I appreciate that Dave - which is why most people build recurring model businesses.
However…I was presented a bill for the retroactive support that would have been 3X what the cost of a license was. On February 6, 2018 at 5:11:46 PM, Dave Warren via mailop ([email protected]) wrote: On 2018-02-05 10:27, Marc Goldman via mailop wrote: > I received an email telling me I would need to pay RETROACTIVELY for the > years I did NOT receive support in order to upgrade. > > Has anyone ever heard of a policy like that? What is cheaper, paying retroactively or buying a new license? At $DAYJOB we charge about 30% (of a new license) to renew if you renew on time, or about 70% to buy an upgrade if you let your support lapse. We want customers to always get a better deal than jumping ship but it encourages ongoing revenue which is what allows us to have a new version to buy at all. (This is an example/anecdote and not an offer, we're in the SMB email space, but not an MTA vendor). On 2018-02-05 11:03, Steve Atkins wrote: > Yes, it's pretty much normal. It dissuades people from only paying for > support every few years when they need support or want an updated version, > while not paying the ongoing fees that pay for development of that updated > version. While this is true, the vendor is also not paying for staff to support the customer while the license is expired. I'd argue that some percentage other than 100% retroactive costs would be appropriate since the customer is only benefiting from the development but not from having support staff available. At the end of the day though, as long as the cost doesn't exceed that of simply buying a new license, I can't get super excited about the details. _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list [email protected] https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list [email protected] https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
