4 ms·

I think a much better solution would be to not charge per user, and to make it tiered. This is the type of thing that could be useful to teams of different size

I think a much better solution would be to not charge per user, and to make it tiered. This is the type of thing that could be useful to teams of different sizes, but it doesn't add more value for more users really. Paying $25 a month for 5 users seems ok. Paying $100 a month for 20 users seems absurd. Just do 3 tiers for like 1-5, 5-20, > 20 users on the order of $19, $29, $49 or something.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
patio11 13y ago
If you have twenty users for this system, it is likely that "you" pay more than $50,000 every other Friday. (Substantially more if they're techies.) I say "you" in scare quotes because much like software payroll just comes out of a budget and isn't "your" money -- spend it or don't spend it, your call, but either way it isn't in your pocket. Your personal financial situation is influenced in a much sharper degree by whether your unit actually accomplishes business goals or not. If you have 20 employees, many, many, MANY things with less certain value than this software cost you more than $100. Many of them are just costs of doing business which you ignore because $100 is chicken feed and moves no needle at the business.
- clarky07 13y ago
  Now that is a good point. I still think tiered pricing is a better fit, but perhaps he can make the tiers higher.
- 7Figures2Commas 13y ago
  > If you have 20 employees, many, many, MANY things with less certain value than this software cost you more than $100. It seems like you're arguing that if you have 20 employees, you're probably wasting more than $100/month on other products and services, so spending another $100/month on iDoneThis isn't a big deal. You might be right in certain cases. Some companies have tighter financial controls and are more thoughtful about managing expenses than others. But as valuable as it might be, iDoneThis is very limited in scope and, perhaps more importantly, is not a "checklist cost" that companies (justified or not) expect to have each month. As such, I think it's very precarious for iDoneThis to depend on the old "companies waste more money on other stuff" non-value proposition. As I noted in another comment, I think it would be wise for iDoneThis to reconsider its pricing model as $5/user/month seems very likely to create agita as the number of users scales. As an example, consider that a Silver Github plan costs $50/month, and can easily support many companies with a 20 person development team.
  - chc 13y ago
    A company that spends an human being's time on evaluating tiny expenditures is not being thoughtful; it's being wasteful. Your employees' time has value just like money does, and any appreciable amount of an employee's time is worth more than $100.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

patio11 13y ago

If you have twenty users for this system, it is likely that "you" pay more than $50,000 every other Friday. (Substantially more if they're techies.) I say "you" in scare quotes because much like software payroll just comes out of a budget and isn't "your" money -- spend it or don't spend it, your call, but either way it isn't in your pocket. Your personal financial situation is influenced in a much sharper degree by whether your unit actually accomplishes business goals or not. If you have 20 employees, many, many, MANY things with less certain value than this software cost you more than $100. Many of them are just costs of doing business which you ignore because $100 is chicken feed and moves no needle at the business.

clarky07 13y ago
Now that is a good point. I still think tiered pricing is a better fit, but perhaps he can make the tiers higher.
7Figures2Commas 13y ago
> If you have 20 employees, many, many, MANY things with less certain value than this software cost you more than $100. It seems like you're arguing that if you have 20 employees, you're probably wasting more than $100/month on other products and services, so spending another $100/month on iDoneThis isn't a big deal. You might be right in certain cases. Some companies have tighter financial controls and are more thoughtful about managing expenses than others. But as valuable as it might be, iDoneThis is very limited in scope and, perhaps more importantly, is not a "checklist cost" that companies (justified or not) expect to have each month. As such, I think it's very precarious for iDoneThis to depend on the old "companies waste more money on other stuff" non-value proposition. As I noted in another comment, I think it would be wise for iDoneThis to reconsider its pricing model as $5/user/month seems very likely to create agita as the number of users scales. As an example, consider that a Silver Github plan costs $50/month, and can easily support many companies with a 20 person development team.
- chc 13y ago
  A company that spends an human being's time on evaluating tiny expenditures is not being thoughtful; it's being wasteful. Your employees' time has value just like money does, and any appreciable amount of an employee's time is worth more than $100.