cont... new reseller plan concerns/complaints

[DogAndPony]

Originally Posted by TVB

And for Bob W. "for" might be a good solution to represent throwing himself into the middle.

*chuckle*



(I'm promoting my new smiley...)

...Bob

Bob "for" West
- not to be confused with Bob "for" Apples

[dank]

You haven't disagreed with anything, respectfully or otherwise... Let me repeat:

Are you suggesting withholding such services from clients who already have their hosting taken care of elsewhere?

What you're saying is those extras (i.e. value added services) warrant a premium being charged by the reseller, but what I'm saying is that unless those services are withheld from clients only wanting design-related services, which would be roughly the dumbest business plan I've ever heard of, it's more like value being taken away than value being added. Either way, it sucks for someone.

Or, you could go the route of offering discounted rates on design services in conjunction with resold hosting, but that gets right back to the crux of the problem, which is the changes resulted in decreased profit margin. I just don't see any positive explanation...

You had 6 databases with the Prospector Package. You'd have 6 Databases now if you downgraded to the Pioneer.

Those are all accounted for by the downgrades reflected in the spreadsheet I posted. I was referring to the only remaining savings being on my own sites -- the only ones where margin is irrelevant -- if I were to downgrade them to Visionary, which is what I thought you had suggested.

Just as our core hosting services are not the same, our support is not the same either.

I disagree. The support is the same, or at least should be. What differs is the reseller's ability to add extra to the table, but that really just complicates the picture with extraneous info. Unless you're prepared to factor in all the costs and benefits to combining design and hosting services, and how they interrelate, I'm going to stick with my assertion that the relevant service (support) is one and the same, with the only difference being the degree to which it is successfully carried out. My background in economics, business administration, accounting, and budget preparation and reporting says you'll have a very difficult time proving otherwise.

Apologize that it had to be how it was.

That's not the same thing. What I saw was you explaining why it was done the way it is, and why our input could not be received, but never acknowledging that things could've been done different or better. There have been numerous comments on what those improvable items were, to which I would suggest you re-read the many posts...

Dan

[Deb]

What you're saying is those extras (i.e. value added services) warrant a premium being charged by the reseller, but what I'm saying is that unless those services are withheld from clients only wanting design-related services, which would be roughly the dumbest business plan I've ever heard of, it's more like value being taken away than value being added. Either way, it sucks for someone.

Or, you could go the route of offering discounted rates on design services in conjunction with resold hosting, but that gets right back to the crux of the problem, which is the changes resulted in decreased profit margin. I just don't see any positive explanation...

On this point.. I guess we're talking about two different things and just don't have a clue what the other is talking about.

Just to be clear -- in no way am I suggesting that you overcharge, undercharge, or deceptively charge.

Whatever it takes for you to do none of those things is what I personally feel you should do.

Those are all accounted for by the downgrades reflected in the spreadsheet I posted. I was referring to the only remaining savings being on my own sites -- the only ones where margin is irrelevant -- if I were to downgrade them to Visionary, which is what I thought you had suggested.

I'm not suggesting you downgrade anything to the Visionary, and my numbers didn't either. Glad that's clearer now.

I disagree. The support is the same, or at least should be. What differs is the reseller's ability to add extra to the table, but that really just complicates the picture with extraneous info. Unless you're prepared to factor in all the costs and benefits to combining design and hosting services, and how they interrelate, I'm going to stick with my assertion that the relevant service (support) is one and the same, with the only difference being the degree to which it is successfully carried out. My background in economics, business administration, accounting, and budget preparation and reporting says you'll have a very difficult time proving otherwise.

On this point.. I guess we're talking about two different things and just don't have a clue what the other is talking about. One time I see you saying there's no comparison and on the other hand you say comparing results in it being the same.

You say here: " with the only difference being the degree to which it is successfully carried out." and that in and of itself is a very big difference to be considered with support. If it's carried out to a "strong degree" then it's worth more. But that's just my opinion and the opinion for the sake of this thread. If you feel your support is the same, then I'd suggest charging the same for it that we do. If you feel it's less, then charge less. If you feel it's worth more, then charge more. Totally up to you and I have no opinion one way or the other as to what you should do since only you and your clients know what your worth is. My only suggestion is for you to do what's fair for you and your clients as best as you can.

