Looks great, nice work! Signed up for a free account to try it out. The pricing on the Large Booster Pack (150K calls for $159) doesn't seem correct given the pricing/value on the Small and Medium packs...
I will never, ever do business with Sprint again, after I cancelled my phone service (twice!), threw out my phone, and they mysteriously re-activated the account a few months later, silently accrued an account balance with late fees, and then reported me to collections.
Absolutely, but the question is how frequent they happen. Are they business-as-usual, or a gross anomaly. When it happens to enough people, and those people tell their friends, the brand erodes.
Back in the 90s my wife and I switched to Sprint, then got a much smaller phone bill than we expected. The following month it was higher than we would have expected, we looked, and it turns out that they included calls that should have been on the first bill. (There were phone calls on the second bill sandwiched between calls on the first bill.)
We figured out that they did this deliberately to make people think they were saving money, knowing full well that most people don't look at their bills in detail. We agreed that it was fundamentally dishonest, and that left a bad enough taste in our mouth that we switched away from them. They switched us back, we registered an official complaint, got switched back, then (because of their stupid billing policy) had to pay bills for another couple of billing cycles.
That was 15 years ago. I've never even considered using Sprint since. If people around me start talking about their great customer service, then after a year or two I'll reconsider. Maybe.
I suspect that your story was likely similar to mine, and the silently accrued balance was the result of phone calls that they didn't bill you for until a couple of payment cycles later.
Are you sure about that? I thought Sprint was only a partial investor and lessee. Clear 4G is a lot more expensive than Sprint 4G, so it would be strange if they had a subsidary that offered worse service for more money.
(I went with Sprint 4G over Clear 4G because Sprint 4G is free with a 3G data plan. 4G coverage can be spotty, but 3G coverage is exceptional. So I am never without data. Now if only I left my house more often...)
We are really happy with Clear. I use it less than everyone else, but we've got people all around Chicagoland using it. What don't you like about it, besides the price?
Clear bugs me because of their pricing; they charge less for "home" than for "mobile"? WTF?
The main reason I went with Sprint is because the cost is almost the same as Clear, but I also get 3G access. I don't use that much in Chicago, but it's great when traveling; Sprint's 3G network is pretty comprehensive. It's really relaxing to have Internet access anywhere. For me, anyway :)
I don't doubt it. Their billing system used to be a nightmare. Fortunately, after 10 years of using them I'm finally happy with more than just their price/network.
I still like a range. I mean, fairly recently someone asked me for a recommendation... I did some legwork and found that one of the best people I know was looking around at the time. I made the recommendation, and kindof embarrassed myself. turns out, the guy wanted "a quick learner" (meaning someone cheap with little experience)
I mean, I think hiring people without experience is great; how else are they going to get experience? but if you are looking to pay $25/hr, don't waste the time of people who expect $200/hr. (and visa-versa.)
Agreed. Software patents hinder innovation. Large companies can afford to create and license patents; startups launch products/web services and hope not to trip any of those "landmines" when they become successful.
To me, a quote request form says the company isn't really serious about this whole Internet thing :) I associate it with a site someone put up in 1995 and hasn't touched since. Probably just me.
But, in this case this may actually be a win, since the product isn't mass market. Whoever goes through the trouble of filling out a request is likely already sold on the product, so less time spent on sales.
This is the typical model for enterprise software that is sold through a sales team. The price of the product is determined by how much the customer is willing to pay and can vary widely from one sale to the next. Sales made this way usually yield a higher price at the expense of speed/volume. You can only sell as fast as your sales team works.
Just because it's typical doesn't mean it's efficient or useful.
There's a new generation of people with purchase authority rising up. I'd rather go with a slightly more expensive company with open pricing rather than a closed company where I constantly have to negotiate small discounts off of a "retail price" nobody ever actually pays (except the government, of course).
This is what I meant. These developer tools aren't really aimed at developers (most of whom would probably pick a tool with a nice tutorial over the one with a quote request form).
So it doesn't really matter if most hackers would hate this sales tactic. What matters in this case is it works on salespeople :)
Agreed, when searching for some kind of library that might potentially be of use to me, it's extremely annoying to have to fill in a form requiring name, position, phone, address, fax number and whatnot; or to go through a lengthy registration and email address confirmation to download a library sample version.
I don't think that is the Market being discussed though. We sell tools at a similar level (more expensive and specialist though) and putting prices on a site is actually a turn off.
The best hack you can do is put a phone number on there. So long as it is the right Market your conversion rate will shoot up.
