4 ms·

Personally, I consider "free if you refer 5 users" sort of an offensive trick. It presents quite odorously the falseness behind the $20/yr pricetag, and makes

by nfoz 13y ago

Personally, I consider "free if you refer 5 users" sort of an offensive trick. It presents quite odorously the falseness behind the $20/yr pricetag, and makes me value the ethics behind that price less.

hobs 13y ago
Really? To me that means the service thinks that if can subsidize new users because the initial cost isnt as much as their purchases will make, and no business makes all of its revenue from a first time shopper (with rare exceptions). That means the service thinks each user is worth about 4 bucks. Actually not that expensive of a lead generation if it brings in 20 a year. I would be interested in your thoughts regarding this, because I have seem some lead generation sites pay 50 dollars for the right kind of lead.
- nfoz 13y ago
  You're thinking entirely from the business side; how a business perceives its profit model. As a consumer, and thinking specifically to when I had less means: perhaps wrongly, but I have an acute perception of the value of anything I purchase in terms of the work that actually goes into its production. I'll pay for a service if I'm not being scammed, if some real human effort went into producing it. If it's just a copy of something that was already produced, then there's nothing for me to pay for. Similarly, if it costs $x but "free if you tell 5 friends", suddenly the whole experience is cheapened. It's perfectly concievable that I could tell 5 "friends" and this has 0 effect on you. My mind starts to wander. Why should I pay more because I don't have 5 friends? Why should I pay more because I'm not willing to shill myself out and strain the relationships I have, to give you some cheap advertising? I consider the premise offensive, and I also see that maybe you don't need the $20 as much as I do. It's not a great way of thinking, but I think the onus is on the salesperson to have some respect for their clients and not smugly write them off as "stealers" when their storefront provided what might be perceived by those clients as a sales trick. shrug

by nfoz 13y ago

hobs 13y ago

Really? To me that means the service thinks that if can subsidize new users because the initial cost isnt as much as their purchases will make, and no business makes all of its revenue from a first time shopper (with rare exceptions). That means the service thinks each user is worth about 4 bucks. Actually not that expensive of a lead generation if it brings in 20 a year. I would be interested in your thoughts regarding this, because I have seem some lead generation sites pay 50 dollars for the right kind of lead.

nfoz 13y ago
You're thinking entirely from the business side; how a business perceives its profit model. As a consumer, and thinking specifically to when I had less means: perhaps wrongly, but I have an acute perception of the value of anything I purchase in terms of the work that actually goes into its production. I'll pay for a service if I'm not being scammed, if some real human effort went into producing it. If it's just a copy of something that was already produced, then there's nothing for me to pay for. Similarly, if it costs $x but "free if you tell 5 friends", suddenly the whole experience is cheapened. It's perfectly concievable that I could tell 5 "friends" and this has 0 effect on you. My mind starts to wander. Why should I pay more because I don't have 5 friends? Why should I pay more because I'm not willing to shill myself out and strain the relationships I have, to give you some cheap advertising? I consider the premise offensive, and I also see that maybe you don't need the $20 as much as I do. It's not a great way of thinking, but I think the onus is on the salesperson to have some respect for their clients and not smugly write them off as "stealers" when their storefront provided what might be perceived by those clients as a sales trick. shrug