That's not the same thing. What I saw was you explaining why it was done the way it is, and why our input could not be received, but never acknowledging that things could've been done different or better. There have been numerous comments on what those improvable items were, to which I would suggest you re-read the many posts...

1) Tell resellers first -- I agreed that this is something I DESPERATELY wanted to do, should've been done, unfortunately couldn't be done, and if I can in the future absolutely will, noting that it's still not always possible I have apologized several times.

2) Apologize that FutureQuest could not give more to everyone while ensuring it cost less for everyone. I have and do apologize.

3) Not try to make assumptions about how other people can, will, or should run their business. I have an inherent problem of trying to advise as best I can to make good out of what may seem sour. I'm open to people keeping what they like and throwing out the rest. I just like to offer positive options and ideas. I apologize to anyone who was offended by that and you personally Dan. I will not say that'll I'll never do it again because it is a part of me. I just wont ever do it with you again

4) Apologize that your revenues will now be decreased and that this new plan makes your reselling worse all of the way around no matter what. ... If in fact you can't find a way to make it a success I already have and do apologize.

5) Apologize for not viewing your chart. I do apologize if you felt you were ignored. I do not, however, feel you were ignored or that the numbers were ignored since the time I took to go over each of your packages resulted in the same conclusion/facts/numbers as your chart came up with. Nevertheless, by telling you I didn't feel the need to view your excel chart I offended you and for that I am honestly sorry.

6) Say that this plan is just worse. I can't and wont because it's not for a vast majority and from where I sit I do have to look toward the majority while doing the very best I can do for the minority in the process.

7) Admit I'm lying or delusional about the number of people that are benefiting from these changes. Nope. Can't do that either because it wouldn't be true. There really are thousands of clients benefiting a great deal.

Deb
- Will work for tag lines...

[Matt]

Delicately stepping into the fray:

Notification that the $60 special would be going away was on the site for quite some time. 60 days I believe. -Deb

This strikes me as a bit disingenuous. FutureQuest did not inform resellers of the impending change, I did. I wasn't echoing some communication received from FutureQuest, I was concerned about a notification shown on the reseller package page on the FQ web site that I just happened to notice. This is a bit like reading about your company being sued in the paper before hearing from the attorneys. Sure, those resellers watching the forums closely (a small percentage by Deb's evaluation) might have seen the post a few weeks before changes went into effect, but there was not the implied lengthy disclosure (implied by the use of "for quite some time" language).

It is quite obvious that Deb and Dan are banging their heads against brick walls (or maybe each others' heads). What should have started as an open and frank discussion didn't. The consequences are what we see here (and in prior threads). Can I accept the moderate price changes? Yes, I can. Can Deb accept that FutureQuest does need to modify its disclosure policy? Apparently not.

Now, let's look at Dan in a different light (I'm using the numbers he supplied). Until FQ changed its reseller program, Dan was a client paying FutureQuest an average of $220 per month (that's likely more than most clients pay FutureQuest per YEAR). His yearly cost was roughly $2,660. Under the new program, Dan saw his renewal costs increase nearly $300.00. Now, can anyone genuinely say that they would be unconcerned about such an increase?

Dan is adapting to the changes as suggested. His new yearly cost will drop to $2,469 ($220 less), BUT his profit margin is eroded by $107. Total "saved" under the new program = $113. We haven't factored into this equation TIME. I will take time for Dan to reshuffle accounts and explain pricing changes to his clients. Once you factor in time spent, I am confident the $113 "savings" disappears. So, Dan's not seeing a savings and has an administrative headache. In addition, Dan is downgrading packages, meaning FQ is likely making less profit. How is this a win for FutureQuest?

As a reseller, Dan has a very real potential of bringing more business to FutureQuest, i.e. paying FQ more money. After all, he has brought a fair amount of business to FQ already. Reseller program aside, doesn't FQ owe something more than an excuse to its big spending client?

I'm pretty sure that Dan can cope with a necessary price increase. However, Dan has built his business around a service that Deb has stated to be in danger of termination. Wouldn't you be concerned if a service you were at one time investing $220/month in was in danger of ceasing to exist?

