
Free Software, Paid Support - jayeshsalvi
http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2011/02/free-software-paid-support.html
======
patio11
I would be sincerely interested in hearing what the "support model" is for
anime/movies/books/etc, because "give the software away for free, charge for
support" is really just another way to say "charge Fortune 500 companies
metric truckloads for the software, let everyone else freeload in the hopes
that they work for a Fortune 500 company and will be an infection vector for
you."

Fortune 500 companies do not strike me as having huge anime consumption habits
which they wouldn't blink at writing 6 figure yearly support contracts for.

~~~
seanos
Example for anime would be something like give away the anime and sell the
merchandising (toys, t-shirts etc).

~~~
sachinag
But that's an entirely different business model: selling add-ons, not support.
One, by the way, that does have analogues in open source: WordPress's Akismet
is a good example.

(Back in my investment banking days, I worked on a thought piece with all the
various business models for open source; if I recall correctly, I think I
managed to find six distinct revenue models. Sadly, I don't have the
presentation nor can I remember the other four off the top of my head.)

~~~
seanos
The selling of add-ons would be an equivalent model, of the general model the
author is talking about, for anime.

From the article: "This approach can be mimicked by anything that is made of
bits not atoms. It can be applied to writing. It can be applied to music. It
can be applied to film. It can be applied to photography, anime, cartoons,
etc, etc."

The author is talking about the general business model where the thing made of
bits is given away (e.g. the anime made from the bits) and the stuff that
costs money to create (e.g. the merchandising made from the atoms) is charged
for. Obviously, there is no notion of _support_ for anime, music etc that the
author mentions.

~~~
fredwilson
yup, it was a metaphor. there isn't support in the case of many forms of
digital content

------
nhebb
I think there's a mismatch of scale in this conversation. Many of the free
apps I see and use are small scale operations. It's just my theory, but I
think an issue being masked here is the fear of rejection, For these small
apps and utilities, the fear of support and returns is exaggerated in the mind
of the developer before they ever occur.

------
nir
Doesn't this mean you're back to selling time, then, rather than a product,
losing the almost-zero marginal cost benefit of selling software?

~~~
rwmj
Yes, and is this a bad thing?

~~~
jamroom
It depends on your definition of "bad" and your situation - if you are selling
licensed software, then selling licenses "scales" (there's little added cost
for creating another license), while support has a harder time scaling since
it is time based. If your business is built on selling licenses, then yes - it
is "bad".

If you are releasing free software then it doesn't matter since your not
offering support any way, so it's not bad.

~~~
gvb
The flip side of that is that Open Source scales up for _developer hours_ and
_creativity,_ limited only by the size of the program's audience. As the
audience grows, so also the programming resources and ideas for improvements.

Closed source development does not scale - it is limited to the available work
hours and imagination of the owners.

------
igorgue
I don't code to make a pile of money, I code because is fun, if you code just
to make money you're doing it wrong, programming is an art that's something
non-programmers can't understand.

For some reason reading the original Programmers Stack Exchange post made me
think of the infamous An Open Letter to Hobbyists:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists>

------
sruffell
Also increasing the cost of any ongoing maintenance and support (and the need
to charge for that support and maintenance) are the "unhedged option calls"
[1] made when the idea was first expressed in code.

[1] [http://www.m3p.co.uk/blog/2010/07/23/bad-code-isnt-
technical...](http://www.m3p.co.uk/blog/2010/07/23/bad-code-isnt-technical-
debt-its-an-unhedged-call-option/)

I'm also reminded of the joke: "How did God manage to create the world in only
six days? He didn't have any installed base he had to worry about backwards
compatibility with."

------
ylem
I think the problem with this model is a question of scaling. Suppose I write
a fitting program which I sell. Sure, I have to support it for some fraction
of users, but for the most part, I have the initial cost of creating/marketing
it, but everything above that is profits. If I am selling support, I have to
have enough people to cover the support and naively, I think that the costs
scale with the number of sales (and one support engineer can only cover so
many customers)--so, the only way I can win is if I charge a lot for
service.....

------
seanos
What about giving away software free initially to build up a user base and
search engine ranking etc, and then once your software is established, either
charging for the software that was once free or introducing a premium version?
Seems like that could be a good business model when entering a competitive
niche if you have few marketing funds available. I would be interested to hear
the thoughts of others on this.

------
RBr
In a similar vein to what Fred is saying...

Free software, paid support, amass users, then...

Watch and listen to what features are missing and what solutions the software
isn't providing... and charge for those.

------
TimJYoung
I think most free software is destined to stay that way. How many free
software projects have kept their existing user base once have started
charging for the software ? My guess is that it is a very low number.

~~~
sovande
But why is that?

~~~
TimJYoung
It's very hard for a software vendor/author to actually gauge how good their
products are unless they charge money for them. Free software distorts the
normal feedback mechanism of the marketplace, which is getting someone to part
with their hard-earned money. So, people use free software products (not all,
but many) primarily because they're "good enough", given that they are free.
This leads the software vendor/author to assume that their existing users will
gladly pay money for the software, but sadly, this is often not the case. Once
you start to charge money for something, "good enough" is no longer "good
enough", and the conversion rate is very low.

------
johngalt
Take it a step further. Design software that can accept lots of data for free,
and encourage users to adopt said system. Then charge whatever you want
because you're in control of something that's vital to them.

------
riledhel
_The cost of building software pales in comparison to the cost of maintaining,
enhancing, and supporting it._ Totally nailed it.

------
thewordpainter
if you're building a super-simple product, this might be the direction to take
it all along. make them pay for your expertise...not your software. if you
want to deter competition once the popularity ensues, you'll have to put it
out there for free or else the me-too market will try to undercut you.

