Re: [DotGNU]GNU business 101

[Timothy Rue]

On 16-Jul-02 17:01:50 Eric Altendorf <address@hidden> wrote:
 EA> On Monday 15 July 2002 05:31, Timothy Rue wrote:
>> But there are a few things GNU people need to understand. First is
>> that the idea of stocks is not in the picture. There should be
>> plenty enough information right now as to why the concept of stock
>> is to abstract and as such to manipulatable. ...

 EA> This is a minor correction, but I'd like to make the point that
 EA> it is  not so much the concept of stock that you are taking issue
 EA> with, but  the way stock is traded.  Stock is just a way of
 EA> sharing ownership of  something...communal property, if you will
 EA> (weighted communal  property, but whatever).  Privately held
 EA> companies have stock too;  they just don't trade it nearly so
 EA> much, and thus are under very  little pressure to get (or
 EA> manufacture) "good numbers" to keep the  share price high.

The transfer of abstract value media is not a generation of real value or
any assurance of the generation of real value.

There are better and more direct real value ways.

 EA> Second, while I admire your noble intentions and obvious goodwill
 EA> in  your discussion of a business model; the first thing I look
 EA> for in a  claimed "business model" is a revenue stream, and I
 EA> didn't find any  real discussion of that.  If you have some ideas
 EA> on this front, I  think we'd all be very interested.

There are posts on this list by me that have links to issues realted to
what the given message is about including real life example of such
business model. I have also put effort into moving business decussion
over to the bizplan list, which also has archives. I'm rather new here so
you shouldn't have to look back to far in this archive and the bizplan
archives has be restarted.....<shrug>

I think you may find what you are asking, on the bizplan list, or at least
what is a general picture of revenue stream flow directions. Though  the
numbers are off, they are well on the concervative side as even the number
of freesoftware developers is greater than 100,000, and as such, if the
user base is not greater than the developer base in number.....well then
something is really seriously out of wack ....... :)

Believe me, I'm beyond nobel and goodwill.......those are only side effect
issues of doing what there is to do in order to leave proprietary monopoly
in the dust instead of being held at a disadvantage by the weaknesses of
FreeSoftware. Take the weakest facets and make them strong, and as the list
of weaknesses change in doing this, always work on strengthening the
weaknesses on that list and to the degree of their priority.

And we all know what's high on that list, Documentation, easy to use user
interfaces and training. And that's only what is most obvious. Not so
obvious is the need for a genuine user<->developer open feedback loop.

And it all is made to happen by understanding human nature and the power
of recognition and rewards.

---
Timothy Rue
Email @ mailto:address@hidden
Web @ http://www.mindspring.com/~timrue/