Wouldn't you be concerned if you were told that the only reason this service you were paying more than $2,500/yr for wasn't cancelled was because of some clever "behind-the-scenes" reorganizing (that may or may not really fix the problem)? Would you be concerned if, rather than working WITH YOU, you were implicated as a burden to your service provider?

If you are a reseller and fail to identify with these concerns, then one or more of the following may be true:
1.) the cost of the package really doesn't matter to you, or
2.) you do not intend to include FutureQuest as an integral part of your long-term business plan, or
3.) you don't have a long-term business plan, or
4.) you work for FutureQuest, or
5.) you want to work for FutureQuest, or
6.) you have an inherent faith in the infallibility of FQ's decisions

This is business, not an arguing match. There are clear implications from this and related threads that resellers and potential resellers need to pay attention to. In the same way that successful businesses try to foster good relations with their channel partners, so too does FQ need to try to foster good relations with its channel partners and a BIG part of this is open communication. FutureQuest is a dam* good hosting company from an end-user perspective. Whether FQ is a good reseller partner is currently up in the air, because it takes more to be a good channel partner in the hosting business than simply reliability. As I have said previously, I very much want to see FQ as a leading partner in the hosting industry, but we're currently going in the wrong direction (in my surely to be debated opinion). This CAN be turned around, both in the short and long term. My primary concern is Deb's refusal to change FQ's disclosure policy. Even if resellers were forced to sign an NDA, it would still be better than where we currently sit.

Matt
- surveying the mess left behind, leaves the fray

[MarkM]

Dan...
> Doubtful. Package size has never been an issue for me or my clients, but I've already said that numerous times.

Deb
>This can go either way... a quick forum search will show you that FutureQuest as a whole is faced with a large number of clients that required more. From where I sit, demanded more.

I'm with Deb on this one.
I haven't used up our increased capacity by a long shot, but now I can go ahead with my plans and not be stressed about reaching the red (more $$) zone.

The problem I see here is not Deb or Dan.
Whatever way either of you charge for your services is your own biz.

Deciding on what either of you charge has to do with so many different factors, one just has to hope that the person doing the books and setting prices has taken everything into consideration.
For both yer sakes here's to hoping you've got all bases covered!

Now... If FQ needed to issue a price hike to cover rising costs in providing consulting services to resellers, should I as a non-reseller be upset? I guess I should be, but I'd swallow it. Why?
1)Because I understand that FQ needs to provide to resellers interests as best as they can ...jees as far as I know, maybe I've only got this great package deal, because the resellers provided a volume that FQ could get their own discounts..
Does it matter to me? No I'ts none of my biz...
What is my biz, is that I respect FQ's decisions...

From here, Dan, it seems like some of your clients are just riding on your coat- tail. If they're not getting any value added services, and don't need extra space to develop their site, why don't you ship em off to the dime a dozen outfits, and keep FQ for your value added customers?

Blame it on your choice of clients!

Mark

I've lost $$ from some, and done half-way decent with others. If it is an option, one should choose clients carefully. When I used to landscape I would sell myself too cheap - Those who would chisel me down would also complain about the littlest thing. - forget telling them about price increases!

When I finally began to ask more realistic prices for my efforts, I found that there were plenty of clients where price was not an issue. They were also more appreciative about the services I offered.

[Deb]

Ok here it is.

I've already apologized and explained SEVERAL times over again to those who feel jilted. For this reason, I'm not going to spend any more time typing it out for a 4th, 10th, 20th time or whatever the count is. I'm starting to feel "unsorry" because feeling "sorry" seems to only work against me

If you absolutely cannot work with the system then yes, a different system may be required for you with another host. If you think you can work with it by all means go for it.

If you feel FutureQuest has cheated or lied to you then I would recommend leaving because no one should be with a host they cannot trust.

If you feel that FutureQuest did the best they could for you then rest assured FutureQuest will continue to do so and will constantly strive toward improving even further.

If you expect FutureQuest to create a NEW (not updated or different or changed) POLICY that would state that we must discuss all of our decisions with Resellers first, it wont happen.

If you expect FutureQuest to work toward 'early warning' well, we are, but it still wont turn into a POLICY because in this VERY FAST PACED ever changing industry I can't guarantee it'll happen. Thus the reason no policy or promise has ever been given before, but also why we try to ensure no negative issues will have an immediate impact.

