[Info-vax] VSI Subscription Licensing Exchanges

[Bill Gunshannon]

On 5/25/21 5:06 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 5/25/2021 4:12 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 5/25/2021 4:07 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> On 5/25/2021 3:59 PM, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>> In article <s8jhon$1c4i$1 at gioia.aioe.org>, =?UTF-8?Q?Arne_Vajh=c3=b8j?=
>>>> <arne at vajhoej.dk> writes:
>>>>>>> Arne has suggested paying for additional years up front (and
>>>>>>> therefore
>>>>>>> getting those licences early as a result).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How would that actually work?  Presumably the goal is to have, say, 5
>>>>>> years after VSI goes bust to sort out some sort of alternative, and
>>>>>> presumably VSI doesn't want to sell licenses with no expiration
>>>>>> because
>>>>>> they would rather have a steady revenue stream.  Just having it 
>>>>>> expire
>>>>>> after 5 years wouldn't work if VSI goes bust after 4œ years.  Perhaps
>>>>>> one could buy a 5-year license every year.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes - the idea was a rolling 5 year license.
>>>>>
>>>>>>                                             However, that would mean
>>>>>> that a customer would then have several valid licenses, and 
>>>>>> apparently
>>>>>> VSI is also concerned about too many licenses being in circulation.
>>>>>> (Unloading and deleting the old one won't cut it, since people have
>>>>>> backups.)
>>>>>
>>>>> You have a license 21-25 for node A and you receive a license
>>>>> 22-26 for node A.
>>>>
>>>> Presumably if a license for 5 years costs X, then when buying another
>>>> one which has a four-year overlap one would pay only X/5.
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>> Or to do it the other way around.
>>>
>>> If a one year license cost X then a 5 year license cost 5*X and
>>> a 1 year license extension of a 5 year license cost X.
>>
>> And maybe they could make the actual license follow extension model, so
>> it would be:
>> * you pay 5X for a license 21-25
>> * next year you pay X for a license 25-26 (extension license)
>>
>> Or whatever. The point is simply that customers know they have
>> AVG=4.5 MIN=4.0 MAX=5.0 left which is better than
>> AVG=0.5 MIN=0.0 MAX=1.0 and AVG=2.5 MIN=0.0 MAX=5.0 for
>> normal 1 and 5 year contracts.
>>
>> Arne
>>
> 
> How easy would it be to replace 50 years of app development in less than 
> 5 years?  Perhaps significantly less.
> 

Companies have been doing that for as far back as I can remember.
The University did it and it took less than a year.  I still think
it was definitely not a bargain and certainly not a good idea, but
the reality is there are a lot of companies who have made a lot of
money doing it.  Isn't that what Sector7 does?

And, just to add another thought to this.  What makes you think
that the C-level executives aren't going to just see the 5 year
license as an incentive to convert within the next 5 years?

bill