Re: UI Pricing Strategies
- From: "Simon Verona" <nomail@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 22:38:38 -0000
Also, we strictly have no components on the client end that have run-time
licences (development licences only with foc run-time).... This means we
don't have to copy-protect or allocate licence keys etc for our client
installs (we can just give away the install cd's on mass to customers).
On the database front, high licence pooling (on jbase a ratio of 100:1+ for
client/server licence ratio is the norm..) means in reality we only need a
couple of database licences on the server. We hide this cost to our
customers in the server price. When we move to a full ASP model, we
will simply write off this cost ourselves. In the long term, licence
pooling like this will start to hurt the database vendors - they will need
to come up with different pricing models to counter this... (not that I care
if they don;t of course!!)
Just some thoughts.
Simon
"Tony Gravagno" <g6q3x9lu53001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:js7sp19m864ac5s73cemhl5v5djv1dctls@xxxxxxxxxx
> We're entering into new relationships here to put web interfaces on
> existing applications. The questions are flying about how much it
> will cost to develop a new UI for specific existing apps, how much
> they can be sold for, and what sort of pricing models can be used.
> With so many people building new user interfaces for their apps, I
> figured this would be a fun group topic.
>
> Many examples of pricing are below, and questions follow. Some of
> these example models can be mixed. Item numbers are used for
> reference only. Example values are in dollars just to cite numbers,
> substitute pounds, euros, yen pesos, or lire if you're so inclined.
> :)
>
> Which pricing models have you used for a new UI, and what sort of
> variations do you use?
> 1) End-user pays per-seat for DBMS, application, and UI. The same
> number of seats must be used for all components.
> 2) End-user pays a single application fee regardless of the number of
> users. DBMS is of course still per-seat. Thick-client is available
> for a per-seat charge for as many seats as the user wants.
> 3) End-user leases application by the year (no up-front
> purchase/licensing costs). No additional cost for thick client vs
> character interface.
>
> For thin-client UI the licensing gets much more complicated - again,
> some of these models cross-over or may be redundant.
> 4) Thin client is licensed per named-user.
> 5) Thin client is licensed as a persistent user, the same as a
> character UI or persistent thick-client (client/server).
> 6) Thin clients are licensed in ranges. Example, 1-20, 21-100, 101+.
> 7) Thin client licenses are pooled with some estimated N-to-1 ratio.
> The end-user pays for some fixed number of server processes (S) to
> satisfy an estimated N*S users.
> 8) The client pays for usage equal to the maximum/peak number of S
> servers, or N users connected during the month.
> 9) Client pays for bandwidth, transactions, or some multiple of both.
> 10) Thin client is free for all users as part of the app.
> 11) Thin client cost is presented to the end-user as a flat fee
> regardless of your tool costs. Example, you charge $200 per
> thin-client license, your web tools have a $100 run-time cost, and you
> have $100 profit. If your costs go up you may absorb it.
> 12) Thin client cost is itemized with run-time licenses and separately
> with your cost for the UI benefit. Example, your tool license costs
> $100 and your fee is $100. If the tool increases to $125 the end-user
> is responsible for for 125+100. (This brings up the basic question of
> whether you itemize costs or do you try to isolate the end-user from a
> lot of numbers by presenting them with a flat-rate which may increase
> over time?)
>
> How do you handle the internet vs extranet vs intranet concepts?
> Example: End-user has a small but fixed number of internal users.
> They also have some larger but variable number of extranet trading
> partners who want to check product and order status. And they have an
> internet site with an unknown number of anonymous or perhaps
> registered user/customer/prospects polling truly dynamic data. As
> acknowledgment that it's difficult to charge for an unpredictable
> number of internet users, do you use different technologies (free/OSS)
> for internet vs intranet and/or extranet?
>
> For better or worse, how many of you have actually experienced the
> trade-offs when the number of non-persistent users (N) goes up,
> allowing the number of DBMS seats and other licenses go down? Have
> you needed to adjust your models because of this? Do you actively
> encourage users to purchase more pooled connectivity licenses to
> decrease the number of server licenses?
>
> How many of you are selling or using hosted applications? Yes, I'm
> talking about the service bureau, Application Service Provider model.
> Does this really save you money or help to generate new income? Can
> you toss out a realistic percentage in savings or increased
> profit/clients/seats?
>
> Please feel free to add new model examples to the list and provide
> some real numbers. E-mailed responses are welcome if you wish.
>
> Thanks,
> Tony
> TG@ removethisNebula-RnD .com
.
- Prev by Date: Re: UI Pricing Strategies
- Next by Date: Re: Should Cache' be on the MV Family Tree?
- Previous by thread: Re: UI Pricing Strategies
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
