[147774] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Well Lookie Here,
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Edward Dore)
Wed Dec 21 14:10:16 2011
From: Edward Dore <edward.dore@freethought-internet.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 19:09:15 +0000
In-Reply-To: <8C26A4FDAE599041A13EB499117D3C286B6354A8@ex-mb-1.corp.atlasnetworks.us>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 21 Dec 2011, at 18:46, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
>> In fact, it's not. If you miss your renewal payment for, frex, =
Safari
>> books,
>> they actually slip your cycle date to when you renew -- since you =
don't
>> *get*
>> the service between the expire date and the renew date, I concur with
>> his
>> appraisal that you shouldn't be paying for it, either.
>>=20
>> If in fact, the service *kept working* for a short time when an
>> overlooked payment was missed, it would be a different story.
>>=20
>> But, effectively, he's a new client, and should probably be treated
>> that way.
>> Assuming the paid service is actually *the update service*.
>>=20
>> I also disagree with your proposition that this is off-topic for =
NANOG,
>> really.
>=20
> I've always strongly felt that this was a rather foul business =
practice, wherever I've seen it. The justification for it is the =
utterly misguided belief that, if allowed to, customers will pay for a =
month then cancel their subscription and 'coast' on the 'current' =
version of the signature for a year. This approach suffers from (at =
least) two fundamental flaws:
>=20
> 1) The entire customer base are treated as hostile. It is no surprise =
that they resent this. (Assumption: having resentful customers is bad)
> 2) Spam is, perhaps moreso than ever, a rapidly evolving threat. The =
effectiveness of signatures declines dramatically with time, which means =
that August's signatures have little value by December. [By the way, it =
seems to me that if they're willing to charge for valueless signatures, =
that represents either A) doubt as to the value of the current =
signatures, or B) disbelief in the decreasing value of out of date =
signatures.]
>=20
> While I realize that car insurance might not be the best analogy =
subject, imagine if you put your car on blocks, went off to college and =
allowed the insurance to lapse whilst you were there. When you return, =
the insurance company wants you to pay the last three years of insurance =
in order to reactivate your policy. That companies customers would =
react in the same way: they would find a new provider to do business =
with, rather than pay out for a valueless bit of smoke and mirrors.
>=20
> Nathan Eisenberg
Are you turning your anti-spam appliance off whilst choosing not to pay =
for the maintenance? If not, then I'd argue that a better analogy would =
be that you don't pay for your car insurance but continue to drive your =
car around until you have an accident, at which point you try to take =
out a new policy so that you are covered.
Whilst I can see the argument for the likes of signature updates, where =
you aren't receiving the service in the period that you haven't paid for =
(unless the signature update system is seriously broken), these kind of =
maintenance renewals for appliances normally also include software =
support and hardware repair/replacement.
If the companies don't backdate the maintenance renewal, then you would =
end up with lots of companies only purchasing the maintenance on an =
ad-hoc basis and that will just make the renewals more expensive for =
those of us that actually pay attention to when our subscriptions to due =
to expire and how much they will cost to renew in order accurately =
predict cash flow.
Edward Dore=20
Freethought Internet=20
