My comment was meant more for the value of the 'deals' as I see it. When you make a 'deal' with a company to get compensated for each subscriber, it's a no loss bargain for that other company...ONEV on the other hand has to sweat it out to make sure their product is in demand. Example...Telnor/Telmex, great deal for them, lousy deal for ONEV, which is apparently making little-to-nothing off of that (compared to the grandiose figures that were touted on this board). Seems like MTNL will be more of the same. My comment was directed that a licensing deal where they get paid x-amount for perhaps y-many subscribers (perhaps renegotiated to a lower rate if they exceed a targeted amount) would mean instant cash for ONEV regardless if MTNL gets even one subscriber, but it would require faith on part of MTNL that ONEV's tech is that good (a subscriber draw)...but it's not a licensing deal. The current pay-per-subscriber is no different than the Say-2-Play advertising on Dell's web site...cost about 1 min in webmaster effort to add that in, and Dell 'gets a cut' from the very 1st sale....ONEV doesn't get anything if they don't sell (bad for ONEV, good for DELL). Same issue would be why doesn't Dell put up a bundle?....every PC sold would have ONEV's product, ONEV would have guaranteed sales (guaranteed to as many PC's of that bundle were chosen for purchase, and not have to rely on how many select that individual app option)...they seemingly never can land that kind of bundling deal either. Maybe they need new salespeople...is it salespeople or the tech? Which is lacking?
That's what I meant...I guess you can flip that to mean the other companies don't have faith in ONEV's tech as a draw if they can only get the kinds of deals we're seeing.
AI
