Various pricing models for PFFS Self-pricing: includes small, smart users, prices might be too low (& costs not fulfilled) experience will show if it is successful gouging by customers is likely to be rampant Imposed, market-projection-based pricing: excludes small, smart users, customers might be too few (& costs not fulfilled) larger contributions are less likely gouging by customers is prevented Mixed pricing (some random ideas): everyone who pays more can get your email address & try to persuade you to up your ante. pay less if you (promise to) contribute (which makes it free to developers, enforceable by using CVS diffs to demonstrate something was done) credit back for contributions measured by project manager. E.g., bugs fixed; features added; solicitations made; paying customers signed; marketing wins & press mentions in a listed set of publications produced. vote is proportional to contribution in any group decisions pay less, get less: get old versions only (no!) delayed delivery until a) it turns free b) that price becomes a valid increment (no) get source only, so you have to work more get source only with error-generating parts marked (commented out or printing a notice or popping up a dialog box to direct development attention to the error) Best pricing model so far: Self-pricing with an administrative minimum ($2?) Credit card required with registration Prominently display aids to rational self-pricing. Aids to rational self-pricing might include: 1) a histogram of other buyers' paid prices (this might make everyone want to undercut the crowd!) 2) Public-spirited PR: this is to pay for the work, not to build corporate profits. 3) Projections: a) return ratio (under a declining returns function) b) how many more customers are needed c) " " " " " thought to exist d) how long it took to get this many signed up (showing totals attained on a time scale) e) percentage of fulfillment attained f) projected success or failure if others do the same contribution; or: how long until fulfillmentat your rate. 4) A menu or price-based judgement system which classifies contributions by size, declares the user to be a given type and makes an appropriate response: Amount Type of contributor: Our response: ------ ------------------------ --------------------------------- $100k Major Investor How can we help you? $16k Significant influencer We needed that $6k Pulling deadlines closer Thanks! $2k Good citizen participant You're okay. $200 Useable Consider helping us out $100 Barely useable Definitely help us out $10 That's not helping Help us out a lot technically $1 Bloodsucker unless ... You should be an active developer 5) Attitudes of a) other buyers b) developers, system, etc. 6) Judge and dialog with the proposed contribution. Get a statement of the personal value and impact to you of the project. Get an auction counter-bid equivalent statement to use with lower-contributing buyers (or with people of the same level) Force the user to read statements (maybe just the best so far received in a few categories) of others & do a test indicating they read it or rating their agreement on it.