LGT,
Very long, but many good points.
I would not mind that we were being charged the same, or more, if the burden of the automation was placed upon thier shoulders.
However, they are asking us to do more work(requiring us to use a complicated system that requires orders to be input in a very specific way). We get no price break for having to do their job. Instead of a discount for doing thier job, they inflict a higher fee on those that expect to receive the same service they've been getting.
THEY SHOULD have implimented a system that put the burden on them, or, if they couldn't do that, been willing to give a discount to customers willing to do the job we've been paying them to do.
Less work, same pay; Same work, more pay. And they are surprised there is discontent?
···
From: "Laurence G. Tilley" <laurence@lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk>
Reply-To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [mepbmlist] LGT speaks... on Autotragic and EEOWCH!
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 07:43:56 +0100At 07:48 PM 08-04-02, you wrote:
>Did I read that right?
>Iniquity!!! INIQUITY!
>
>Colin, your secret is out. You're Laurence in disguise?
>While you're at it, you forgot to mention the 'iniquitous' 5% credit card
>surcharge.No, he's not quite that good Kev
Well Gentlemen, I have been reading the debate with great
interest. Highlights for me have been:- The chap who dubbed it "Autotragic". (He was referring I think to the
situation rather than to the programming)- The chap who pointed out the fact that the original announcement in "News
from Brie" (Brie stinks dunnit? Oh well doing my best here. Just kidding
Brie lovers.) was a very bad case of spin. Spin unfortunately is a
virulent British disease at the moment, the government are terminally
infected by it, and it penetrates all levels of society. However, it has
to be said that sales spin has probably been around since Eve first got
Adam to mow the lawns. The spin was followed in true Blair style, by what
came across by more spin - the unfortunate remark about only three people
being unhappy and lots being happy including comments off list. (Remember
when I was getting black balled for daring to have a go at Brie? There
were lots of folk "of list" who loved that too. Who are these shy little
elves who send praise so secretly?) I'm not suggesting that Clint
consciously intended spin in either instance, but it did come across very
badly.There are three aspects which stand out for me. The first two are
relatively minor, and have I feel, rather concealed the main issue.- 1 (relatively minor) The LINUTS, the (dirty) Mac brigade and last but
not least the poor chap who is so virophobic that he will not download a
macro even from his best friend, feel excluded and consigned to the ranks
of an overtaxed underclass. I like these guys! Their popping up on the
list to complain about their (largely self-inflicted) problems is a
perennial event, which I welcome like the spring. I love it when they take
their bitter and twisted snipes at Microsoft and "Uncle Bill". I should be
very sorry to see them go off in a huff. Actually though chaps, I'm
guessing that in a year of so it'll go to 4.50 for all of us. The bad news
will be that it'll be a price rise, but it'll be good news really, because
you chaps will not be charged any extra AND doubly good news, you'll not
feel excluded any more- 2 (relatively minor) Dithery dithery. First we get told there's going to
be a price rise, but not for Autotragic and EEOWCH! users. Then we get
told that the price rise will be 29th April, causing panic among those
having problems with Autotragic, and those like myself not lucky enough to
own a copy of Uncle Bill's Excel, and still waiting wide eyed for the
release of EEOWCH! Then we get told that the price rise will not happen
until the release of EEOWCH!... probably... Each time some annoying Irving
calls in, who can't be bothered to read the whole discussion, and so asks
the question again, Clint answers him patiently, but I'm never quite sure
if the price will be held, or the price will be held probably. Seems to me
that the boyos need to sit down and have a meeting (fair trade coffee only
please) and make some firm decision on it. Seems to me that they should
have done this before the original announcement in Brie. And finally, call
me a cynic if you will (no?), it seems to me that if EEOWCH! and its
anonymous programmer has no firm release schedule, then there is a fair
chance that playtesting and bug fixing could take a fair while, and
possibly a very long while.- 3 (in case any of you are still with me). Here is the point: You are
being charged the same, 3.90 per turn, when Mepbm Games, are introducing a
system which will save them a significant amount of time and therefore
