls. Consequently
we find many companies won't hire us because they
have not heard of us. Ya' gotta' get the word out,
ya' gotta' get heard. Building a better course will
not have the world beating a path to your door.
[so any help any of y'all can give us is appreciated;
and I know many on this list have helped support us.]
I don't profess to have all the answers; God knows I wish for that sort
of wisdom but it just ain't happenin'. I'm only speaking what my own
mind tells me MIGHT be a good way to deal with the situation. Experience
may teach me differently but for the moment, I look on the situation
through rose-colored glasses.
Experience would teach you differently. So escape into
the rose-colored world for as long as you can. But you'll
also miss out on a lot of adventure and fun.
Kind regards,
-Steve Comstock
The Trainer's Friend, Inc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
