I think what annoys people is that a company touts a free service, then as soon as they have a user base, impose a fee. It would seem more honest to advertise this as a paid service at the beginning with "first year free" or something. There seem to be a huge number of internet companies providing free services, but with the crash in internet stocks, I think shareholders are now demanding to see some real revenues, and advertisers may be more selective in paying for internet ads as well. I suspect a lot more internet sites will start charging for previously free services.
Regards,
Jerry Moos
Steven L. Sheffield wrote:
> Why do people have a problem paying for a service that's they're using?
>
> Photopoint is a business. How do you expect them to stay in business if no
> one pays for the services they're offering?
>
> You've used it for free for months now ... and the $19.95 per year they're
> planning to gives you 12 free prints of some of the photos you have stored.
>
> There is a less expensive option of $9.95 per year, which does not include
> the 12 free prints ... that's less than $0.83 per month. Is it going to
> kill anyone to cough up a measly $0.83 per month to continue using a service
> that has been beneficial to all of us?
>
> --
>
> Steven L. Sheffield
> stevens at veloworks dot com
> veloworks at earthlink dot net
> aitch tee tea pea colon [for word] slash [four ward] slash double-you
> double-yew double-ewe dot veloworks dot com [four word] slash