agreed on the threat but the threat still exists in the current program right?
someone could pay for a month and work for two...same stuff
but if it was pay as you go it would encourage folks to comply with accurate contract terms and subsequent payments.
when you force them to potentially pay for a service they won't always get to fully use potentially....then you have an unhappy camper, that's the idea behind pay as you go...flexibilty to suit the promoters contract...
after all as much as we try to make the client take up a certain term...ultimately as in all business, that is wishes were horses, as in the end, it is the client ie: the man signing the check...who decides his term of contract.
again, until someone can illustrate the cons outweighing the pro's of such an approach, I just cannot see how it "would be very difficult for ihub to regulate the "pay as you go" kind of deal."
I will say this, this is not just a vain attempt to save a few bucks....a lot of thought and discussion of this has taken place already across a broad scope of industry members,
as well..here's another aspect I raised some time ago on the question answer board.
Look I currently operate on a very wide scope and number of internet portals, and frankly I don't see any other sites charging at all...as has been suggested..at least not yet, if someone has please let me know.
sure i understand ihub's dominance that's fine, but at some point the cost issue needs to be more of a pay for what you use , because once the other sites see this action they surely will begin to adopt the same policy.
Now i am not saying they will all do so at once, and yes I realize some of them do not have the traffic of ihub.
However if even 20% of the other sites begin to adopt this same practice at even 20% of these fees and heaven forbid at the flat rate system in place currently,
holy, now were talking an expense that quickly exceeds our ability to backcharge the client...especially if your servicing multiple operators for each client. right?
Now admittedly that is down the road and hypothetical, however it clearly demonstrates, when combined with the aforementioned issues, why a more well rounded system would benefit all invovled
...and heck yes ..certainly a group operator discount should be considered.
At the end of the day, it is the compliance and realistic economics of the proposed plan that would sell the cooperation and fundamental acceptance of the expense, and subsequently the future happy camper factor.
Force feeding it to the public domain is never successfull, the fed has been trying to force feed promoter compliance forever, and thus far has been largely unsuccessfull.
Look we all know buyin type promoters skirt even the sec rules, and they get away with it without breaking any laws!
So ihubs plan will not effect a change to that sector, and that sector is much larger than us little dogs who actually disclose!!!
Ultimately, that should be the goal, compliance. Anything to improve the chances of that, ultimately will improve the bottom line of the financial and satisfaction levels of the users. Even in the face of total acceptance of buyin promoters, who will not be affected by the irp program, you must consider that the ones who disclose should get as fair a chance at encouragement to comply as possible.
lastly...any business person will tell you that customer satisfaction is key...even the taxman will tell you that
force feeding something NEVER improves compliance, and has always been shown to drive the public underground.
conversely..when you encourage the prospective client to feel good about their purchase...you ultimately stand a much better chance for the most part...of convincing the purchaser to get out his wallet and play along.
That translates into more volume, and better compliance....and that should be the goal.
Afterall this has been the talk of ihub 135,000 subscribers strong, for 60 days
last night the omnious threat of matts launch was put out
and we got 15 people signed up?
do we seriously believe theres only 15 promoters on ihub?
out of 135,000 subscribers ??
wow, either we are in for record arrests and deputy churak is gonna be doing overtime for a week...or it seems not too many are concerned.
Certainly i expect more enrollments, but just for a moment read some of the new inductees disclaimers...that will open your eyes to a small sample of what has been going on.
should be fun though to see the round up!!
make no mistake i fully support the idea...just think there should be a little more compliance encouraging.
appreciate your input tina, gonna go park outside the sherrifs door and watch the hooligans roundup
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
