[nfbcs] Adaptive Technology and Your Pocketbook

[David Andrews]

If there is such a need for monthly financing of technology -- and GW 
Micro offers one -- then why haven't they taken over a larger share 
of the market than they have???

Dave

At 11:07 AM 2/5/2010, you wrote:
>John,
>
>Let's not play the victim card here.  You're too intelligent for that.  As
>far as open minds go, I dare say you have completely balked at my idea
>before it can even be called a fledgling, but let me try to address your
>points again.  I do hope you will respond, because your feedback is what
>could make this effort stronger.
>
>To your first point, the fact that there are free and low cost screen
>reading solutions does not prove that prices for other products are not
>artificially high.  It means other companies responded to the problem of
>people unable to afford the leading products on the market.  These products
>are new.  They do not offer the wide range of accessibility of other
>products, but to me this is slightly irrelevant.  If I'm understanding your
>logic correctly, people do not have to pay for JAWS if they don't want to,
>but I'm interested in the reverse side of this argument.  What happens with
>the people who do want JAWS?  I'm no socialist in favor of absolute equality
>across the board.  People ought to make sacrifices if they want better
>products, but it is my belief, one shared by many others, that the current
>price levels do not even make sacrifices worth it because the amount is not
>even in the ballpark of what they could afford.
>
>Now, I only cite JAWS because GW Micro has at least implemented a payment
>plan for customers to lease a copy of Window Eyes.  If one leading company
>has done it, why hasn't Freedom Scientific?  This, after all, goes back to
>your own argument of competition.  All of this might very well be resolved
>if companies exercised similar payment plan practices.  In this scenario
>companies would not lose any money.  In fact, the argument could be made
>that companies would make a little more money.  No one has decided what the
>solution of our efforts should be.  Quit jumping to the conclusion that our
>sole aim is to force companies to lower prices at the risk of negatively
>impacting development and production.
>
>Secondly, I cannot yet answer the question of leverage because I do not yet
>fully understand the problem.  Part of what my group has already begun doing
>is collecting data of how the current market affects everyone from companies
>to government agencies to the training instructors who deal with customers
>long after the product has been purchased and finally to the consumers who
>ultimately rely on the products to stay employed.  We should try to get a
>sense of how much it costs to develop a single notetaker.  We really should
>talk to companies about universal acceptance of payment plans.  We should
>set up an authoritative source where customer reviews can be collected of
>products the way other websites routinely evaluate mainstream products.  I
>know that we ought to help the NFB with the promotion of the technology bill
>of rights legislation, because ultimately the ideal solution would be for
>mainstream products to follow the lead of Apple, Olympus and other
>manufacturers.  If all else fails, perhaps we should pool our resources to
>help raise money to help those professionals who would otherwise be unable
>to afford technology they need.  I'm already leading development and
>fundraising efforts for a national consumer protection group, who has also
>pledged its support to use its advocacy network to help mobilize support for
>the NFB legislation.
>
>The point is, I am still learning how to best address the issue.  How I came
>to be interested in the issue at all is nothing more inspiring than a long
>list of people on multiple lists complaining of how they cannot afford what
>they need to do well in school and work, but to me, that's inspiring enough.
>I'm no hero.  I can't very well be that when I clearly do not have all the
>answers, but you know, enough people have responded who are interested in
>studying the issue and figuring out a way to make things better.
>
>I hope despite our differences you too will consider lending your talents.
>If I'm wrong, I suppose I'll look like an enormous idiot.  If I do wind up
>looking like an ass, it won't be on account of lack of hard work and a lot
>of creativity.
>
>Best,
>
>Joe Orozco
>
>"A man who wants to lead the orchestra must turn his back on the
>crowd."--Max Lucado
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org
>[mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of John G. Heim
>Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 10:06 AM
>To: NFBnet NFBCS Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Adaptive Technology and Your Pocketbook
>
>Joe,
>
>Its totally inappropriate for you to attack me personally. All
>I did was ask
>questions. If you're not interested in opposing points of view,
>you should
>have said so right up front. It's obvious that you are bound
>and determined
>to continue on the course you've already settled on in spite of
>what anyone
>says.
>
>Well, anyway, back to the facts. I have 2 points to make which
>you still
>have not addressed.
>
>1. What evidence do you have to believe that prices for accessible
>technologies are artificially high. That prices are high is not
>evidence
>that they are *artificially* high. There is a considerable amount of
>evidence that prices are not artificially high much of which
>I've already
>mentioned. There is at least one totally free commercial screen reader
>available for Windows, system access. There is another free commercial
>screen reader available for Mac OS. And there are several free
>open source
>screen readers. At least in the area of screen readers, there
>is absolutely
>a great deal of price competition. It stands to reason that the
>competition
>over flows into other areas. GW Micro even has a price/performance
>comparison chart for note takers on its web site. Now, in spite
>of all this
>evidence, you continue to insist that prices are artificially
>high. But why?
>
>2. What do you think a campaign can accomplish that competition
>cannot? Even
>if your assertion that competition is ineffective, and I don't
>believe it
>is, what do you think a campaign will do? This is not an idle
>question. I
>would like to know how you're going to approach the problem.  It seems
>unlikely that if accessibility technology manufacturers are deliberatly
>inflating prices, they they'll lower them just because you ask. I mean,
>Freedom Scientific is not going to say, "Huh, all this time we
>thought blind
>people liked paying  $6000 for a note taker. Okay, the price is
>now $600."
>If you ask me why should accessible technology companies lower
>their price
>regardless of competition, I'll point out that I asked you
>first. If they're
>not going to lower it for competition sake, why should they
>lower it for
>you?
>
>In other words ,I would like to know what kind of leverage you
>are planning
>to bring to bear in your campaign.  That's a fair question.
>PS: Feel free to ignore my questions. I may kill this entire
>thread anyway.
>I'm not interested in arguing with someone who has already made
>up their
>mind anyway.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Joe Orozco" <jsorozco at gmail.com>
>To: "'NFBnet NFBCS Mailing List'" <nfbcs at nfbnet.org>
>Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 7:18 PM
>Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Adaptive Technology and Your Pocketbook
>
>
> > John,
> >
> > You're quite the little ray of sunshine, aren't you?
> >
> > Competition is not the answer, because as long as there is a
>small group
> > of
> > players, neither one will blink and drop prices to get more
>customers.
> > Why
> > should a company drop prices if they can get away with
>staying in the same
> > general neighborhood as the others?  This is not exactly a phenomenon
> > limited to the blindness market.  It's simple enterprise.
> >
> > Freedom Scientific is not losing customers to Apple, because
>the PC is
> > still
> > dominant.  People have certainly migrated to the Mac, and there are
> > benefits
> > to purchasing a computer that comes talking out of the box.  Yet, the
> > average consumer will be hard pressed to learn a new
>operating system for
> > the sake of a built-in screen reader that is still growing and whose
> > overall
> > platform is still inferior to the compatibility of the PC.  I'm not
> > bashing
> > Apple.  On the contrary, I applaud their work, but don't
>allow your own
> > computer preferences to make you assume your views are shared by the
> > majority of consumers, blind or sighted.
> >
> > And, no, I think that while some people will move over to
>less expensive
> > options like NVDA, people ultimately know that the
>accessibility of these
> > choices does not rival the accessibility of JAWS and Window
>Eyes.  Talk to
> > David Andrews who pointed out that the introduction of these
>products can
> > actually hurt the adaptive industry.
> >
> > I'm not looking for a JAWS alternative.  I don't care for the price
> > associated with purchasing new upgrades, but for now it's
>what I have to
> > pay
> > to get the accessibility I need.  Yet, you assume this is a
>self-motivated
> > campaign designed to air out my own grievances.  Believe it
>or not, I care
> > about people without the means to buy their own technology.
>In today's
> > economy there's no telling when I find myself in the same
>position to be
> > unable to buy what I need to get by.
> >
> > It's not a matter of ethics when you compare the cost of a mainstream
> > product to the astronomical cost of an adaptive one.  I think
>this is the
> > strategy of an informed consumer.  Voting with my dollars
>will hardly put
> > a
> > dent in what is already at least a $30 million sales
>operation in the case
> > of Freedom Scientific, according to public records, and that's only an
> > estimate.  WAFRA Partners only purchases companies that
>generate a minimum
> > revenue of $20 million.  That too is public record.  I could
>be stupid and
> > assume my refusing to pay $260 for a JAWS upgrade will make
>them shake
> > their
> > heads and think, "wow, you know, maybe I should bring down prices."
> > Seriously, don't be delusional.
> >
> > And, don't be a naysayer.  You have no idea how the campaign
>will evolve.
> > If people don't step up to the plate, it won't even happen, because
> > ultimately I am only interested in helping people who want to
>try to help
> > themselves.  You don't even know how the companies will
>respond, because
> > until there is reason to believe otherwise, we can only hope
>that what is
> > achieved is a true compromise that does not deprive companies
>of the funds
> > necessary to step up development and does not bar consumers
>from taking
> > advantage of all the technology.  What you do know is that whatever
> > benefits
> > are achieved from our little group of diverse professionals
>are also going
> > to benefit you.  Don't sit there and throw up objections to
>something good
> > that could happen without your raising a finger.
> >
> > Respectfully,
> >
> > Joe Orozco
> >
> > "A man who wants to lead the orchestra must turn his back on the
> > crowd."--Max Lucado
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org
> > [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of John G. Heim
> > Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 5:55 PM
> > To: NFBnet NFBCS Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Adaptive Technology and Your Pocketbook
> >
> > I can't figure out what you think a campaign can do that
> > competition isn't
> > already doing.
