| |||||||||||||
Actually real price was something like $3-$5 at the time...Actually real price was something like $3-$5 at the time...Posted Jan 20, 2012 16:02 UTC (Fri) by khim (subscriber, #9252)In reply to: Software is The Glass Bead Game by nybble41 Parent article: LCA: Addressing the failure of open source
Not unless they're selling them for about twenty cents each (the cost of a blank CD, plus handling). It's not feasible to sell them for $0.2. You'll not cover even S&H costs. $3-$5 is realistic, and yes, it was done when that made sense.
(Log in to post comments)
Actually real price was something like $3-$5 at the time... Posted Jan 20, 2012 16:22 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] When you buy a CD of something that you could download for free, because for whatever reason you want a CD, are you buying hardware or software? I think I'm buying hardware.
Actually real price was something like $3-$5 at the time... Posted Jan 20, 2012 16:52 UTC (Fri) by nybble41 (subscriber, #55106) [Link]
> You'll not cover even S&H costs. $3-$5 is realistic, and yes, it was done when that made sense.
I wasn't counting shipping in the price, just the blank CD and whatever it costs to burn data onto it. Feel free to substitute a more realistic base cost; it's been a while since I priced blank CDs, and the overhead was no more than a guess. Including S&H, $3-$5 is well within the margin of error.
In the case you cited, as giraffedata pointed out, they really were a hardware & service vendor--they were paid for the CDs and the service of filling them with third-party software (plus S&H). No one would pay them for the software itself knowing that said software is available for free.
In short, if you're making a standard retail markup over the cost of manufacturing the discs, you're a hardware/service vendor. If you're making significantly more than that, then you're being paid for the data on the disc, not the disc itself, which makes you a software vendor.
|
|||||||||||||