Floating licenses and affiliate program

[mr_h]

AGHHHH.... not just .... AGH... GAAAAH... Dual-Loss.

*headbutts keyboard*

*whispers from the shadows*
Go ahead....do it, you know you want to. No court in the land would convict you...justifiable homicide...temporarily insane.......

[VenomousFiligree]

Looks like FUM are having another FUMCon end of october / begining of November, floating licenses would be ideal for this!

Phil

[ddavison]

There is a prototype developed that supports floating licenses, but I asked them to hold off on releasing it until the ownership change was finalized. For various reasons, that process took longer than expected. The prototype will probably need to be altered somewhat to support the model I expect to employ.

The floating license will require one full license along with X floating licenses which are linked to your full license. These licenses will allow X anonymous people to download a basic version of the application and connect with your full license. You can have X simultaneous connections active in addition to any other connections from Full and Lite licenses. The floating licenses will be a subscription model -- either renewed every 6 months or renewed every year.

Preliminarily, I am proposing something like the following:
Full License: Same cost
Floating License Subscriptions:
Qty Price 6-month renewal
1 $20.00 $10.00
2 $40.00 $20.00
3 $55.00 $27.50
4 $70.00 $35
5 $80.00 $40
6 $90.00 $45

There is additional server burden to provide the real time floating license to full license match which the 6-month renewal would address.

If a user finds that their regular users have all purchased their own licenses, they can reduce their subscription amount by decreasing the number of floating licenses they subscribe to.

[Tenian]

You say full licenses will be the same cost and then break down the floating options. Does this mean the Lite license will no longer be offered?

In other words if you had a static group of 4 players and 1 dm/gm, the most cost effective purchase would be 5 full licenses? As this option would avoid the recurring $35 fee?

[ddavison]

The lite license will remain an option for static groups. You could theoretically mix all 3 types together.

[Invain63]

<snip> These licenses will allow X anonymous people to download a basic version of the application and connect with your full license.

Are the basic and lite versions functionally equivalent? If not then what features might the basic version lack.

<snip>
Full License: Same cost

Is the Lite version cost remaining the same also?

Floating License Subscriptions: <snip>

If you let your floating licenses laps and then later want to renew them again would you have to start over with the base price or would you just pay the +6 months fee?

From a price comparison perspective, for the first six months this scheme offers an approximately $4 discount off the equivalent in bundle purchased Lite licenses. Thereafter it becomes significantly more expensive. It appears to be a slightly cheaper way to add an unexpected extra player or two.

The discount isn't so much that I personally would choose it over just buying a Lite license for my extra player. My game group is fairly stable and relatively small. Even if some of them didn't follow my instructions to uninstall their Lite license once the campaign is finished, it is HIGHLY unlikely that any of them would be trying to use their Lite license with some other Full License holder at the same time that I am running a game.

Other groups are no doubt different, so this is only a problem if my group is typical of FG2 groups in general.

Still, if it results in more business for Smite Works then more power to it.

-Kevin McDonald

[ddavison]

The lite license will remain the same price-wise for the time being. I have no plans to change that although I may look to provide a permanent lite to full upgrade path.

The Lite license will still be preferred when you don't mind the license being given to a specific user. As it is today, they are basically able to connect to any full license they want but you aren't able to swap them in and out for other players as a GM under the same license. It's a different beast and only appropriate for those people who need that sort of flexibility. Long term, there is a premium paid for that flexibility.

I actually imagine that for most DMs, they may keep a single floating license to allow someone to try their game before buying. In that regard it is superior to the demo license since you can connect with live games running custom rulesets along with other users who own a full or lite license. We may also look to institute some form of referral bonus credit that basically allows a GM to waive the cost of a floating license renewal for each referral that resulted in either a Lite or Full license sale.

Does the pricing seem reasonable so far?

[ddavison]

Are the basic and lite versions functionally equivalent? If not then what features might the basic version lack.

The basic version will be crippled in that it will only allow connections to GM's who have an open floating license. Otherwise I expect it will be the same.

If you let your floating licenses laps and then later want to renew them again would you have to start over with the base price or would you just pay the +6 months fee?

That's a good question. I will have to think about that some more before answering.

[VenomousFiligree]

We may also look to institute some form of referral bonus credit that basically allows a GM to waive the cost of a floating license renewal for each referral that resulted in either a Lite or Full license sale.

I GM a lot of [Savage Worlds] one shots with new players so would welcome the opportunity to both try and increase the player base of FG and benefit through that

Does the pricing seem reasonable so far?

To me, yes.

[Invain63]

The lite license will remain the same price-wise for the time being. I have no plans to change that although I may look to provide a permanent lite to full upgrade path.

Both statements receive the Kevin seal of approval!

The Lite license will still be preferred when you don't mind the license being given to a specific user. As it is today, they are basically able to connect to any full license they want but you aren't able to swap them in and out for other players as a GM under the same license. It's a different beast and only appropriate for those people who need that sort of flexibility. Long term, there is a premium paid for that flexibility.

Understood.

Please forgive my rambling - I am working this out in my head as I type this response. As it is, I have rewritten this email about 16 times. Ugh!

Just to be clear, I am observing that under the current system GMs with a small player base and/or infrequent FG2 hosted games will be tempted to give out the same Lite license to more than one player if both players are not in the same game at the same time. Under those circumstances the odds of a license conflict are vanishingly small. I understand that this is a violation of the FG2 license, but I am sure it happens. How often it happens I can't say. Being a pessimist, I assume that people will typically act according to their narrow self-interest.

That sort of GM is not likely to find the floating license scheme to be very attractive. As MurghBpurn observed, the floating license scheme *will* be attractive to GMs who have a large player base (ie run demos, etc) or play very frequently with a variety of players. Those GMs are much more likely to encounter license conflicts if they break their license and hand out Lites to all players.

If the GM always plays with the same players (ie no drop-in players) and gives each of them their own license then this isn't an issue. (That is my situation - 4 players, 4 Lite licenses, no problem.)

GMs that have popular ongoing games using FG2 are more likely to be able to get players to self-support than GMs like me that are just starting out and have a skeptical group of players to win over. For the popular FG2 GM the floating license would make tempting players to buy their own licenses that much easier, which is a good thing.

Otherwise, the up-front cost of 4 floating licenses isn't all that different from buying 4 Lites and the Lites don't have a recurring cost, so I would probably still buy the Lites if faced with the floating license scenario as described.

I actually imagine that for most DMs, they may keep a single floating license to allow someone to try their game before buying.

Maybe. It depends on how likely the GM is to have more than the just occasional drop-in player. The very occasional one or two drop-ins can be handled almost as cost effectively using Lite licenses - possibly more. I expect that the floating license program is of most benefit to the GMs that can potentially bring in lots of new customers.

<snip>We may also look to institute some form of referral bonus credit that basically allows a GM to waive the cost of a floating license renewal for each referral that resulted in either a Lite or Full license sale.

Now THAT could tip the value scales in favor of the floating license for lots of people. Please do give that serious consideration.

-Kevin McDonald