|
|
| GeoCommunity Mailing List |
| |
| Mailing List Archives |
| Subject: | RE: GISList: GIS Data Depot download limits.. oops! |
| Date: |
06/10/2002 07:58:41 AM |
| From: |
Weaver, Chris |
|
|
Glenn -
Although I am not a member of your "Premium Download" Service I am a
"valued" customer of yours. We have bought data from you in the past
via CD. I would expect an apology after delivering such a crass
message via a public email list.
So Glenn am I going to get one? Do you treat all your customers this
way? Can you or your president describe to me how this fits in your
business model?
Thanks!
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Glenn Letham [mailto:editor@geocomm.com]=20
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 4:07 PM
To: ajq3@spatialnetworks.com
Cc: gislist@geocomm.com
Subject: Re: GISList: GIS Data Depot download limits.. oops!
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=3Dsubscribe 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: Rober
|
|
Sponsored by:
For information
regarding
advertising rates
Click Here!
|
