The Best Pricing Model for non-FEM Structural Software - KootWare 5

[KootK]

The Mission

While I'm still above grade, I intend to create a suite of pay for play, online structural engineering tools (KootWare). And I feel that a big part of making this questionable venture a success -- or at least improving the odds of a contained failure -- will be arriving at a good pricing model. Frankly, this is something that I feel that other developers have done poorly, to their detriment. As such, I'd like to solicit feedback from the hive with respect to the pricing models that I'll propose below and any possibilities for improvement.

The Basics of What You Need to Know About the Offering

1) 100% online offering. No option for a local, perpetual license version.

2) The goal here is not to get rich. The goal is to extract enough income from this that I can justify pouring a lot of effort into a project that I expect to enjoy a great deal.

3) Spit balling, if I could create enough value that I could convince 1000 SE's to part with $5/month, that would be enough. Or any other combination of numbers that gets to the same place. How many software using structural engineers do we think exist in North America anyhow? Sixteen? Eighty thousand? I really don't know.

4) Think something along the lines of TEDDS, ENERCALC, or Jabacus on steroids. I do have ideas for, in my opinion, greatly improving upon these offerings. I'd like that to be a separate conversation however. For now, make a leap of faith and just assume that it will be awesome.

5) I intend to attach some manner of structural only, online forum to the offering. While it would be a free-form space for conversation, as Eng-Tips is, it's ostensible purpose would be to provide a place for me to provide responsive help to anybody designing stuff utilizing the software. Thus making the whole thing even more fun for me. This would be offered in addition to the usual help guide and verification manuals etc <-- edit added per skeletron's comments.

Some Obvservations that I Have Regarding the Pricing Models of Others

6) For software of this type, I feel that a monthly subscription pricing scheme would not be well received. As a small outfit my self, I loathe taking on any additional "monthlys", no matter how great the ROI seems to be. I'm always afraid that I'll use it twice and forget to cancel. I doubt that I'm the only one who feels this way.

7) I also don't think that a straight "pay per use" model is the way to go either. Design is an iterative process and software licensing needs to reflect that. Sadly, I don't just design a shear wall once. I probably design it half a dozen times before all is said and done. And I can't be losing my shirt on pay per use while going through that process.

8) One has to assume that anything that can be abused, will be abused. This will prevent me from being quite as customer friendly as I would otherwise wish to be. My own IP halo gets a little dirty from time to time so no judgement here.

Pricing Model A

This is my favorite of the two and would appeal to me as a customer. Keep in mind than none of the particular values are set in any way. It's really more about the structure at this point. That said, if anybody has thoughts on what the numbers ought to be, I'd welcome that too. I figure I'll adjust as use data starts to pile up but I'll still have to start somewhere.

1) Create an account at KootWare International and add a credit card, paypal etc.

2) Buy yourself some quantity KootWare credits. $10. $100. Whatever. Little gold doubloons in your digital purse.

3) To access the retaining wall tool for use, you pay $5. After the first run, you have the lesser of 20 additional runs or 60 days to keep using the tool on the original $5. One "run" would represent one execution of a full design with detailed output. <-- added per skeletron's comments.

4) If you want to share your account login and credits with somebody else, that's your prerogative. Share it with your coworker, a school chum in Brisbane, your aunt... retaining walls for everybody on that original $5. But, no matter who's using, it taps out after 20 runs or 60 days.

Pricing Model B

1) Create an account at KootWare International and add a credit card, paypal etc.

2) Buy yourself some quantity KootWare credits. $10. $100. Whatever.

3) You can use any tool your like, for free, but you can't get a detailed printout for your calcs until some money has changed hands. The software would tell you the basics of what passed and what failed and would allow you to save your file to the system for future retrieval. I kind of like this in that it would allow one to essentially do their preliminary design work for free. I could allow folks to printout their inputs in case they were worried about my going bankrupt before they get to IFC.

4) When you've got all your design settled and ready for final calc documentation, it's $5 per print. The trouble with this is, I couldn't let the user see the detailed printout ahead of paying for it. Otherwise, I'll wind up with a bunch of folks just doing screen capture etc.

 

[KootK]

For me, the number one thing would be a print out showing inputs, detailed calculation, and outputs, with a sketch (no scale needed), with lots of description and reference to code clauses. Basically just like the Mathcad sheets I use.

#metoo. I've actually spent a good deal of time seeing if there could be a way to just host MathCAD sheets online AS the tools. It doesn't appear feasible from what I can tell. I'm drifting into content as I'd sworn not to but, when I look into my crystal ball:

1) Tools that are simple but clean and powerful and meant to be used by the competent. I don't want the software to be an engineer for you. I want the software to enable the snot out of your being a great engineer. It's an arsenal that you combine, with your own tools, into a whole. It's never trying to BE the whole.

