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
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
