Software-as-a-Service model for shareware authors

My company is in the SaaS-enablement business.we have technology that
transforms existing applications into ones that can be offered as a service
over the internet on either a metered-use or subscription basis. We have
mostly been working with enterprise ISVs to help them quickly launch SaaS
offerings of their applications.



Recently we have been developing a platform specifically targeted at
shareware developers and micro-ISVs. It includes a "wrapping engine" that
transforms an existing application into one that is web-enabled and can be
offered on a metered ($ per hour) basis, and a hosting infrastructure for
the wrapped applications that we manage and operate. End users create an
account and can then immediately access any application in the library at
the hourly fee specified by the application author and we remit the usage
fees to the authors.



We would like to get some feedback from the shareware community on this
model, and the ASP suggested we post here.



We feel that this model benefits end-users because:



-         it reduces the initial price of using applications

-         they have access to a greater variety of applications without
purchasing each one individually

-         they don't need to download and install any software, which they
may fear contains spyware, will pollute their registry, etc.



For shareware developers the benefits are:



-         it offers an alternative revenue model which we think has a much
higher upside than traditional shareware fees

-         it eliminates the need for shareware authors to manage license
keys and process payments from end-users

-         it eliminates the threat of piracy

-         it enables more users to access their applications at a lower
cost-of-entry point.



We expect to announce the platform this summer in conjunction with one of
the major shareware download sites, but in the meantime we would like to
speak with some shareware developers who would be interested in testing
their applications on our platform and advising us of their requirements and
wish-lists.



If you have any comments, positive or negative, on the business model,
please post them here or send them to me by email. If you would like to work
more closely with us to test our tools on your application and be early to
market, please contact me to discuss.



Many thanks.



Gord Graham

ggraham@wrappedapps.com

<ggraham@wrappedapps.com> wrote in message
news:fu0gq6$kif$1@news-asp.cifnet.net...
>
> Recently we have been developing a platform specifically targeted at
> shareware developers and micro-ISVs. It includes a "wrapping engine" that
> transforms an existing application into one that is web-enabled and can be
> offered on a metered ($ per hour) basis, and a hosting infrastructure for
> the wrapped applications that we manage and operate. End users create an
> account and can then immediately access any application in the library at
> the hourly fee specified by the application author and we remit the usage
> fees to the authors.

I think this could work well for high priced applications.  But for
inexpensive applications that the user will be using every day I don't see
that average consumer wanting to have to pay for ongoing use.  Lots of
people are fine with leasing cars but they would not lease a bicycle.

How do you plan on compensating the ISVs?  Would they get something just for
being listed as an available application in your library or would they be
getting a percentage of the money paid for each hour their application was
accessed by each user?

Does your product work for Microsoft Office Add-Ins?

Does your model work with Microsoft Office Add-Ins?

<ggraham@wrappedapps.com> wrote in message
news:fu0gq6$kif$1@news-asp.cifnet.net...
>
> Recently we have been developing a platform specifically targeted at
> shareware developers and micro-ISVs. It includes a "wrapping engine" that
> transforms an existing application into one that is web-enabled and can be
> offered on a metered ($ per hour) basis, and a hosting infrastructure for
> the wrapped applications that we manage and operate. End users create an
> account and can then immediately access any application in the library at
> the hourly fee specified by the application author and we remit the usage
> fees to the authors.

I think this could work well for high priced applications.  But for
inexpensive applications that the user will be using every day I don't see
that average consumer wanting to have to pay for ongoing use.  Lots of
people are fine with leasing cars but they would not lease a bicycle.

How do you plan on compensating the ISVs?  Would they get something just for
being listed as an available application in your library or would they be
getting a percentage of the money paid for each hour their application was
accessed by each user?

Hi Dan,

These are great comments and questions. We want to get as much input as we
can, because we want the platform to be driven by the needs and desires of
the ISV community.

We can support a number of revenue models, but what we are contemplating
right now is that we will set a base access fee to the user to recover our
hosting costs, and the ISV will specify the usage fee that they wish to
charge users on top of that. That gives the ISV complete control over
end-user pricing. We will collect the fees from the user, and remit the
ISV's usage fee to their bank account on a monthly basis.

