Discussion of article "Payments and payment methods" - page 2
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I think it's done well. 20% is not much. And greed of a seller (in any sphere) is quickly cured by low sales turnovers.
It is possible to bypass the market of course. But in this case, the seller will give the buyer a file that is not protected. Now let him time it,
after which it will appear on pay ryu, etc.
I think it's done well. 20% is not much.
I won't argue, that's not why I responded. The volume of MQ's work is enormous, for this I always have respect and respect from everyone. I just want to convey the idea that such activities as "access to audience, our advertising of developers' services, renting our space, providing payment environment, participation in arbitrage" look like some kind of general paid service in the eyes of an ordinary common man/non_marketer.
A programmer will consider that he personally writes the program (isn't it so?) and sells it, and the commission for using the paid service is some "external expenses" for him. The reasonableness of the size of this commission will determine whether the programmer will use the service or will look for workarounds, because it is the programmer who will decide whether he should include the MQ commission into the price of his product (and whether he will not lose some orders because of it).
I wrote "the channel owner/distributor has a direct stake in the product" for a reason.
Workarounds in selling software are marginal and inefficient. Any successful software company spends a huge amount of money (although it often says the opposite to the public) to promote its products. And every company knows very well that the distribution channel is the generator of income. No channel means no sales.
For the uninitiated, the simple thought "I have my own site, I will earn money on it" is usually enough, but practice shows that the own site does not generate sufficient sales, and the increase in income from the site is a direct function of advertising costs. A large number of "businessmen" try to use free sites (especially Google), begin to consider the free flow of customers from such sites something self-evident, but are terribly indignant when for some reason lose such flows. After such cases, not everyone understands the value of channels and continue to fight for freebies .
If a developer wants to make real money, it is better for him to join our common system, remove infrastructure problems, get access to a large audience, increase his sales and pay a fair commission.
The alternative is low or no sales outside the system.
...
Secondly my opinion is that 20% commission is an outright robbery. :) It would be acceptable if the developers were with you - with intermediaries - in the share. But they are not. With such a commission the service will breathe badly. And it will be constantly bypassed by other ways. The service will turn into a showcase for free adverts, with transactions taking place outside of it.
...Not at all, a very fair commission.
I'll give you an example of my own experience. Being a 3D-modeller(all this can be projected on programmers), unknown to anyone, it was very difficult to find a buyer for my models. And one day I found in the network resource (I will not name that would not be considered for advertising), which provided an opportunity to lay out their products in the manner of a showcase. On such a "showcase" can look, and look, the largest design studios, giants of the film industry, and just freelance designers who urgently need a model for their project, but do not have time to model it. It's a huge audience with many potential customers and buyers that I would never have access to if it weren't for this 3D model buying/selling platform. In addition, buyers can leave their comments and evaluations, which contributes to a successful and profitable business (mine and the owner of the resource). Therefore, I did not hesitate to agree to a 50% commission(20% is taken by the resource owner, and 30% US tax).
to Mischek +1
It usually takes a few months or years for novice salespeople to realise the exceptional value of the promotional channel.
I absolutely agree with this statement. I was convinced by my own experience once upon a time.
If a developer wants to really make money, it is better for him to get involved in our common system, remove infrastructure problems, get access to a large audience, increase his sales and pay a fair commission
In general, it turns out that much will depend on the programmer's realisation of this necessity and comparing it with the size of the commission.
30% US tax.
...
Is there anywhere I can look at your models?
Is it for foreigners or is it for all Americans?
I think it's for everyone, I filled out a US tax form WB8EN.
Is there anywhere I can look at your models?
You can, here is some of my earliest work. :)
For everyone, I used to fill out American tax form WB8EN.
You can, here's some of my earliest work. :)
For everyone, I used to fill out American tax form WB8EN.
You can, here's some of my earliest work. :)
Awesome!