Re: Supply and Demand

[rmw@netscape.com (Robert Waugh)]

  > Probably the most important, and confusing, point is what
  > Mr Mueller pointed out, that a company w/ deep pockets like
  > MS can, at this point, circumvent any need for generating revenue
  > by limiting supply and resort to 'dumping'. Seems to me this dangerous
  > trend was started by Netscape. It's actually amazing that an
  > 'important economic battle' is being waged between two products
  > which have no price! (other than 'registering' your existence).
  
  Netscape's product is not free unless you are in education or affiliated with
  a non-profit organization.  However, we do allow free trial periods for
  individuals and companies.  Most individuals never purchase our product, which
  we do not actively enforce (unlike our competitor, who is notorious for their
  inane war against "piracy").  On the other hand, almost all companies in the
  desire to keep their company legal, do license our browser, which is where we
  make our money from.
  
  I don't see how Netscape started a trend of "dumping".  We were a venture
  capital based company, and had no intention of charging for our first release
  product because it wasn't of enough quality.  What's more, there were no
  commercial web browsers to be had at that time (despite the Microsoft
  statement that they had a commercial web browser in 1993, which is just
  ridiculous).  Once it became critical that we make income to survive and our
  product had come to the level that it was something people would actually pay
  for, we began charging a modest amount for the browser in select cases.
  
  There is no way that you can liken Netscape's marketing strategy to
  Microsoft's predatory strategy.  Netscape provides the browser for free to the
  majority of individual consumers because our CEO thinks that it should be
  accessible technology.  Microsoft provides their browser for free because
  their CEO thinks that everyone should pay a royalty to use technology.