Very Important: VDN Tiers & Costs

Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1998 23:08:05 -0300 (ADT)
From: Christopher Majka <nextug@is.dal.ca>
To: Richard Rudnicki <foxpoint@fox.nstn.ca>
cc: ccn board <ccn-board@chebucto.ns.ca>, David Murdoch <murdoch@csuite.ns.ca>, CCN Information Provider Committee <ccn-ip@chebucto.ns.ca>
Precedence: bulk
Return-Path: <ccn-ip-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>

next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects

Index of Subjects
Hi all,

On Sun, 4 Oct 1998, Richard Rudnicki wrote:

> Regardless of what's been agreed upon, positioning is everything in the 
> world of competitive business, and CCN could learn well from the principle. 
> 
> This whole question of what to charge and what not to charge for various 
> levels of service can only be answered in the context of what the other 
> players in the field are doing together with CCN's mission. We must position 
> ourselves relative to what other ISPs are providing and what the consumer of 
> these services can get relative to her/his needs -- or we'll be lame ducks. 
> We're having this debate about prices with very little information, mostly 
> hearsay, and have no definitive overview or agreement on what the heck is 
> going on out there in our own field of operations. We can't be effective 
> making decisions this way. 

<snip>

Good point, however, I would add that in this context positioning is one
of several important factors that we need to consider.

I fully concur with Richard's proposal that we take a comprehensive look
at what other ISP's out there are offering and what costs, conditions,
etc. are. This can help us put what we are prepared to offer in a
meaningful context. I also think it would be worthwhile, as Richard
suggests, canvassing our own IP constituency for their feedback. 

However, in addition to this I think we have to weigh a number of other
factors.

1) What is our IP constituency, both present as well as desired?

The CCN does represent a different community then the one that is out
there busily mounting commercial sites on Kayhay, Supercity or Sympatico
and I think we have a long-standing ideological commitment to fostering
such groups. We have to take into account their means and our own level of
commitment in assisting them.

One could argue that a VDN was icing on the cake and that only those who
could afford it require it. However, I understand the real (and perceived)
interest in and advantages of a VDN by some groups with only modest means
and I don't think we should make our pricing so exclusive that they cannot
reasonably afford it.

2) What are the real costs we incur through creating a VDN?

I would like to hear more from Operations on this, however, it is my
impression that, having created the structures that support a VDN, there
is little additional effort on the part of the CCN in maintaining a VDN IP
than in maintaining any other IP. Hence I think there is some real
justification in looking at a fee which represents a 'start-up cost'
followed, perhaps, by a lower annual fee.

I'm pulling numbers out of a hat, however, I think that a $400 set-up fee
(which David Trueman once indicated to me he considered "more than ample"
in view of the tech time involved in setting up a VDN) followed by, say, a
'suggested minimum annual contribution of $100' would be much more
affordable for most CCN IPs interested in such an option, and a more
realistic accounting of the expenses incurred by the CCN.

Now one could take the position that VDN fees could represent a cash-cow
to offset the expenses against regular IPs from which revenues are more
modest, however, I would suggest that if you drive all the cows from the
pasture you'll gross substantially less milk. ;->

3) Positioning with respect to what?

The CCN occupies a different niche than the commercial ISPs and our IPs
are a different breed. It's one thing to say that $400 per annum
represents a bargain viz-a-viz Sympatico, however, our ISPs aren't
necessarily picking us out of that pack. Alternatives may include Ednet,
University Servers or US hosting services such as Best.Com (or others that
Peter Morgan mentions). These are free or lost cost services and we need
to realistically position ourselves in relation to them as well. 

4) The playing field has lots of topography.

I think it is important to look at how competitive the larger ISPs are
with respect to hosting certain sites that they are interested in. As I
mentioned previously we have lost Neptune Theatre, Symphony Nova Scotia
and Eastern Front Theatre to Sympatico. Being involved with SNS I know
they offer a lot. Free hosting, multiple email addresses (I myself have
one of them), unlimited server space *and* their people design and create
the sites for these groups (built from scratch every year when they unveil
their new season). Very attractive.

There are lots of constituencies and I think we need to be able to
flexibly accommodate as many as possible. Business IPs who have a
significant cash flow are in one league; non-profit IPs are in another.

Lets look at the IPs who have been through the VDN process at the CCN: a
sports NGO; a health research project at Dalhousie; a heritage promotion
group; an engineering professional association and a student Newspaper. We
need to be able to provide a reasonable service to our own constituency.

Cheers!

Chris

_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._.
Christopher Majka                               <aa051@chebucto.ns.ca>
Editor-in-Chief: Chebucto Community Net - Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
URL = http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/Home.html

"We have ... in this country ... far too many captive editors who cannot 
even be heard to rattle their chains."              -- Carl E. Lindstrom
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._.


next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects