SOHO and SMB Cloud Storage Recommendations
-
@Dashrender said:
I don't agree. If a 10,000 person company is deploying O365, I suppose they could choose to only roll it out to 290 users so they could get that price point, but that really seems silly.
The point is that being a 10,000 person company is completely their choice. It never something a business is forced to be. They both have the choice of how many licensing to purchase AND how many people to hire.
Number of staff that companies hire is completely choice. In the case of a company of 10,000 they may have made that decision long ago, but they made it and they retain those people by choice day to day.
-
@Dashrender said:
Today my company is 280 users and I'm paying $12.50/u and we are content with the services. But I get a spike in business that takes me to 350 user.. suddenly I have to start paying $20/u or $2100/month more (just for the 280 old users) because of the business growth, (while assuming I don't need/want any of the additional services offered.
That's one way to look at it. Or you could look at it as @Carnival-Boy pointed out that you've been getting "special pricing" with limited features specifically for very small companies and you are about to breach the threshold into a full company. It's not that suddenly you pay "a lot", it is equally that you suddenly "stop getting special treatment as a very small company." I know that the result is the same, but it's the difference between feeling a new penalty versus being thankful for years of special benefits.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Today my company is 280 users and I'm paying $12.50/u and we are content with the services. But I get a spike in business that takes me to 350 user.. suddenly I have to start paying $20/u or $2100/month more (just for the 280 old users) because of the business growth, (while assuming I don't need/want any of the additional services offered.
That's one way to look at it. Or you could look at it as @Carnival-Boy pointed out that you've been getting "special pricing" with limited features specifically for very small companies and you are about to breach the threshold into a full company. It's not that suddenly you pay "a lot", it is equally that you suddenly "stop getting special treatment as a very small company." I know that the result is the same, but it's the difference between feeling a new penalty versus being thankful for years of special benefits.
I read this and one thing instantly popped into my head.
You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Or you could look at it as @Carnival-Boy pointed out that you've been getting "special pricing" with limited features specifically for very small companies and you are about to breach the threshold into a full company. It's not that suddenly you pay "a lot", it is equally that you suddenly "stop getting special treatment as a very small company." I know that the result is the same, but it's the difference between feeling a new penalty versus being thankful for years of special benefits.
If companies want to play that game, then they should really point out that fact. Pointing it out on our bill every month will make us completely prepared for a price change upon breaching a specific level. But a pricing plan like you posted earlier doesn't do that.. instead we get the feeling that now that we are bigger you feel that we suddenly make enough money to be able to afford to pay you more.
But as you mentioned they are just feelings either way.
The MS plan presentation is still the best though. You KNOW that 300 is the limit for the cheaper plans, and you clearly see the other advantages you get when you move to the Enterprise plans.
-
@Dashrender said:
But a pricing plan like you posted earlier doesn't do that.. instead we get the feeling that now that we are bigger you feel that we suddenly make enough money to be able to afford to pay you more.
But that is exactly what is happening. You no longer need special consideration for being a "start up" and now you are a full fledged company and can pay "viable company" prices.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Pricing that humps because the vendor adds features as the hump goes up is being deceptive in their offerings in a price list as Scott has presented it. Instead of realizing I'm getting extra stuff (do I even want it, Access for example) the simple list looks like just because I'm a big boy means I get punished.
So you feel that it is deceptive in a non-useful way to the vendor? I'm unsure what you feel is deceptive here. Where do you feel there is deception?
You're presentation doesn't indicate there are more features for the higher levels of users (but that might be only YOUR presentation, and not the one actually on the website like Microsoft's presentation of O365 - which clearly shows the additions per level of purchase.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
But a pricing plan like you posted earlier doesn't do that.. instead we get the feeling that now that we are bigger you feel that we suddenly make enough money to be able to afford to pay you more.
But that is exactly what is happening. You no longer need special consideration for being a "start up" and now you are a full fledged company and can pay "viable company" prices.
But we all know that that isn't always true. They've picked an arbitrary line... it might be true for some or even most, but definitely not all.
And and this point, we're just nitpicking.. I think we're pretty much on the same page now.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Pricing that humps because the vendor adds features as the hump goes up is being deceptive in their offerings in a price list as Scott has presented it. Instead of realizing I'm getting extra stuff (do I even want it, Access for example) the simple list looks like just because I'm a big boy means I get punished.
So you feel that it is deceptive in a non-useful way to the vendor? I'm unsure what you feel is deceptive here. Where do you feel there is deception?
You're presentation doesn't indicate there are more features for the higher levels of users (but that might be only YOUR presentation, and not the one actually on the website like Microsoft's presentation of O365 - which clearly shows the additions per level of purchase.
I get that. It's rare (but still correct) to call it deceptive in when it is in your favour. Like telling you I forget your birthday to cover for sneakily getting you a rainbow and unicorn decorated cake without you guessing.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
But a pricing plan like you posted earlier doesn't do that.. instead we get the feeling that now that we are bigger you feel that we suddenly make enough money to be able to afford to pay you more.
But that is exactly what is happening. You no longer need special consideration for being a "start up" and now you are a full fledged company and can pay "viable company" prices.
But we all know that that isn't always true. They've picked an arbitrary line... it might be true for some or even most, but definitely not all.
And and this point, we're just nitpicking.. I think we're pretty much on the same page now.
Yes, they have to pick an indicator. There is no direct means for them to put a metric on "viable." But they make it very public and it is a sensible number. I am sure that tons of thought went into which numbers work for which size organizations.
-
@scottalanmiller Am I getting a unicorn and rainbows cake for my birthday? You kinda volunteered right there...
-
@Dashrender said:
eh? not for more than 10 users? O365 example is clearly more than 10 users.
My initial point was that whilst it is common for software houses to offer special products or pricing for less than 10 users, Microsoft is unusual in doing a similar thing for 300 users. That was it. My one and only point!
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Are you saying that Microsoft is only "wrong" because of the exact number of users in question and not because of the general theory?
I have no opinion on what Microsoft are doing. I don't think they're wrong or right. They're the marketing experts. All I am pointing out is that whilst it is common for software houses to offer special products or pricing for less than 10 users, Microsoft is unusual in doing a similar thing for 300 users. Not wrong, not right, just unusual.
Indeed, this is a relatively recent thing. They initially had Small Business which was for up to 25 users, and Enterprise which was for everyone else. They then introduced Mid-Size, which was for between 25 and 300 (and I didn't get this either, at the time). They then effectively merged Small Business and Mid-Size and ended up with the 300 limit. I am sure this will be revamped again in due course.
-
Can I have a unicorn as well please.
-
Anyway Scott, I think number of users is the crucial factor, you think that is irrelevant and number of employees is a bigger factor. I see this as a simple difference of opinion. You think I'm attacking your character or personal traits. That wasn't ever my intention and I apologise that that is how I came across.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@Dashrender said:
eh? not for more than 10 users? O365 example is clearly more than 10 users.
My initial point was that whilst it is common for software houses to offer special products or pricing for less than 10 users, Microsoft is unusual in doing a similar thing for 300 users. That was it. My one and only point!
Okay, if the question was not one of "they shouldn't do this" which is how it came across and only question of "why is MS at 300 vs other companies at 10" that's very different and really just about the kind of software that it is.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@Dashrender said:
eh? not for more than 10 users? O365 example is clearly more than 10 users.
My initial point was that whilst it is common for software houses to offer special products or pricing for less than 10 users, Microsoft is unusual in doing a similar thing for 300 users. That was it. My one and only point!
Awww.. and are you saying this when looking at Scott's suggested reasoning - at 300 you're no longer in the kiddy pool as far as being a company, you're now playing with the big dogs?
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Are you saying that Microsoft is only "wrong" because of the exact number of users in question and not because of the general theory?
I have no opinion on what Microsoft are doing. I don't think they're wrong or right. They're the marketing experts. All I am pointing out is that whilst it is common for software houses to offer special products or pricing for less than 10 users, Microsoft is unusual in doing a similar thing for 300 users. Not wrong, not right, just unusual.
Indeed, this is a relatively recent thing. They initially had Small Business which was for up to 25 users, and Enterprise which was for everyone else. They then introduced Mid-Size, which was for between 25 and 300 (and I didn't get this either, at the time). They then effectively merged Small Business and Mid-Size and ended up with the 300 limit. I am sure this will be revamped again in due course.
SBS was capped at 75 users, not 25. They did come out with a product (is it Essentials?) that's capped at 25 now?
While I liked the idea of the Mid-sized software, ultimately the limitations weren't worth the cost savings. -
Not sure of the Essentials cap. Foundation is capped at 15, I believe.
-
@Dashrender said:
@Carnival-Boy said:
Indeed, this is a relatively recent thing. They initially had Small Business which was for up to 25 users, and Enterprise which was for everyone else. They then introduced Mid-Size, which was for between 25 and 300 (and I didn't get this either, at the time). They then effectively merged Small Business and Mid-Size and ended up with the 300 limit. I am sure this will be revamped again in due course.
SBS was capped at 75 users, not 25. They did come out with a product (is it Essentials?) that's capped at 25 now?
I think it was originally called Small Business Essentials, but they they renamed it to just Small Business (there was also a Small Business Premium). It was capped at 25.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@Dashrender said:
@Carnival-Boy said:
Indeed, this is a relatively recent thing. They initially had Small Business which was for up to 25 users, and Enterprise which was for everyone else. They then introduced Mid-Size, which was for between 25 and 300 (and I didn't get this either, at the time). They then effectively merged Small Business and Mid-Size and ended up with the 300 limit. I am sure this will be revamped again in due course.
SBS was capped at 75 users, not 25. They did come out with a product (is it Essentials?) that's capped at 25 now?
I think it was originally called Small Business Essentials, but they they renamed it to just Small Business (there was also a Small Business Premium). It was capped at 25.
Aww.. I was referring to server products, not O365.. my bad.
