Wouldn't a flat fee for both services be a plus to the average consumer ? Wouldn't the improvement in the level of quality for both methods of communication be viewed as a real plus ? IMHO, the average consumer might look at this
service as a real boon.
Yes and Yes and I agree.
The adoption curve is important for companies to understand where their product sits and where they position it. AOL knows that its reaching (if it has not already reached) the hump on the curve, when the number of possible subscribers to its current service becomes much more finite.
When companies see that its product is being consumed by the late adopters and laggers, they begin to reposition it to attract new consumers. The person who signed up with AOL 7 years ago will not be happy with the same service the newbie signs up with today. So if you are AOL, you reposition yourself as a total media company, offering the old consumer a chance to be an Innovator again, still using your product.
One day your services may be bundled, but when "the average consumer" loves this service and begins to eat it up, the company providing it should already be looking at new ways to position its product, to let their original customers become innovators again, and attract new innovators who did not join the first time.
If @HOME were to offer the exact same services for the next 5 years, the innovators and early adopters would move on quickly. Marketing is trying to strike the balance between keeping your Innovators and Early Adopters and attracting as many of the majority as possible.
regards
Jay |
