[Info-vax] VSI licencing policy (again), was: Re: VSI has a new CEO

[John Vottero]

On Wednesday, August 4, 2021 at 8:19:24 AM UTC-4, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2021-08-03, Dave Froble <da... at tsoft-inc.com> wrote: 
> > On 8/3/2021 1:41 PM, Simon Clubley wrote: 
> >> 
> >> Unfortunately, VSI do not seem to show any interest in addressing this. 
> >> 
> >> I wonder how much business it has cost them and how much it's going to 
> >> cost them simply because a customer cannot allow this situation to occur. 
> >> 
> >> A business may love VMS and want to stay with it, but they are not 
> >> going to allow the collapse of a vendor to be the collapse of their 
> >> own business, even if that means moving away from VMS. 
> > 
> > On this we agree 100%. 
> > 
> 
> Even when people disagree with me on the other things I say, everyone 
> still appears to agree with me on this. 
> 

Not everyone.

VSI is smart enough to know that they cannot expect much revenue from new sales of VMS.

VSI must charge a yearly fee to ensure a revenue stream. If they didn't, many customers would get to a stable x86 version and then stop paying. VSI also knows that if they try to do a yearly fee with just language in the license, they will spend more money trying to collect the fees than the fees themselves. What happens when the VMS administrator leaves a company? Have you ever tried calling a billion dollar company and asking who the new VMS admin is? When the license key drops dead, the new VMS admin will call VSI.

But, IT DOESN'T MATTER because VSI will never just drop dead. If VSI decides they just can't make it work, they will lay off everyone except the one person that sends out invoices and generates new license keys. That would be a multi-million dollar business that only has one employee.