Recent posts in this topic
Staff
Ilija Studen
on Sep 19. 2007. 2:57 pm
We are reconsidering pricing scheme. Details will be posted after the weekend (Monday most probably). activeCollab v1.0 will be available for you to play with so you'll know final price and what you are getting for that money.
Thanks for the feedback :)
Thanks for the feedback :)
activeCollab Team Member
Great to hear Ilija! Thanks first of all for the clear communication and secondly for re-evaluating how best to price this product.
Kudos.
Kudos.
Well done Illija.
There's been some rather scathing remarks on the blog/community which i imagine can't have been the most comfortable of reads, especially after all your hard work. However, having the guts to recognise your markets needs, even if they are not inline with your initial thoughts, should be commended.
AB
There's been some rather scathing remarks on the blog/community which i imagine can't have been the most comfortable of reads, especially after all your hard work. However, having the guts to recognise your markets needs, even if they are not inline with your initial thoughts, should be commended.
AB
Pro
ncrossland
on Sep 19. 2007. 9:11 pm
Hi Illija. Thanks for listening -- I can't remember seeing the public opinion on a software project change from positive buzz so dramatically before. If you had announced you'd have to sacrifice a kitten and sell your children to get a copy, it couldn't have been much worse. Please add this to the blog so it is more widely known. There is no harm in changing your mind -- it shows you're listening to your customers.
I think one of the reasons it was rejected so unanimously was misunderstanding the target market.
The main issue with the pricing (and this is probably covering well trodden ground, but bear with me) is the fact that for your audience, artificial limitations on projects don't cut it.
Your target market is people who are perhaps more tech savvy (geeky) than Basecamp users (who just want something that works, with no techy hassle or maintenance). Your audience want to fiddle, want to get involved, and want to use AC not as a finished solution, but as a starting block to customise and develop for their own needs.
Placing a limit on the number of projects is an absolutely artificial construct for software you install on your own server. Selling software based on limits is not a positive message. It appears to work against the aims of your clients (we want to gain more projects; you want us to restrict the number of projects we do). It punishes us for success. You make us pay more, but we don't get any more features for the money.
A far more positive way of selling is to manage the pricing so extra cost brings extra benefits. Upgrading from Lite to Pro brings you extra features. Within Pro, make some features optional modules -- e.g. a calendar module, an Outlook sync module, access to source code, or whatever. The price of adding in all the extra modules might total the top-end cost you were proposing -- but people have been given a choice, they feel like they're not paying for things they don't need, and this makes people happy!
While you're reconsidering the pricing, I'd urge you to reconsider the concept of encrypted source. Open source (and I mean in the sense source that can be read and edited, rather than licensing model) is vital to the audience you're targetting. I don't mind if its an extra cost. At the moment you're saying to your customers "Thanks for the cash -- but we don't trust you". You're already removing most of the incentive for people to steal your code by releasing the free version. A satisfied and loyal customer is less likely to share the software. We've licensed three pieces of software recently (OEMPro, SimpleViewer and vBulletin) all of which are paid for, and give us full access to source code. I'm not aware that any of them have problems with paid-for source code "escaping" -- I'm sure it could work for you.
Looking forward to your next announcement!
I think one of the reasons it was rejected so unanimously was misunderstanding the target market.
The main issue with the pricing (and this is probably covering well trodden ground, but bear with me) is the fact that for your audience, artificial limitations on projects don't cut it.
Your target market is people who are perhaps more tech savvy (geeky) than Basecamp users (who just want something that works, with no techy hassle or maintenance). Your audience want to fiddle, want to get involved, and want to use AC not as a finished solution, but as a starting block to customise and develop for their own needs.
Placing a limit on the number of projects is an absolutely artificial construct for software you install on your own server. Selling software based on limits is not a positive message. It appears to work against the aims of your clients (we want to gain more projects; you want us to restrict the number of projects we do). It punishes us for success. You make us pay more, but we don't get any more features for the money.
A far more positive way of selling is to manage the pricing so extra cost brings extra benefits. Upgrading from Lite to Pro brings you extra features. Within Pro, make some features optional modules -- e.g. a calendar module, an Outlook sync module, access to source code, or whatever. The price of adding in all the extra modules might total the top-end cost you were proposing -- but people have been given a choice, they feel like they're not paying for things they don't need, and this makes people happy!
While you're reconsidering the pricing, I'd urge you to reconsider the concept of encrypted source. Open source (and I mean in the sense source that can be read and edited, rather than licensing model) is vital to the audience you're targetting. I don't mind if its an extra cost. At the moment you're saying to your customers "Thanks for the cash -- but we don't trust you". You're already removing most of the incentive for people to steal your code by releasing the free version. A satisfied and loyal customer is less likely to share the software. We've licensed three pieces of software recently (OEMPro, SimpleViewer and vBulletin) all of which are paid for, and give us full access to source code. I'm not aware that any of them have problems with paid-for source code "escaping" -- I'm sure it could work for you.
Looking forward to your next announcement!
flashlackey
on Sep 19. 2007. 9:25 pm
Thanks Ilija. I'm interested to see what you guys decide.
One thought is that maybe some market research would be in order? Even if it's as simple as a 'what would you pay' poll, it might be useful to determine where the sweet spot of the market is at. As someone else alluded to before, sometimes selling more licenses for less is going to yield more profit than selling fewer for more. The trick is to set the price at the peak of that bell curve. But, how can you without data? Just an idea.
One thought is that maybe some market research would be in order? Even if it's as simple as a 'what would you pay' poll, it might be useful to determine where the sweet spot of the market is at. As someone else alluded to before, sometimes selling more licenses for less is going to yield more profit than selling fewer for more. The trick is to set the price at the peak of that bell curve. But, how can you without data? Just an idea.
Well, at least we know that the dev's are listening. That is encouraging. Can't wait to see the new model, and kick the tires as well.
Pro
+1 with what ncrossland said, couldn't have said it better !
This being said, even if you don't reconsider, I'll stay with aC provided I can have a localized version (either provided or that I can do myself : but that means access to code or language file) which my french clients require...
This being said, even if you don't reconsider, I'll stay with aC provided I can have a localized version (either provided or that I can do myself : but that means access to code or language file) which my french clients require...
The best way to predict the future is to invent it
------------------------------------------
Apache 2.2.8 - MySQL 5.0.45 - PHP 5.2.6 | Debian 4.0 (Etch)
------------------------------------------
Apache 2.2.8 - MySQL 5.0.45 - PHP 5.2.6 | Debian 4.0 (Etch)
