4 ms·
My wild guess would be that their finance people do not like a monotonically increasing liability on the books. Since some users will never use their credits,
by dasil003 9y ago
My wild guess would be that their finance people do not like a monotonically increasing liability on the books. Since some users will never use their credits, this is their way of satisfying the bean counters.
- richdougherty 9y agoYou're absolutely right, of course. It's still weird because it puts off customers buying Skype credits in the first place, and getting credit from your customers is pretty great.
- jjeaff 9y agoThat was my thought. But as far as the bean counters are concerned, they would base it on an aging schedule. Unused credits stop being counted at 100% after x number of months. But there isn't really any reason to disable them in the software. Especially since they can be reenabled. Just like if you have fully depreciated an office desk, that doesn't mean you march into that person's office and take it away. Sorry, this desk must be thrown out as it is now fully depreciated! So I think it is an attempt at scraping more money out of their users.
- njarboe 9y ago"Sorry, this desk must be thrown out as it is now fully depreciated!" This gave me a good laugh. With lowering interest rates and quantitative easing not pumping up the economy as expected, any bets on long before this becomes a reality?
- majewsky 9y agoPlanned obsolescence is already a thing.
- chris_wot 9y agoWait till they apply this to people.
- tomerv 9y agoIt sounds silly, but these things happen! Just ask anyone who has worked in a Fortune-500 company for at least a few years. Things in good condition get replaced because there's a budget for replacing them, with asking the employees actually using those things (and sometimes despite asking and getting a response on the lines of "please don't touch my stuff, I like it the way it is").
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]