2) I see my sweet spot as being spreadsheets that you almost certainly could make yourself but will almost never have the time to get around to actually making yourself. And I think this makes some intuitive sense. Something requiring that much effort probably only makes sense if it's being used by a larger pool of people.





HELP! I'd like your help with a thread that I was forced to move to the business issues section where it will surely be seen by next to nobody that matters to me:

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=456235

 

[IRstuff]

Many eons ago, Mathworks did have a Mathcad Application Server that was extant for a while, and then they stopped.

These days, I would think are other similar options, where you might simulate the effect of running a Mathcad Application Server, such as spawning virtual machines running Mathcad on your own server. Might take a bit of system coding to get to that state, though.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[KootK]

It is important to point out this will be the biggest hurdle we are all creatures of habit...

Any thoughts on the crystal meth program that I described above? This really is the key to what I want to do I think. Think that's got any merit? This is how I see changing hearts and minds on this aspect of things. A minuscule investment coupled with an immediate, tangible ROI.

One aspect that gives me real hope is the Canadian market as I feel that it's horrendously underserved. Three out of five engineers seem to use this for real production work: Link. I intend to to something of a much grander scale than Jabacus but, in their defense, they don't really seem to be trying to do much with it. Probably just a hobbyist. Canada's only 1/10th the market that the US is but if I could have a big chunk of it, that's like being the king California!

HELP! I'd like your help with a thread that I was forced to move to the business issues section where it will surely be seen by next to nobody that matters to me:

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=456235

 

[KootK]

The "a la carte" type of structure could encourage users to come to the platform that might require more support. Say an architect that just needs a header size. Maybe this is something that you want to encourage maybe it's not. Either way, worth considering.

You're right, that is something that I want to encourage as it fits my service model. I will give it some more thought though.

I think at least in the beginning to gain credibility, there would need to be a somewhat free module. Something common with Enercalc or similar that can be compared easily.

I agree completely. Many ideas:

1) I see probably 10% of the tools suite probably being perpetually free. Just some fun, useful teaser that most folks probably have tools for already.

2) Gotta watch out for that casino feel but I'd considered randomly rotating tools that are free and using that for advertising. I probably won't do this though as it even rubs me the wrong way wrt to the thing feeling un-serious.

3) I expect to be in a near constant state of tool addition. I thought that it might be fun to have many things remain in the freebie zone for the first six months that they are available etc. Again, something that might be a good fit for an advert "check out the new widget at KootWare, free for the next six months".

Truly, I don't see the super serious software space as being my zone. It's always going to feel more like Enercalc than ETABS.



HELP! I'd like your help with a thread that I was forced to move to the business issues section where it will surely be seen by next to nobody that matters to me:

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=456235

 

[Celt83]

I like it in concept feed me something simply say beam reactions and max moment and with a small one time payment give me full beam diagrams deflection and detailed span bracket functions.

It's a bit like the Apple/Android app stores there is the "F it why not" price and then there is the "eh this looks cool but I'm not paying that" price. I'm not sure what the latter number would end up being and perhaps it's variable based on the complexity of the program so maybe that beam program is a $1 to run the advanced stuff or $5 if you want to expand it to some material design.

Maybe you have a free aspect where all results get stored in a common database that everyone can look at various analytics on.

Open Source Structural Applications:

https://github.com/buddyd16/Structural-Engineering

 

[KootK]

For me to formulate an opinion on what/how I would prefer paying for a service such as you are envisioning, I need to have an idea of what the actual structural tools are.

Think something along the lines of TEDDS, ENERCALC, or Jabacus on steroids. I do have ideas for, in my opinion, greatly improving upon these offerings. I'd like that to be a separate conversation however. For now, make a leap of faith and just assume that it will be awesome.

That's the best that I can do for now. Without hyperbole, you may well have the opportunity to tell me what tools I should have and how you'd want them to be. So try to imagine yourself in that future.

If I see a lot of really good tools (say 15) that I would rarely use because of my business mix, but also see 3 or 4 things I would use, then my desired payment method is more along the pay as you go model. On the other hand, if I see 18 tools that I would most likely use a lot due to my business mix, I am more for the "buying in bulk" method.

I can't really imagine anything whereby anybody would use a high percentage of the tools. Think three hundred tools and eight that you use regularly. I plan to come at this with a vengeance: wood, steel, concrete, precast, cold formed, design loads, analysis tools, US, Canada. Part of the fun will be that I'll track the rates of usage on various tools and let that guide me wrt where additional development time is best spent.

I am assuming you are writing software that tackles some of the more difficult items that not all engineers may be well-versed in.

