4 ms·

Yep, the path to monetization is always adding new value-adds, not trying to charge for the current functionality after the fact.

paulryanrogers 4y ago
This assumes one knows how scalable such a generous free offering will be forever, on day one. Much more likely they were basically dumping to undercut the competition and gain market share. Though I suppose some startups are genuinely naive enough to just launch and hope they'll find a revenue stream rich enough later.
brookst 4y ago
So if someone underpriced today, they are obligated to give it to you for less forever?
- raincole 4y ago
  Apparently all the free Docker users believe so. I'm not saying they're right or wrong, but they believe so. You need to count this when writing down your monetization plan. People nowadays are generally extremely entitled.
  - brookst 4y ago
    I’ve run a service that pissed off free users by charging for things that used to be free. It increased revenue and decreased costs from the tiny percentage that actually left. I think it’s win/win for any business that doesn’t rely on network effects.
    - AviationAtom 4y ago
      Part of Docker's issue was the executed it absolutely horribly. They gave a short suspense, very little detail, and few options for migrating under such a deadline.
- AviationAtom 4y ago
  When people use your services in a matter assuming such, yes, I do believe so. At the very least you should grandfather in old users and only change it for new users going forward.
  - brookst 4y ago
    Do you expect raises at work to cover inflation at least?
    - AviationAtom 4y ago
      In my personal experience? No. I asked for 15%, knowing my co-workers made more than that, and inflation had been 9.1% YoY. I was told to be happy to get 3%. What did I do? Found a different job and employer. Jobs are like insurance rates: you should shop around occasionally. For businesses it's a cost of doing business when trying to compete to lure new workers.

paulryanrogers 4y ago

This assumes one knows how scalable such a generous free offering will be forever, on day one. Much more likely they were basically dumping to undercut the competition and gain market share. Though I suppose some startups are genuinely naive enough to just launch and hope they'll find a revenue stream rich enough later.

brookst 4y ago

So if someone underpriced today, they are obligated to give it to you for less forever?

raincole 4y ago
Apparently all the free Docker users believe so. I'm not saying they're right or wrong, but they believe so. You need to count this when writing down your monetization plan. People nowadays are generally extremely entitled.
- brookst 4y ago
  I’ve run a service that pissed off free users by charging for things that used to be free. It increased revenue and decreased costs from the tiny percentage that actually left. I think it’s win/win for any business that doesn’t rely on network effects.
  - AviationAtom 4y ago
    Part of Docker's issue was the executed it absolutely horribly. They gave a short suspense, very little detail, and few options for migrating under such a deadline.
AviationAtom 4y ago
When people use your services in a matter assuming such, yes, I do believe so. At the very least you should grandfather in old users and only change it for new users going forward.
- brookst 4y ago
  Do you expect raises at work to cover inflation at least?
  - AviationAtom 4y ago
    In my personal experience? No. I asked for 15%, knowing my co-workers made more than that, and inflation had been 9.1% YoY. I was told to be happy to get 3%. What did I do? Found a different job and employer. Jobs are like insurance rates: you should shop around occasionally. For businesses it's a cost of doing business when trying to compete to lure new workers.