Other models are possible for us...for instance, many SaaS applications are
offered on a subscription basis. However, this makes it difficult for us to
anticipate our hosting costs, and reduces flexibility for the end-user as
they will have to subscribe and pay on an application-by-application basis.

The ISV will prepare their application for SaaS delivery using the tools and
processors we will provide on our Author's Center, and publish it to our
SaaS platform to make it available to end-users. We anticipate that the
Author's Center and publishing to our platform will be free for the ISV.

For applications that are frequently used on a daily basis, the end-user may
prefer to install it on their machine and purchase a perpetual license from
the ISV, which can continue to be an option. However, salesforce.com and
others have shown that this is not necessarily the case...many businesses
are moving toward reducing the number of applications they have to install,
support and manage on their employees' desktops, and many consumers are
getting concerned about spyware, viruses, programs that won't uninstall
correctly, etc.

For the infrequent user of an application, this model is ideal, and my
intuition is that the shareware developer will make more money by offering
the application on an hourly basis to infrequent users rather than hoping
that some percentage of them will pay the shareware fee.

I expect that shareware developers will make more money on this model, and
that they will have happier customers. They may even be able to increase the
fee for a perpetual license for power-users. And of course it reduces the
headaches associated with license keys, processing purchase transactions,
customer support for installation problems, etc., and they don't have to pay
an exorbitant margin to 3rd parties to sell the apps and process the
purchases for them.

We are thinking of demonstrating the process and platform at the Software
Industry Conference in July, but we are also looking for ISVs who want to
work with us beforehand so they can get out of the gate quickly. In fact, we
have been busy downloading a bunch of shareware applications from various
sites, wrapping them, and deploying them on our lab platform to test them.

Thanks for your feedback. Look forward to hearing more.

...Gord




<Dan@DanHite.com> wrote in message news:fu2cld$vqe$1@news-asp.cifnet.net...
>
> <ggraham@wrappedapps.com> wrote in message
> news:fu0gq6$kif$1@news-asp.cifnet.net... 
>
> I think this could work well for high priced applications.  But for
> inexpensive applications that the user will be using every day I don't see
> that average consumer wanting to have to pay for ongoing use.  Lots of
> people are fine with leasing cars but they would not lease a bicycle.
>
> How do you plan on compensating the ISVs?  Would they get something just
> for
> being listed as an available application in your library or would they be
> getting a percentage of the money paid for each hour their application was
> accessed by each user?
>
>

Hi Gord,

> We want to get as much input as we  can, because we want
>the platform to be driven by the needs and desires of
> the ISV community.

I say this without bias but probably the best research money you can spend
right now is the $100 membership fee to join the ASP. The members newsgroups
there are very active - as active as this newsgroup is not - and you will
receive many more comments both good and bad (members get pretty blunt - and
more importantly much more candid) in the private newsgroups.

For you it seems like a perfect and immediate fit.

Thanks,
Dexter Bell
ASP - Sergeant at Arms
saa@asp-shareware.org

Will do...thanks Dexter.

...gord
<dexter@theutilityfactory.com> wrote in message
news:fu5dr6$2j03$1@news-asp.cifnet.net...
>
> Hi Gord,
> 
>
> I say this without bias but probably the best research money you can spend
> right now is the $100 membership fee to join the ASP. The members
> newsgroups
> there are very active - as active as this newsgroup is not - and you will
> receive many more comments both good and bad (members get pretty blunt -
> and
> more importantly much more candid) in the private newsgroups.
>
> For you it seems like a perfect and immediate fit.
>
> Thanks,
> Dexter Bell
> ASP - Sergeant at Arms
> saa@asp-shareware.org
>
>

I doubt it would work for Office Add-Ins unless we wrapped them with Office
itself. Sorry.

<ask_the_asp@taskline.com> wrote in message
news:fu2iiv$emd$2@news-asp.cifnet.net...
>
> Does your product work for Microsoft Office Add-Ins?
>
>