That is accurate. I feel that one of the "voids" out there right now is that many of the software folks seem to have lost touch with what it's really like to design in a production office. Either they've lost touch with it or they never new it in the first place, I'm not sure. As an example, I've seen a firm's spreadsheet that designs ALL of the pad footing in one go. Put in the basic geo parameters and you've got 3' footings up to 12' footing in one run. Hand that off to drafting for schedule development and come back to delete unused rows at IFC print. I want to do stuff like this where we're really anticipating production office work flow rather than one-off element design (certainly there will be this too).

With your proposed system, I would not have to worry about not being able to try it out. Once I see the actual program, where I can use it in my business etc, then I would have a better idea of how much I am willing to come off the hip for.

Yeah, that really is my hope. Demonstrated return on investment in little bit sized chunks. And, if I could find a way to offer it without it being abused, I'd have no problem with something like "okay, you've spent $25 this month, anything else is on the house."

HELP! I'd like your help with a thread that I was forced to move to the business issues section where it will surely be seen by next to nobody that matters to me:

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=456235

 

[KootK]

That said, I'm in a 2-man shop, and I'd be very near the front of the line to give whatever you come out with a shot.

Thanks for this, truly. I'm a tiny shop as well and am really my own intended demographic to a large degree.

If I pay for something, I want to at least 'feel' like its 'mine' to use as I see fit.

I expect that there will always be a market segment that feels this way and that I'll have to forgo their participation. The best that I can do with respect to making it yours would be:

1) You can download the input file.
2) You can save the input file to the system for retrieval.
3) You can print and save the detailed output.

Having the coding be "yours" in any meaningful way will be too much of a departure from my vision on this.

If I got used to your tools, and am using them under typical time crunch pressure, if the # of calcs/runs becomes another added consideration/complication in my workflow, I just don't see myself keeping it as a regular part of said workflow.

I think that I can address this though. The idea would be to have the number of runs and time out period on each purchase be such that you never actually run into this. I pitched $5/20run/60days just to put some numbers on it but it's completely up for negotiation. Is there any version of that that would appeal to you?

After reading Celt83's edit about 'per project' fees...that thought crossed my mind as something I'd be willing to pay for, just to pay a flat fee to be able to iterate as many times as I want. I'm not sure how to stop that from being taken advantage of though, by people running multiple projects through a single 'project fee'...

Without question, I feel that this would be ideal model if it could be executed with out inviting the abuse that you've also anticipated. My proposals have really been developed in an attempt to get as close to this as possible. Instead of "$15 bucks all you can eat for this meal" it's "$5 for as much of this bacon as you want up to 500 pieces or next Tuesday". The former is better but, obviously, much harder to police.

HELP! I'd like your help with a thread that I was forced to move to the business issues section where it will surely be seen by next to nobody that matters to me:

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=456235

 

[WinelandV]

It's a bit like the Apple/Android app stores there is the "F it why not" price and then there is the "eh this looks cool but I'm not paying that" price. I'm not sure what the latter number would end up being and perhaps it's variable based on the complexity of the program so maybe that beam program is a $1 to run the advanced stuff or $5 if you want to expand it to some material design.

"Kootware: now FREE!!!!*"

Small print:
* with in-app-purchases

 

[KootK]

...give me full beam diagrams deflection and detailed span bracket functions.

Again sidetracking into content but one thing that I want to get into deep is add on software for existing FEM programs. You know, read in your ETABS shear wall file and do a bunch of amazing data handling voodoo. And, as I said, batch design of pretty much anything that would make sense. A version of our (yours and mine) work on stud wall design charts is very much on the hit list too.

A utility for the design of any simple span beam with cantilevers is on the list for the freebie section as well. Something like the older versions of RAMSteel but with more material options.

It's a bit like the Apple/Android app stores there is the "F it why not" price

That's my space for sure. That said, done right, I could easily it being the kind thing where:

a) You "accidentally" spend $15 in may instead of $5 BUT;

b) Your not upset about this because you still felt that the $15 was good value.

HELP! I'd like your help with a thread that I was forced to move to the business issues section where it will surely be seen by next to nobody that matters to me:

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=456235

 

[KootK]

"Kootware: now FREE!!!!*"

KootWare: now FREE with the purchase of this T-shirt!!

HELP! I'd like your help with a thread that I was forced to move to the business issues section where it will surely be seen by next to nobody that matters to me:

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=456235

 

[WinelandV]

Actually, let me pick the T-shirt color, and I might get one even if the Kootware package isn't thrown in.

I know my wife won't understand it, but she doesn't understand my red mage/nuklearpower shirt, either.

 

[Celt83]

I mean at least make the white transparent what is this amateur hour.

KootWare: I got a steak from BARetired...nuff said.

I'm really interested to see where this ends up.

Open Source Structural Applications:

https://github.com/buddyd16/Structural-Engineering

 

[KootK]

I'm really interested to see where this ends up.

As well you should be. If I have my way, you'll be on the development team. My dream version of this is:

1) Establish a base platform for tool development and eCommerce.

