3 ms·
There's also something called "killing the golden goose." If they had more reasonable pricing, they may have been able to extract money from more clients for a
by hvs 15y ago
There's also something called "killing the golden goose." If they had more reasonable pricing, they may have been able to extract money from more clients for a longer period. I'm not sure what they current profits look like, but gouging your customers for short term gain while destroying long term profits isn't generally considered a good way to maximize shareholder value.
- glhaynes 15y agoAgreed - though, if open source is gonna kill the golden goose regardless... maybe might as well kill it first, get all the eggs.
- travem 15y agoThe other scenario is that keeping prices reasonable means there isn't as much demand for an open source version. Developers who balked at paying $150 a seat wouldn't be sufficiently motivated if the cost was a more "reasonable" $20 say.
- travem 15y agoI just remembered a pretty good example of this with the story of BitKeeper and Git, you can read http://kerneltrap.org/node/4966 http://kerneltrap.org/node/4966 for more information. It was the catalyst of losing the cheap enough/free option that motivated the work on Git.