- This topic has 7 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 20 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Ken,
whilst I might be the first to compliment you on your drive and ambition to deliver this industry out of the depths to which it has plunged, I will also be the first to say Whooaaa boy.
The forms software you have spent two days on is great, and you’ve not finished yet, what you’ve come up with is BRILL, no doubt.
But, why give it away to subscribers????
Remember that it costs UKW to produce your output and therefore we need to see a return on it. As Del pointed out earlier we do need other sources of income to supplement what we have and I think we should consider what we give away before we give it away.
Being a subscriber is not about walking away with a shit load of goodies UKW hands out. Its about being a part of something bigger, a sense of unity, being part of a family. We don’t need to offer bribes to subscribe, those that want to, will. After all they already get plenty of benefits in comparison to the £60.00 + vat membership.
So bear in mind that we need revenue to support all what we give away to subscribers and of course the “free resource itself” the SITE.Where we have something that might generate income we should discuss what we do, thats why we have a board of directors, isn’t it?
Kevin
Re: dynamic kwatt
I agree to a certain extent Kev but the plan from the off was to give as much to the guys on the ground that we could for free but by doing so gather interest from bodies who would be willing to pay for such goods.
We have to give stuff away to get the interest level on new ideas otherwise it would never get off the ground a lot of the time.
Dave.
Re: dynamic kwatt
I’ve no problem giving stuff away to subscribers or anyone else for that matter, I am only concerned that somewhere we have to “earn” for the site. We already give away revenue to the subscribers, Google and Amazon, we are about to supplement the day delegate rate at Sibson for all who attend, so whilst I am on board with the “for free” ethos, I would like to see us earn from the labours too.
I have to say we can’t forever produce for free, we will run out of funding, thats simple business economics.
KevinRe: dynamic kwatt
kheath wrote:I have to say we can’t forever produce for free, we will run out of funding, thats simple business economics.
Very true 😀
Dave.
Re: dynamic kwatt
Because…
If I let the subs have them for free then the chances are that it may encourage others to subscribe, even if the idea doesn’t work it’s a percieved extra value item. No harm done there.
If it does work I need people to use the damn things as, to have any chance of success you need a wide user base. A La the Microsoft business model, which has been a tad successful. 😉
Once you have the userbase, you link it into ACH making it piss easy to send the info with the click of a button and, this is the best bit that you’ll love, we’d have to make these up for ACH anyway so in effect we’re not really giving anything away. What we’re actually doing is offering a taster of just how easy and how much admin we can eliminate by showing them which will ultimately be better than just telling them. It also gets them used to using a bit of IT to do that job.
In two years once the new ACH forms are updated the old ones will look tired, but there’s no call for us to support them as we’ll have ACH by then. This serves as encouragement for people to sign up to ACH later as well.
So in fact, whilst on the face of it, it looks as if I’m giving something away free gratis, I’m not as I have a longer term goal with what I’m doing with a greater reward at the end than a few quid for a silly template. I do things for a reason, normally with a long-term plan in mind.
K.
Re: dynamic kwatt
It still does not pay for your time and effort now, which is costing UKW however way you look at it
Kevin
Re: dynamic kwatt
Kev,
I’m usually the first one to bang the ‘TO MANY FREEBIES’ drum but even a numb scull like me is beginin’ to see that if we can make are system the only one worth using, Then just like the windows platform is to computers this is how ken see’s UKW’s A.C.H. being to the whitegoods trade.
Everyone will be so used to using it that they wont want to use anything else they will be already using a beta version of A.C.H. before they know it. I think Ken is just using the Bill Gates model. IBM floated Bill Gates business and P&G are floating ours.
Ken have i got the basic gist of it ?
Sean
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.