Darla, Amazon and Ameritrade are in totally different model types of businesses than GMGC in that they are attracting retail clients to make a point of sale decision each time they are to recognize income from that customer. Additionally, they must establish a relationship based on their name recognition as opposed to their customer using a competitor to provide the same type of service. Barnes and Nobel as well as Schwab ring a bell? Coke versus Pepsi, Nike versus Addidas...Big advertising $$$ because no real difference other than perception which must be created.
Also,Portico is a service that can be marketed through resellers and carriers because they, especially the carriers, will make money. The carriers will make a ton of money on additional usage therefor justifying the expenditure of their advertising dollars to mitigate the cost per customer to GMGC.
The less a product is categorized as a commodity, meaning the more it is differentiated from similar products in the marketplace, the less advertising that is necessary to attract customers.
The more a service can be integrated into another product or service that is at the retail point of sale, the lower its fixed costs and advertising. For years Intel didn't advertise much because they didn't have to convince us to buy their product, they had to convince Compaq et al to bundle it with its product.
All these are reasons, IMHO, that will allow GMGC to attract customers at a favorable cost per customer compared to many other industries. I don't know what that cost will be, but you sure don't know either. I would venture to guess that GMGC's Chief Financial Officer knows, and that the numbers are viable.
Let's not resort to the obnoxious responses to a differing opinion that you so eloquently displayed just now. Save that for the hypesters, not those with an honest difference. |
