Judy,
I totally agree with you that if the intention is to market to HC users,
that the initial and upgrade prices ought to be clear. Although I don't
necessarily think they ought to be *low*. There's nothing wrong with
attempting to sell a fuel-efficient but pricey vehicle to someone who has a
cheap gas-guzzler as a "side-grade". It is the buyer's decision as to
whether they want to spend more to get more, wait until they can afford it,
or not buy at all.
I agree with Raymond in that the "cost" of HyperCard ultimately is closer to
the $300 range once you add up the extra costs for development; the
difference here is that the extra costs are *not* part of the initial outlay
that one has to pay to get started.
RunRev has some work to do to determine if they consider HC users to be a
significant part of their primary target market, or whether they are on the
fringe as a secondary or tertiary target. If HC is to be a primary target,
then there should be either better initial pricing, or some staged way to
convert HC users to Rev. If HC is *not* a primary target, then it is still
OK to market to them, just be aware that there are a bunch of HC user that
won't be able to afford that kind of leap.
One other thing to keep in mind... Revolution is sort of MetaCard's "big
brother" (superior interface, better documentation, more extra development
features, etc.), but it shares the exact same interpreter that's in
MetaCard. RunRev is most likely *licensing* the engine from MetaCard Corp;
if MetaCard sells for $995 flat, RunRev can't possibly be licensing it from
MC for a price that would enable them to sell a $100 product, even one that
was somewhat crippled. They just wouldn't make much on it - which goes back
to the target market discussion above...
My gut feeling (and I know there are people that don't agree with me) is as
follows:
1) that the Standard version of Rev should be missing some higher-end
features and sold at the $350 - $450 level and that the Professional version
of Rev have ALL the features and sell for $795 - $995. Both come with 1 year
of free upgrades.
2) that both the Standard and Professional versions have their own upgrade
paths. Most likely when a new version of Pro is released, a new version of
Standard is released as well.
3) that both the Standard and Professional versions have their own "update
packs" you can buy (like $99/year for Standard and $249/year for Pro) that
enable you to get the upgrades for the product that happen during that year
4) that both the Standard and Professional versions retain their
multiplatform deployment capabilities (this is one of Rev's biggest selling
points), and not "break it up" to sell cheaper versions.
5) If you have Standard and want to go Pro, you pay the difference in cost
between the two products.
To me this is very clear. Personally I would rather Rev have a 30-day
full-featured, full-scripting version for trial than the 10-line scripting
limit... it is more industry-standard and understandable to corporations
that wish to evaluate it, and it does not cause people to try and write
spaghetti code to keep from paying for a valuable product, IMHO.
This is just my $0.02.
Ken Ray
Sons of Thunder Software
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web Site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/
----- Original Message -----
From: "Judy Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 11:37 AM
Subject: Re: Upgrade pricing
> Hmmm... I believe I recall announcements being made on the HC list for
> the beta of Rev inviting HC users to participate. My interpretation of
> the call for testers was that somebody at MC had finally listened to
> complaints about the interface and costs and this was the opportunity to
> 'make MC what we HC users expect and wish for it to be'. Around that
> time and before there were statements floating about on the list to the
> effect: 'it's everything you wanted HC3 to be and more'; just like HC
> only better; now that HC's dead, this is the next HC, etc etc. And, if
> these comments were not made by Rev team personnel (and, honestly, they
> may well not have been), they were certainly not corrected either
> to say 'no, this is not what we intend for you to understand'. And I can
> tell you from first-hand experience that, at least of late, the Rev team
> take action to correct any perceived misrepresentation on the HC list ;-)
>
> I don't wish to imply that I think that Rev is engaging in deceptive
> marketing or any kind of switch 'n bait kind of thing, because I don't.
> I think what is happening is normal for a new product that is seeking to
> determine what its potential user base is or can be. I also
> think that the HC community and the educational community could
> benefit enormously from financial access to the Rev product. I also
> obviously believe, in turn, that these are potential revenue
> streams for Rev that can be tapped by offering a product with an
> appropriately reduced feature set and price which is attractive
> and competitive for those markets.
>
> Regards,
>
> Judy Perry
>
> > unaware of the kind of marketing that RunRev is doing to the HC
> community.
> > Can you tell me where RunRev has marketed directly to the HC community
to
> > woo them into using Rev as a replacement?
> >
> > The reason I ask is that (to me) this is a critical element; if Rev is
being
> > marketed directly to HC users, then there is definitely some pricing
issues
> > going on here. On the other hand, if HC users have become aware of Rev
> > through other means (word of mouth, etc.) and are *themselves* looking
for a
> > replacement for HC, then it is a different story.
> >
> > Can you please provide some clarification on your experience of RunRev's
> > marketing efforts to the HC community?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ken Ray
> > Sons of Thunder Software
> > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Web Site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/
> >
>
>
