Sorry Anthony... I accidentally referenced you at the end of my last message... my appologies. I was meaning to direct that response only towards Chris.
your comments are appreciated
Glenn
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Glenn Letham" <editor@geocomm.com> To: <gislist@geocomm.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 2:46 PM Subject: Re: GISList: GIS Data Depot download limits
> Anthony and Chris, remember, you are dealing with a business here (and a > succesful one at that). I respond to you out of respect for the rest of the > people on the list that you have also decided to vent to, however, I don't > really feel that I owe you any detailed explanation. If you decide to ever > pay for the services we provide I will be glad to answer your concerns. > > Regards > Glenn > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Glenn Letham, Managing Editor > ThinkBurst Media, Inc > ph: 850-897-6778 > fx: 850-897-1001 > > The GeoCommunity > http://www.GeoComm.com > & > The WirelessDeveloperNetwork > http://www.WirelessDevNet.com > > The web's largest GIS News Wire! > email: editor@geocomm.com > Subject=subscribe daily newsfeed > > Send your news enquiries and submissions to > pr@geocomm.com > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Anthony Quartararo" <ajq3@spatialnetworks.com> > To: <gislist@geocomm.com> > Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 1:03 PM > Subject: RE: GISList: GIS Data Depot download limits > > > > Robert & Chris, > > > > This issue was beaten to death when the deal was inked with USGS/Geocomm > > some time ago. GeoComm took a lot of flak from many people, including me, > > right or wrong. But to justify GeoComm changing it's provisioning of the > > data (a la pricing structure) after the fact is a slippery slope. What's > > next, only 4k at a time unless you pay for better speed? > > > > This will continue to be a thorny issue for the USGS, because as > impossible > > as it may seem, GeoComm may not be around forever, especially if revenues > > are dependent on ads as you make clear. What is the Survey going to do to > > provide this data, yet again, to the public if that were to happen ? > Sure, > > it took more ongoing tax money each year to support the data provisioning > > and other great services that the USGS provide(ed)(es), but it was > > consistent and not co-dependent on market fluctuations and the whims of > > marketing budgets. > > > > It might make more sense for GeoComm to either be in the data provisioning > > or news-zine business, but not both in my opinion. The true value of > > something is what people are willing to pay for it. If no one decides to > > pay for "better" access, frustration will reach epic proportions and lots > of > > Congressional delegates are going to be hearing from a lot of > constituents, > > meanwhile where will GeoComm get it's revenue or even recover their costs > > for provision then ? > > > > I have a problem paying for data to the extent that it may be subsidizing > > problems endemic to GeoComm's business model, management style, strategy, > > etc. Paying for access to data is fine, that is essentially what the USGS > > did, even if that "price" was some miniscule fraction of a percent in your > > tax dollar, it's still there. The folks that benefit from the data still > > end up being the domestic and even international population, and it's not > > reasonable to send everyone an invoice for $.00000004 for their relevant > > value derived from some firm posting a map of earthquake hazard areas in > the > > Cascades for example. Frankly, if GeoComm's revenues are in need of the > > extra $ that this may bring in, we all may have more to be worried about > > than a 5Mb limit. > > > > Anthony > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Robert Heitzman [mailto:rheitzman@hotmail.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 1:31 PM > > To: CWeaver@icfconsulting.com: gislist@geocomm.com > > Subject: Re: GISList: GIS Data Depot download limits > > > > > > Well, since it is doubtful Glenn is getting any of the money you are > paying > > in taxes... > > > > The service the Data Depot provides obviously costs something to maintain, > > and internet advertising is pretty much a bust for low traffic sites, so > > somebody hass got to pay for the deport to stick around. Why not the folks > > that benefit from the data? > > > > > >
|