> >
> > Don't you think that Freedom Scientific knows its losing
> > customers to Apple
> > and voiceover? Not to mention nvda, orca, and system access?
> > Don't you think
> > FS, GW Micro, and Humanware are already doing as much as they
> > can to keep
> > their prices low in order to sell more products than their
> > competitors? I
> > really think that if you went to FS and said that you'd really
> > like them to
> > lower the price of the Pac Mate, they'd say that they only wish
> > they could
> > so that they could out sell GWM and Humanware.
> >
> > I mean, if you don't like Freedom Scientific's pricing structure, buy
> > Window-eyes instead. Or buy a Mac and use voiceOver. That's
> > what I did. In
> > fact, I told FS that. I actually called the sales number at FS,
> > asked how
> > much it would cost to upgrade jaws and when they said like a
> > million dollars
> > (whatever) I told them that I was going to buy a Macintosh. And
> > I did.  I'm
> > still using an old version of jaws at work but I will probably
> > never buy
> > another jaws license.
> >
> > Anyway, I just don't see what a campaign can do that voting with your
> > dollars can't do much better.
> >
> > Besides, I think its unethical to accuse a company of gouging
> > its customers
> > without evidence. ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Joe Orozco" <jsorozco at gmail.com>
> > To: "'NFBnet NFBCS Mailing List'" <nfbcs at nfbnet.org>; "'NFB
>Webmaster's
> > List'" <nfb-web at nfbnet.org>; "'Discussion list for
> > NABS,National Alliance of
> > Blind Students.'" <nabs at acb.org>; "'The PAC Mate User List'"
> > <pmlist at pacmategear.com>; <gw-notetaker at gwmicro.com>; "'Braillenote'"
> > <braillenote at list.humanware.com>; "'nfb-texas members'"
> > <members at nfb-texas.org>; <ATCNFB at yahoogroups.com>; "'Arizona
>Students'"
> > <arizona-students at nfbnet.org>; "'California Students'"
> > <cabs-talk at nfbnet.org>; "'Colorado Center'" <ccb-alumni at nfbnet.org>;
> > "'Colorado Students'" <cabs at nfbnet.org>; "'Florida Students'"
> > <fabs at nfbnet.org>; "'Illinois Students'"
> > <iabs-talk at nfbnet.org>; "'Kansas
> > Students'" <kabs at nfbnet.org>; "'Kentucky Students'"
> > <nfbkabs at nfbnet.org>;
> > "'Louisiana Students'" <la-students at nfbnet.org>; "'Michigan'"
> > <mi-abs at nfbnet.org>; "'Minnesota Students'" <mn-abs at nfbnet.org>;
> > "'Missouri'" <mabs at nfbnet.org>; "'National'" <nabs-l at nfbnet.org>;
> > "'Nebraska'" <nebraska-students at nfbnet.org>; "'New Hampshire
>Students'"
> > <new-hampshire-students at nfbnet.org>; "'New Jersey Students'"
> > <njabs-talk at nfbnet.org>; "'North Carolina Students'"
> > <ncabs at nfbnet.org>;
> > "'Ohio'" <oabs at nfbnet.org>; "'Pennsylvania'" <nfbofpa at att.net>;
> > "'Presidents'" <Nabs-presidents at nfbnet.org>; "'TABS Students'"
> > <tabs_students at googlegroups.com>; "'Tennessee Students'"
> > <tabs at nfbnet.org>;
> > "'Utah Students'" <uabs at nfbnet.org>; "'Virginia Students'"
> > <vabs at nfbnet.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 2:21 PM
> > Subject: [nfbcs] Adaptive Technology and Your Pocketbook
> >
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> Over the past couple days I have engaged a discussion on
>several lists
> >> concerning the price of adaptive technology.  There are
> > varying views on
> >> whether or not these prices are fair, and there appears to be
> > interest in
> >> creating a campaign to address the issue.  If you are interested in
> >> lending
> >> your views or your support, please e-mail me at the address
> > below.  This
> >> would be preferable to a prolonged discussion across multiple lists.
> >> Please
> >> e-mail anyone you feel would be interested in participating,
> > and please
> >> especially help us find representatives from the leading adaptive
> >> technology
> >> companies.  We are not interested in creating a landscape of
> > corporations
> >> versus consumers.  At this time there is no evidence
> > suggesting adaptive
> >> technology companies are not willing to discuss our concerns, and
> >> preliminary feedback on the issue mostly agrees that we
> > should find a plan
> >> that takes into account the real cost of production and the
> > impact to a
> >> consumer's personal finances.  We do not know if the answer
> > lies in lower
> >> prices, payment plans or philanthropic programs to help
> > offset the cost of
> >> this technology, but we will not find answers if we do not
> > hear from you.
> >>
> >> If you are interested in participating in a working group,
> > please e-mail
> >> me
> >> at:
> >>
> >> jsorozco at gmail.com
> >>
> >> Thank you in advance,
> >>
> >> Joe Orozco