2) Rope as many trusted tool development contributors into the mix as possible with everybody getting paid for their tools.

3) Use the collaborative setup as a way to grow the tool set fast and reel in constant feedback about what is good and bad from practicing engineers (forum does this too).

That said, if I gotta just do it myself, that's cool too.


HELP! I'd like your help with a thread that I was forced to move to the business issues section where it will surely be seen by next to nobody that matters to me:

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=456235

 

[Huevo]

You're right, that is something that I want to encourage as it fits my service model. I will give it some more thought though.

I suspected this might be the case. It seems you have 2 different types of customer.

1. The engineer or practitioner that puts kootware into their workflow and uses the software frequently. I would very likely be here. Especially if the tools are successful in being friendly to a production office. I would want to at least have the option of a constant monthly fee. Helps with budgeting and not surprising the ownership with varying software costs. It's hard enough to get them to splurge on software. They are much more likely to go for something that is a known constant cost as opposed to something that varies based what types of projects we are doing at that time. I can already see them trying to track the costs and back-charge them to the projects. Yuck.

1a. This person also would need very little technical assistance from you.

2. The individual that uses the software less frequently, mostly to fill a void in their other toolboxs. A la carte works great. You pay for what you need and only what you need. Perfect for this individual.

2b. This person is likely to need the most technical assistance while also using the software the least.

 

[KootK]

I really wanted a throne made of old HP calculators but, you know... time. Pretty sure I could make an armrest just out of what I got in my desk drawer.

HELP! I'd like your help with a thread that I was forced to move to the business issues section where it will surely be seen by next to nobody that matters to me:

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=456235

 

[Celt83]

Need to find a way to work this into the tool set and merch.:
Advanced online calculator

I like and agree with what Huevo is getting at with the types of users. My firm would fall in the type 1 set where a set fee would be easier to budget and sell, even though the surprise costs sound like they could be on a smaller scale there is some uneasy feeling towards that model thanks to Bentley's licensing model (they have gotten better with the connect system). So having the option for a long term single payment investment would be nice.


Open Source Structural Applications:

https://github.com/buddyd16/Structural-Engineering

 

[Huevo]

even though the surprise costs sound like they could be on a smaller scale

Agree.

@KootK It seems fussy but even at a small company like mine. That type of stuff just seems to make itself into an issue. Even when you bring up that the half hour conversation spent discussing the varying costs could have been spent doing design to pay for the whole month of subscription. Just take my $50-$100 USD per month per user (or whatever it would need to be) and get the accounting people off my back.

 

[KootK]

The "a la carte" type of structure could encourage users to come to the platform that might require more support. Say an architect that just needs a header size. Maybe this is something that you want to encourage maybe it's not.

You're right, that is something that I want to encourage as it fits my service model. I will give it some more thought though.

I suspected this might be the case.

Yeah. For my Utopian version, imagine a future not far from now..

[Hapless EIT] Mr Huevo Sir! I've been struggling with this STM pile cap design for hours now and making little progress!

[CEO Huevo] I have a meeting downtown in ten minutes and I just don't have time for this crap Hapless. There are some decent STM tools on KootWare and I've known that guy forever. He lives for wasting time. Just post something on the forum there and see what you can come up with. I'll review it in the morning.

So we do this, it works out amazingly, and the next thing you know, I'm waking up every day truly looking forward to what it will entail.

HELP! I'd like your help with a thread that I was forced to move to the business issues section where it will surely be seen by next to nobody that matters to me:

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=456235

 

[IDS]

FWIW:

The only paid for software I use is either:
- Yearly subscription (MS Office, it used to be monthly subscription, but yearly is cheaper).
- One off purchase
- One off purchase plus annual support fee covering upgrades and technical help.

For a product with a limited market the last one seems most suitable to me.

I wouldn't be interested in pay per use software in any form.

I'm also not sure what the attraction of on-line applications is. Everything I have seen has been slow and clunky, with (for me) precisely zero advantages to make up for it.

Good luck with your project anyway

Doug Jenkins
Interactive Design Services

http://newtonexcelbach.wordpress.com/

 

[KootK]

Thanks for your input.

The only paid for software I use is either:

I suspect that you're a little special in that you've got vastly more of your own tools, and the ability to create more, than a typical customer.

I'm also not sure what the attraction of on-line applications is.

I'm the reverse and can't wait for it all to be online so that I can use it from anywhere and not have to concern my self with installation issues locally. It just has to be acceptably good. To this day, if feel that most of what is available, really isn't. I won't be doing any fancy FEM etc so I'd expect most of what I've got in mind to run acceptably quickly. I think that another advantage for online deliver is the ease with which updates can be made. Most of what I'd be creating will be tied to codes and material standards.

HELP! I'd like your help with a thread that I was forced to move to the business issues section where it will surely be seen by next to nobody that matters to me:

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=456235