We have built Qlutter over the last year, the goal is to create a collaboration/planning tool that does what is needed for the team without being too bloated.
We've placed a lot of focus on supporting the kind of collaboration that will actually make a team better, especially morning meetings. We just launched and would appreciate any feedback!
It looks clean from what I can see. I have tried a few of your competitors and tried to build internally and now back to using MS Office (which is bloated).
I wish the photos were larger or there was a demo/walk-through without having to sign up.
The concern I have with a project like this that the pricing model seems at odds with the level of commitment a customer needs to make to both fully utilize Qlutter and for Qlutter to be highly profitable and sustainable.
I mean that it's a tool designed for someone to run critical business operations while the pricing model is discount from an enterprise perspective. I know it works for 37Signals, but their product line grew out of an inhouse project, so early on, it did not depend on sales or investment to drive improvement or to keep it from dying.
At a hundred euros a seat per month, versus the current ten, the product is priced to suggest a sustainable business alongside a high level of service. At ten euros a seat per month, it does not look that way.
We understand the commitment a user makes when switching planning/collaboration app. We are in this for the long run and already have a user base from the closed beta that provide steady revenue.
No problems to have a sustainable business at 10 euro per user and month with our cloud offering (also accounting for customer acquisition costs in line with industry standard). The on premises hosting (offered to enterprises) requires more support and therefore we have a higher price point for that offering.
Further on it would be natural to create additional revenue streams for us with supplementing solutions and modules. E.g. analytics across multiple teams.
1. The basis for pricing is cost to produce rather than value produced.
2. The anchor price for the enterprise product is the low price of the cloud product.
3. Suppose the tag line for your product was "It returns 50x its cost every month!" At 100 euro per ten seats that's 500 euro per seat per month before switching costs and administrative costs. In many businesses 500 euro per employee per month is line noise and 5000 euro in a department is rounding error. At 100 euro a seat, the numbers are more likely to be meaningful.
4. Adding analytics across teams isn't going to be a 90 euro add on to a 10 euro product. But it's a version 1.1 feature for a 100 euro product.
5. The amount of value that it is possible to create with the revenue from a 100 euro seat can potentially be leveraged into a 200 euro seat. Getting from 10 euro seats to 50 euro seats is likely to be harder.
6. The argument for lower prices is not backed up with a model higher showing higher revenue.
6 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 32.8 ms ] threadWe have built Qlutter over the last year, the goal is to create a collaboration/planning tool that does what is needed for the team without being too bloated.
We've placed a lot of focus on supporting the kind of collaboration that will actually make a team better, especially morning meetings. We just launched and would appreciate any feedback!
I wish the photos were larger or there was a demo/walk-through without having to sign up.
http://imgur.com/gallery/NvWx9
Good point regarding demo-video and sandbox test environment, adding it to the development roadmap.
Edit: Added links to high resolution screen shots above.
I mean that it's a tool designed for someone to run critical business operations while the pricing model is discount from an enterprise perspective. I know it works for 37Signals, but their product line grew out of an inhouse project, so early on, it did not depend on sales or investment to drive improvement or to keep it from dying.
At a hundred euros a seat per month, versus the current ten, the product is priced to suggest a sustainable business alongside a high level of service. At ten euros a seat per month, it does not look that way.
Good luck.
We understand the commitment a user makes when switching planning/collaboration app. We are in this for the long run and already have a user base from the closed beta that provide steady revenue.
No problems to have a sustainable business at 10 euro per user and month with our cloud offering (also accounting for customer acquisition costs in line with industry standard). The on premises hosting (offered to enterprises) requires more support and therefore we have a higher price point for that offering.
Further on it would be natural to create additional revenue streams for us with supplementing solutions and modules. E.g. analytics across multiple teams.
1. The basis for pricing is cost to produce rather than value produced.
2. The anchor price for the enterprise product is the low price of the cloud product.
3. Suppose the tag line for your product was "It returns 50x its cost every month!" At 100 euro per ten seats that's 500 euro per seat per month before switching costs and administrative costs. In many businesses 500 euro per employee per month is line noise and 5000 euro in a department is rounding error. At 100 euro a seat, the numbers are more likely to be meaningful.
4. Adding analytics across teams isn't going to be a 90 euro add on to a 10 euro product. But it's a version 1.1 feature for a 100 euro product.
5. The amount of value that it is possible to create with the revenue from a 100 euro seat can potentially be leveraged into a 200 euro seat. Getting from 10 euro seats to 50 euro seats is likely to be harder.
6. The argument for lower prices is not backed up with a model higher showing higher revenue.