4 ms·

Thankyou. 1. My target is researchers in psychology, sociology, and similar fields. 2. I've tried to price the product so that the individual could make a disc

Thankyou. 1. My target is researchers in psychology, sociology, and similar fields. 2. I've tried to price the product so that the individual could make a discretionary purchase (have discussed the pricing with quite a few people with positive responses). The simplest plan is $480 per year and the next plan up is $780 and comes with a second account for an RA or student. I only need a couple of hundred users to be quite comfortable and successful do from done number crunching at the beginning I was pretty confident that that was a small % of TAM. So far the software been used for both research and teaching but the teaching part was an unexpected bonus. Thanks very much for the thoughtful reply. Excuse my terse response as I'm typing on a phone.

impendia 7y ago
You might try to contact William Stein. He is a former academic (tenured professor at the University of Washington) that was the lead developer for SageMath, an open source product which he's tried to commercialize along vaguely similar lines. He's now working on a project called CoCalc, which I know less about. Unfortunately, my impression is that he's had some bad luck, despite a fantastic product, and also despite being 100% an insider whom many research mathematicians personally know and deeply admire. Last I heard, he found us a difficult market to sell to. Maybe his luck has turned around, I certainly hope so. I see him participate on HN every once in awhile. His email address is wstein@gmail.com (not private -- I merely saved you two seconds of googling), and perhaps he would be willing to share his advice.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
impendia 7y ago
One further thought. I am in mathematics, which is not the same as psychology or sociology, so take this with a grain of salt. That said --- I think your pricing plan is wrong. Don't price based on a subscription model. Instead, sell your software outright, perhaps include more licenses (e.g. for all students and postdocs under the PI's direct supervision), and charge closer to $3-5K for it. Here is why. First I recommend this entertaining article by Joel Spolsky on how to price software: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2004/12/15/camels-and-rubber-duckies/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2004/12/15/camels-and-rubber-... The idea is the same, and the details are totally different. In academia, funding tends to be feast or famine. I would never buy software that cost $480 per year. I'd be too scared that my funding source would dry up. Granting agencies and deans are way too capricious. If I got used to it and came to rely on it, I might end up needing to pay out of pocket. Which I'd probably do for $100, but not for $480. Conversely, when funding does come, it tends to come in larger chunks. For example, my dean has a "small equipment purchase support" program, where I can apply for funding to buy equipment. Never mind the details (I'm not sure if software is covered, and apparently there is a minimum of $5,000, but let's pretend otherwise). If I were going to apply for $500, then I may as well apply for $5,000 instead. It's same amount of work, my chances are roughly as good. Looks the same to me, puts 10x as much food on your table. An even better source of money is expiring grants. Often, if you haven't spent a source of grant money by a certain date, it goes away. So researchers will say to themselves "Shit. I have $7,000 I need to spend within the next three weeks. Is there anything I can justify spending it on?" If you're in the right room at the right time, then you will get $X, where X is the price of your software, as long as it is less than however much money they have left. At least in my field, somewhere in the low to mid four figures would probably maximize your expected value. Good luck!
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- throw_your_boat 7y ago
  Thanks (for both replies)! I do have a lab plan as well (6 transferable accounts at $2460 per year) but as you've pointed out, that isn't a one off cost. The problem I have with the one-time purchase is recurring costs for storage, hosting, etc. as it's a web based SaaS. Nevertheless, excellent advice... I'm going to have to start researching my options on one-time pricing. Thankyou!

impendia 7y ago

You might try to contact William Stein. He is a former academic (tenured professor at the University of Washington) that was the lead developer for SageMath, an open source product which he's tried to commercialize along vaguely similar lines. He's now working on a project called CoCalc, which I know less about. Unfortunately, my impression is that he's had some bad luck, despite a fantastic product, and also despite being 100% an insider whom many research mathematicians personally know and deeply admire. Last I heard, he found us a difficult market to sell to. Maybe his luck has turned around, I certainly hope so. I see him participate on HN every once in awhile. His email address is wstein@gmail.com (not private -- I merely saved you two seconds of googling), and perhaps he would be willing to share his advice.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

impendia 7y ago

One further thought. I am in mathematics, which is not the same as psychology or sociology, so take this with a grain of salt. That said --- I think your pricing plan is wrong. Don't price based on a subscription model. Instead, sell your software outright, perhaps include more licenses (e.g. for all students and postdocs under the PI's direct supervision), and charge closer to $3-5K for it. Here is why. First I recommend this entertaining article by Joel Spolsky on how to price software: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2004/12/15/camels-and-rubber-duckies/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2004/12/15/camels-and-rubber-... The idea is the same, and the details are totally different. In academia, funding tends to be feast or famine. I would never buy software that cost $480 per year. I'd be too scared that my funding source would dry up. Granting agencies and deans are way too capricious. If I got used to it and came to rely on it, I might end up needing to pay out of pocket. Which I'd probably do for $100, but not for $480. Conversely, when funding does come, it tends to come in larger chunks. For example, my dean has a "small equipment purchase support" program, where I can apply for funding to buy equipment. Never mind the details (I'm not sure if software is covered, and apparently there is a minimum of $5,000, but let's pretend otherwise). If I were going to apply for $500, then I may as well apply for $5,000 instead. It's same amount of work, my chances are roughly as good. Looks the same to me, puts 10x as much food on your table. An even better source of money is expiring grants. Often, if you haven't spent a source of grant money by a certain date, it goes away. So researchers will say to themselves "Shit. I have $7,000 I need to spend within the next three weeks. Is there anything I can justify spending it on?" If you're in the right room at the right time, then you will get $X, where X is the price of your software, as long as it is less than however much money they have left. At least in my field, somewhere in the low to mid four figures would probably maximize your expected value. Good luck!

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
throw_your_boat 7y ago
Thanks (for both replies)! I do have a lab plan as well (6 transferable accounts at $2460 per year) but as you've pointed out, that isn't a one off cost. The problem I have with the one-time purchase is recurring costs for storage, hosting, etc. as it's a web based SaaS. Nevertheless, excellent advice... I'm going to have to start researching my options on one-time pricing. Thankyou!