[147777] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Well Lookie Here,
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniel Seagraves)
Wed Dec 21 14:54:06 2011
From: Daniel Seagraves <dseagrav@humancapitaldev.com>
In-Reply-To: <2F1D4FA4-107A-49C4-B5E5-CD40B282B9B2@freethought-internet.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 13:52:58 -0600
To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Dec 21, 2011, at 1:09 PM, Edward Dore wrote:
> On 21 Dec 2011, at 18:46, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
>=20
>>> 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signatures, or B) disbelief in the decreasing value of out of date =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
>=20
> 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.
>=20
> 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.
>=20
> 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.
<rant>
Besides, treating your customers like thieves and/or forcing =
disagreeable conditions on them is all the rage now! Everyone knows they =
can screw customers as hard as they like because everyone else is going =
to screw them just as hard, and if you aren't screwing them hard enough, =
well that's just wasted potential right there! Don't worry about them =
leaving for another provider - They all do it! I mean, look at the =
airlines: Company profits in the toilet, customer satisfaction so low =
they're trying to get Congress involved, crew pay at the lowest on =
record, and the salaries of the upper management is the highest in the =
history of the industry! Just think, if you screw your customers hard =
enough, YOU could be NEXT sitting on that huge pile of cash in the top =
of your ivory tower pissing down on the public!
For example, I have a large pile of content that I have paid for but =
cannot access anymore because their various copy protection schemes are =
no longer supported or no longer run on modern machines. Next to that I =
have a smaller but increasingly growing stack of content I paid for but =
REFUSE to access due to provisions hidden in the EULA requiring me to =
display advertisements and/or install spyware on my computer. You can't =
read the EULA before purchase and you can't return the purchase for a =
refund if you refuse the EULA. (That's right, you can sell AD-SUPPORTED =
software that customers pay FULL RETAIL PRICE for! They whine and =
complain on the internet, but believe you me, when the next iteration =
comes out, they'll line up to buy it!) I could resort to illegal hacks =
that disable the DRM or remove the ads, but that is a federal offense =
and a security risk, and I don't feel like wasting my computer or career =
over a few hundred dollars. So they join the pile. The companies who do =
this actually consider this situation desirable - They got my money, and =
I'm not going to be downloading patches or using up server time or =
anything. Pure profit! It's win-win!
Executive Summary: It doesn't matter what your customers want anymore. =
You just give them what you want to give them, and if they don't take =
it, you punish them until they give up and go away (and don't worry =
about that, they'll be back!) or accept your conditions. Thar's gold in =
them thar hills, you just gotta go beat it out of em!
</rant>