money. Now a number of chaps have spoken to say how irrelevant this is, I
suggest that such individuals are over paid. It is very easy to be
complacent about the cost of things when you do not have to watch the
pennies. Some chaps were overcome with charitable feeling for the Mepbm
wage slaves. Certainly 5-10K does, or rather would, constitute sweat shop
pay. But you're missing the point - nobody forces them to work
there. Indeed, many of them have received a university education. I have
the deepest respect for any graduate who goes to work in a cake shop or on
the milk round, for the benefit of his soul. I once moved to a much lower
paid job for which I was considered grossly over-qualified, and it was one
of the best things I ever did. BUT such people have CHOSEN not to pursue
jobs which require graduate skills, jobs which they know do not receive
graduate remuneration.Some have spoken to say how cheap MEPMB is, so what does it matter if the
LINUTS have to pay 60p more and the rest of us pay the same while less work
is done on our behalf? It matters because with an automated system coming
in, we might have expected a substantial price CUT. Does MEPBM offer good
value for money? Beware, beware the simplistic question my friend. It's
the one asked in the silly polls, and you can prove anything in a poll. If
you look at the entertainment value you can get out of a turn, it can be
immense. But does it come from the clumsily produced turn sheet, the
flawed game system and the fine quality reproduced graphics? It comes from
the interaction with the other players on your team. If value for money is
assessed only in terms of entertainment value, then I should be paying a
tenner a turn for game 80, and getting subsidised to play one other (number
concealed to protect the guilty).Let's assess value for money then in terms of work paid for. I find it
hard to believe that it can take an inputter much more than 10 or 15
minutes to input my orders. After that it's a couple of clicks, and Uncle
Bill's babies take care of the rest. Sure, there's overheads, the license,
and the very occasional error notification or manual edit, but I still find
it very hard to accept that 3.90 is a good price for the pdf which is
actually generated. Perhaps if you only play one game, you don't notice
it. If you play 5 or more games, and do not have an executive income, then
it mounts up very quickly. It's by this criteria that I personally do not
believe that an Mepbm turn is good value for money. Why then do I play? I
suppose I gamble, that the high price will yield a higher entertainment
value. But I'm often left feeling that I've allowed myself to be slightly
ripped off - you think I harp on about the credit card surcharge for UK
players? That's really just a little extra salt in the wounds. When Mepbm
Games were expanding, and taking over the world last year, one intelligent
commentator on this list warned us of the effects of a lack of
competition. He was completely right. Most of us will pay what Mepbm
asks, because we love the game, and there is no alternative supplier.Then, in some contrast to the above two paragraphs, I have to say that I
remain a capitalist (though I too have to confess to Fair Trade Coffee). I
occasionally sell bits and bobs on the Internet auctions. If someone bids
100 quid for my bent bicycle wheel, then I'd accept his money. As a
result, I have to say that I cannot blame Clint for making every penny he
can, from what he's got to sell. Though I do wonder if this is the best
way to do it long term. Perhaps some of the LINUTS et al. will reduce the
number of games they play. I certainly shall unless I can get EEOWCH!
running. But that won't make much difference with the savings they will be
making. Ask yourself: As the price (effectively) goes up, has the game
improved? At 3.90 per turn for a now wholly computer moderated game, will
new players be attracted in?I would have felt much happier if the savings generated by the new
inputting systems could have been passed on, at least partly, to the
players. Discounts for multiple games would have been smart. With the
primary labouring task removed from the running of Mebpm, at a stroke, the
savings on wages must be substantial. I can understand that in a small and
friendly company, reductions in staffing levels might be considered
unethical (and very praiseworthy that would be). But, if that is the case,
all those freed up graduate level skills should go into marketing, so that
more profit can come from expanding, rather than milking, the player base.So in summary. More than three people are unhappy. I thought the decision
to hold the price was a wrong one, and the announcement was badly
handled. But I acknowledge Mebpm games right to charge what they like, and
doubt I shall stop playing just yet.Laurence G. Tilley
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com