That leaves only "support for LC as a platform" as a reason for acting on the offer. So this is another "forward-looking" argument. The "more features" part was mentioned in Kevin's letter (things that would be available only to Indy), but these features are not there yet. People could have been enticed by offering them more features. People that didn't need it up until now would not gain any advantage from fixed prices or discounts - they just don't need Indy. People that needed Indy were already paying for it, so LC actually lost money on them. People new to LC would certainly not start off with a $500 commitment, so I'm sure not many takers came from there. IF this was done to achieve a cash injection (which is an absolutely valid and reasonable requirement), it was done wrongly: I believe the 2-year Indy offer that concluded on 24th July was mistimed. Well it seems some of that matches the direction taken by LC ("add a premium for access to these features"), but some of it doesn't ("don't make business decisions based on casual predictions"). Follow your vision, add the FEATURES that people need most, and having done that, if you're not doing well financially, add a premium for access to these features. I know you have a business to run, but you're asking for financial advice from an audience that can't give you a reliable answer. Whatever it may be worth, a suggestion: don't make business decisions based on casual predictions for matters that people can't accurately estimate. I am certain that 90% of the people that answered this part would give you different responses if they participated in the survey one week later. Any value entered here does not really mean anything, it is an estimate based on a prediction, based on nothing more than the fact that you requested an answer so people needed to enter one.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |