Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : FirstWave Technologies (FSTW) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Shege Dambanza who wrote (1204)	7/1/1999 1:19:00 AM
From: Mike M	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9677

My point in my response to Mike M is that he is easily swayed by press releases with little real content, and does not demonstrate any rigor in thought or writing. And it's easy to get his goat. ;-0 You have little concept of what excites me, Sledge. You may call the press release trivial, I don't think it is. Hell, I don't think you are stupid enough to think it is (but I could be wrong about that). On the other hand, I would certainly refer to this long winded discourse as trivial. Certainly there is much to be said for the advantages of hosted applications, and while there are still some performance and control issues I don't think they'll be tough to work out in the longer term. Don't you know that sets Richard's mind at ease.

To: Shege Dambanza who wrote (1204)	7/1/1999 10:14:00 AM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9677

Shege, I wish I had more time for exercise, trivial or otherwise, but alas, my "peurile"[sic] pursuits keep me too busy. If you have comparative pricing information, together, of course, with a qualitative comparison on CRM packages, I for one would like to see it. Much as you might like to think otherwise, some FSTW shareholders appreciate thoughtful critiques of the company and its products. Now, regarding my allegedly puerile insinuations, are you seriously suggesting that customers and prospects wouldn't share your pricing with your competition? Now who is being puerile or, more precisely, naive? Gathering of competitive intelligence (legally, of course) is smart business and customers are frequently the best source. Personally, I couldn't care less how you got the information. If you know something potentially helpful to the thread, you should share it. Otherwise, you serve no useful purpose here (I don't consider your puerile "tweaking" of Mike much of a purpose, and if you do, then you should grow up and get a life.). Looking forward to your comparison. Bob

To: Shege Dambanza who wrote (1204)	7/1/1999 10:24:00 AM
From: Roger A. Babb	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9677

Shege, yes I do normally look at things from the customer end. Any deal has to work from the customer end to be a long term success and TCO is what it is all about. Of course it is possible to ferret out pricing from Firstwave or anyone else, but I am not going to post it! In my opinion, the monthly revenue stream is the best way to handle remote hosted operations. Yes, it allows the customers the ability to switch away from you on short notice if a better deal comes along. But then again nothing good ever comes from holding captive a customer who wants to leave anyway. If you have a good product and continue your R&D so as to stay on the leading edge, then trying to lock customers in with big upfront costs is less of an issue. From a long term financial perspective, I like the continuing revenue stream. You don't get the big quarterly swings based on whether a deal closes by the 30th or not. It takes longer to ramp up revenues without the big upfronts, but in the end you have solid, dependable, predictable revenues.

To: Shege Dambanza who wrote (1204)	7/1/1999 4:51:00 PM
From: Bob Trocchi	Respond to of 9677

Shege... >>This model is risker to the vendor because the costs of switching are lower. << I believe that I have read a number of articles lately the most recent in Business Week (if my retired brain is still working) that talks about the huge potential growth for ASP's. Your comment about it being risker to the vendor because the costs of switching is lower is true to an extent. If the product is good and I know that it is a big if, then the motivation is not there for switching. Benefits to the vendor is a much more predictable revenue stream (I know this depends upon how the financial arrangements are made with the ASP and the vendor but lets assume the vendor gets a monthly revenue stream) AND not having to sell an upgrade package once a year. In addition, the vendor will not have to support multiple releases. The release to the ASP is the release and that is the one that customers will use. Thus, If the product is good and continues to be enhanced, I feel the benefits to the vendor far outweigh the risks due to the lower costs of switching. If the product does not meet competitive standards, then the cost of switching is NOT the problem. Customers will switch sometimes regardless of the costs. Truly enjoy your posts. I often say I am a patient investor and still not having sold any FSTW and clearly underwater, I have earned my "patience" badge! Bob T. P.S. Note to TED. Welcome back to the SI world, miss you and hope all is great with your new position.