The thought does occur to me of how other companies have dealt with similar issues. That issue being how to address a market requiring internal expansion (i.e. expanded reinvestment) while not alienating an existing satisifed customer base. Many companies simply split their product line into 'basic' and 'premium' services. If the need is as great as Michael says, and the new revisions will result in vastly improved service, than most of their existing customers should want to move forward. However, giving people the option to 'stand still' is viable, good marketing, and good strategy. At this point, you have a certain catch 22. Everyone that pays now (for next year) is still paying you at the same rate (meaning no expanded funds), but is now wondering if they're doing the right thing. Almost seems like the only way to make the current strategy pay off would have been to demand the increased fees from all clients and not given the grace period for renewing at the old rate. At least that way, you'd have gotten something in return for any perceived customer dissatisfaction.
Consider expanding to a two-tier service option. It really can work well, especially when in the future you might want to charge even more, but not alienate 'new' customers who need a lower buy-in. Rick Robeson getlocalnews.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Fox, Thomas Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 2:40 PM To: sniffer@SortMonster.com Subject: RE: Re[2]: [sniffer] Last chance to renew at the old price! Your interpretation of "a bit" as being 50+% is disingenuous at best, and thievery at the worst. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pete McNeil > Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 5:34 PM > To: Fox, Thomas > Subject: Re[2]: [sniffer] Last chance to renew at the old price! > > On Tuesday, December 27, 2005, 5:14:13 PM, Thomas wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Murdoch > >> > >> If you don't feel that's the case, then you > >> are free to decide if you think otherwise. Thanks and take care! > > FT> EASY FOX TRANSLATION: > > FT> "Like it, or lump it." > > Translated another way... > > We could keep things as they are, stand still while spam generation > technology advances rapidly, whither away, and die. > > OR > > We could charge a bit more, accelerate development and make sure that > SNF stays out in front and even expands the gap. > > I, for one, am not willing to make the first choice, and I doubt that > it would be in anyone's best interests - except, perhaps, the > blackhats. > > _M > > > > This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For > information and (un)subscription instructions go to > http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html > --- > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] > > --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and (un)subscription instructions go to http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and (un)subscription instructions go to http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html
