RE: Tiered pricing (was Tiger tools...)

[Jim Damato <jdamato@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Carl:
>Isn't tiered pricing similar to user based pricing in some respects?

Not similar enough.  The AS/400 is great at scaling to run multiple packaged
applications.  But if I run packages for HR, Financials, Merchandising,
Planning & Allocations, Time Card/Time Clock, and EDI on one AS/400 I have
to pay each vendor a premium.  It's bad enough when their applications
architecture assumes they're the only software on the machine, but the
pricing structure does as well.

If my business grows, expanding my usage of an application I don't mind
paying for that usage.  But if I've upgraded my system because I've
implemented a new Sales Audit package I shouldn't have to pay the other
vendors for that privilege.  And I should not have to purchase, integrate,
and administer another machine just to get around primitive pricing schemes.

Pricing is an important aspect of business.  Vendors should give it a bit
more thought instead of dumbing it down to processor groups.  The best
pricing models I've seen offer some sort of user or use based pricing and
tier pricing to show why you'd want their use pricing.

Waah again.

-Jim

James P. Damato
Manager - Technical Administration
Dollar General Corporation
<mailto:jdamato@dollargeneral.com>