There's some stuff going into the CNC, and some new stuff being worked on for QuestAdmin, and some new stuff going into the servers, and some new stuff for filters, and some new stuff for mailing lists, and as soon as any of the items are completed they are going to be in our clients hands for usage...reseller or not. Just as it has always been before. It's not because we don't care about our resellers. It's because in this industry everyone needs it NOW and I cannot keep it from the majority of our clients while the resellers talk about it or update their pages for it. Where it is going to directly affect an existing client of yours in a negative way we'll make sure you have as much notice as possible. In this case you had a minimum of 30 days with as much as a year - noting that I still agree it would've been nice to be able to offer more early warning.

For FutureQuest and the majority this plan, in its very early stages, appears to be a success, while noting that there are some that felt jilted due to the annual costs and lack of early communication. Time will tell us more concerning the long term success and those that feel jilted will tell us "how jilted" by whether or not they accept the explanations and apology provided and stick around or by leaving.

25 pages of this is more than enough however.

So heres the Bottom line:

FutureQuest has offered you the most it had to offer and did so in such a way that lowered the costs for the majority. I do wish a better warning could have been given to the resellers but due to circumstances already explained several times it couldn't so the most we could do is apologize, especially to those who find it impossible to see a savings or an opportunity for the future.

It's now up to you to take it or leave it.

It's up to FutureQuest to continue working on new features for this new year so that we can continue doing the best we can for the entire community of site owners that depend on us to service them and their web sites. Which is exactly what I intend to do.

Deb
- To slow down or to refuse change and surprises is to die in this business.

[DogAndPony]

Originally posted by Deb - It's now up to you to take it or leave it.

I'm sure you wanted to avoid using language like this if at all possible, Deb, but I'm glad you finally did, even though it may have been painful.

I've always been the kind of person who strives to maintain a "The Customer is Always Right" kind of stance, but over a couple of decades, I have come to the conclusion that it's not always the best policy. There are just times when you and the client aren't a good match for each other -- which FQ intelligently acknowledges as fact throughout their communications, rather than unwisely trying to be all things to all people. There are also times when the client is simply more trouble than they're worth. Sometimes it is because of an incompatibility in needs/abilities, sometimes due to a mismatch in philosophies, sometimes because the client has unrealistic expectations and/or because the client is a malcontent, and a few times when the client is unfortunately a deadbeat.

Now I tend to be more assertive with clients and talk more openly about possible incompatibilities earlier in the relationship (or before it even gets started), so that expectations aren't built up over time, making repairs more difficult.

(I'm definitely not saying that you haven't done that; just mentioning it as part of my process.)

And while I may be more tolerant of incompatibilities during times when revenues are down, I feel I've benefitted -- and my clients have benefitted -- from laying it on the line, or just plain kicking a little butt now and then.

I see this as being akin to a couple of the points that Lencioni makes in his "Temptations" book, albeit regarding clients instead of employees: "desires to ... consistently remain popular ... [and] constantly strive for an atmosphere of total harmony." (Haven't read the book, just the Amazon blurbs.)

While I absolutely *despise* unnecessary conflict, I've come to find that there are times when a little friction is necessary and even beneficial.

But then, I'm not telling you anything you don't already obviously know... I'm just trying to say that I support your stand.

Now... I for one would certainly love to see this topic go away. But, as we live in an "open society" here at FQ, users are free to speak their minds.

And that means that locking every thread on the subject isn't possible, practical or desireable. And since vBulletin apparently doesn't have an "ignore" feature, I and others will probably continue to see threads and posts on the subject that rehash the same information/points over and over. So be it. Hopefully, posters will eventually realize that simple repetition doesn't do anyone any good.

I would hope that by saying what you've said, that "eventually" will be hastened.

On the other hand, I would hope that when there is some change or new information or fresh, constructive suggestion on the subject that needs to be discussed, that users and/or FQ would post it and discuss it freely. And having been in the forums for a while, I'm sure that will happen.

I've said it before, and others have said it, too, but it bears saying again: I feel you've gone above and beyond in the amount of time and typing you've spent dealing with this change. You've done some heavy lifting when it comes to offering specific advice on how to make the plan work -- in general, and for specific users. You've been willing to apologize for various things far more than is usually seen from the head of a company... some of which you're probably right to apologize for, but some for which it seems to me you didn't really have to. (Heck, access to a CEO just doesn't happen like this anyway.)

