|
> > If you buy my argument that LANSA, MRC, BCD, Cool, Seagull, Jacada, (yada, > > yada, yada...;-) DON'T exhibit these qualities and/or are NOT > > "affordable" --> it must not be possible. If it was possible, then these > > ISVs would be marketing it already. (OR they just don't see a market where > > I see one, but that's pretty hard to believe.) > > There is at least a third possibility: Simply that vendors feel profits are better at > higher price points. As long as the market allows selling one item for $1000, there's > good reason to think you'll make more profit than if you sold 1000 of them at $1. Only > when the market refuses to pay the $1000, is it worth it to the seller to lower the price. > > That is, just because it isn't done isn't sufficient to rule it impossible. You know, I realized this past year that I have never gotten any profits from my company, just a salary. What little profit we have made has gone back into the company. I decided that I would like to make a profit, and I am working to do so. Speaking to your argument, its only worth it to lower the price if you can make a profit at that lower price. I have a couple of great products that I can't sell, because there aren't enough people to buy it at a price where I can sell it and support it (or I have not found them, anyways.) And pardon me for saying so, and don't take this the wrong way, but it's partly your own fault that software costs so much. I can give you several reasons why. The first is the extended sales cycle. I sell a report archiving system for the AS/400. You guys are all aware of the IRS requirement that you keep all of your reports for at least three years - anything that demonstrates the state of your accounting transactions that reflects in any way on your taxes. No, it doesn't count to be able to go back and regenerate a report from your history files at a later date. History files can be modified, changed and changed back. They want source documents in paper or electronic form, captured at the time of their creation. You public guys have some auditing requirements that say similar things. Archiving is cheaper than paper by far - especially if you have to handle it later. It's also more convenient. I'm not trying to sell my product here, I'm trying to point out that this is a no-brainier decision. If you have an AS/400 you ought to have some archive system, even if it is only AS/400 based. Keeping a digital copy of your business records offsite in two or five places makes a lot of sense, especially if they are on a 50-cent CD. So every AS/400 site over P05 size should have one of these - but most don't. When the software vendor finally gets your attention, you often spend more money evaluating the software than the software costs. And it often takes six months to several years to make the decision - in which time period you have paid for the product once or twice in lost savings, and you still don't have it. All that time we have to pay our salespeople and office support staff, lights and phone bill, and it all comes out of what the software costs. The second reason is that our prospects seem to evaluate unknown software on price. If you don't know the brand, price equals value. We did the good thing and priced our software as cheaply as we could, thinking that would make it more attractive. It works fine unless a competitor enters the picture. The prospect sees that their product costs three times as much, and we start getting the cold shoulder. We can beat them on features and ease of use, support for multiple hosts and universal clients, but it's too late to raise the price. "It must be better because it costs so much more." Oh yeah, the third reason: "they came to visit us". Today we can demo any product over the internet immediately with just a web browser on your end. We can show it to you as many times a you like, we will come visit you at install time, and we have a thirty day moneyback guarantee. If we come to visit you, somebody is going to end up paying for it - in higher price software. If it takes ten different prospect visits for each sale (I mean to multiple prospects), then you have just added at least ten thousand dollars to the software cost. (This is not as big an issue as it used to be.) I hope this doesn't sound like I'm whining. I appreciate all of you, and I don't mean to say you are acting irrationally. There are good reasons for all of this. I'm just trying to point out that the frictional costs of selling are a high percentage of the cost of your software. Maybe that is part of the justification for tiered pricing - bigger companies take longer to sell . (I don't use tiered pricing).
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.