You've done a great job of detailing the plan changes, and explaining FQ's position... with a kind of patience that makes me think you could be the freakish love child of Mother Teresa and a visiting member of an advanced alien race.


Thanks... And Calcutta barada nikto.

...Bob

Bob West
- A guy named "Nobel" called for you. Something about a "piece of pie"?

[dank]

Hopefully, posters will eventually realize that simple repetition doesn't do anyone any good.

I couldn't disagree more. If not for the issue being forced, there never would have been any awareness and acknowledgement that things could have been handled better, so the situation likely would have repeated itself.

If it's repetitive input that you find wasteful, then your entire post didn't exactly add anything new to the discussion... We already knew you support Deb's position and would rather see the thread(s) come to an end.

If you want something new to comment on, why has no one responded to Matt's last post, 4 messages up the page? That's about as good a summary of the situation as anyone could put together. I can only hope people have read it through in detail and are letting it sink in -- I know it's generally a lot tougher to comment on something you agree with than to break down what you disagree with.

From here, Dan, it seems like some of your clients are just riding on your coat- tail. If they're not getting any value added services, and don't need extra space to develop their site, why don't you ship em off to the dime a dozen outfits, and keep FQ for your value added customers?

Mark, I don't follow your reasoning at all. None of my clients are problematic, so shipping them off would just further erode profits. Riding my coat tails seems like a very strange way of looking at it... That implies a conscious decision to not change to something else, but since I haven't yet passed along any price increases, that doesn't compute.

When I finally began to ask more realistic prices for my efforts, I found that there were plenty of clients where price was not an issue.

Yet another analogy that doesn't quite hit the mark... No pun intended. Your landscaping service and pricing is held up against two things: what you offer and what the competition offers. Intangibles have to be factored in, because the most basic service -- the actual landscaping -- is not identical. Not true with resold hosting, where the service itself is identical.

Let me see if I can explain things a bit more clearly with a new analogy...

Let's say I go to Costco and buy one of their hot dogs for $1.50, then go out front and try selling it for $2.00. How many takers do you think I'll get? How about if I drop the price down to $1.50? Still none... But if I go down to $1.00, perhaps some trusting soul will see the value to be had. That is the situation relevant to resold hosting. The service is the same, and it can be had directly from the source, so the only true comparative value is cost. I could dance a jig outside Costco and flash passers-by, but it wouldn't add any value to the hot dog.

Now, if that same Costco did not sell any pre-cooked, ready to eat food, I could go into the frozen foods section, buy a huge pack of dogs, fire up a grill out front, and sell them to my heart's content ... until security came along and told me where to shove my hot dogs... That is the situation comparable to the analogies we keep getting in these threads. The model of competition has been changed dramatically, so the comparative pricing no longer holds.

Bob W., if being unbiased is of any importance to you, I would hope you'd attack the repetitively bad analogies with the same disdain as the repetitive complaints by resellers...

Dan

[Deb]

Now, if that same Costco did not sell any pre-cooked, ready to eat food, I could go into the frozen foods section, buy a huge pack of dogs, fire up a grill out front, and sell them to my heart's content ... until security came along and told me where to shove my hot dogs... That is the situation comparable to the analogies we keep getting in these threads. The model of competition has been changed dramatically, so the comparative pricing no longer holds.

Just to be clear for all of the FutureQuest resellers reading....

FutureQuest does not have a hot dog stand nor any desire to begin cooking the hot dogs... so in no way would we send out the guards to kick you out for doing so. On the contrary, we find that the ability to "cook and dress the dog" is exactly what makes the majority of you so valuable to the clientele you are able to attract and thus we encourage you to continue cooking hot dogs and developing all of the special sauces you can think of to continue earning an extra income while enhancing your frozen hot dog sales for those clients that just can't figure out how to cook a hot dog by themselves.

Deb
- Maybe Monty will hook us up with the RV for a huge Weenie Roast!

[cindik]

Originally Posted by DogAndPony

And since vBulletin apparently doesn't have an "ignore" feature,

Oh, but it does. View the user's profile. Click "Add username to Your Ignore List"