Intuit Abandoning Quicken
in [Quicken]
|
Prev: Quicken 2008 Annuity
Next: Crossed accounts
From: Robert Neville on 17 Jan 2010 00:10 "mazorj" <mazorj(a)verizon.net> wrote: >Wow. Where have we heard this kind of CEO arrogance before? It's not just arrogance, it's flat out ignorance. You don't ever, ever, ever announce an end of life for a product you don't have a ready replacement for. Announcing an EOL 5 years ahead of time would get you an immediate fail in freshman marketing. All it does is upset your current base (who happen to be funding all that wonderful development you have planned) and encourage them to start looking for alternates. You've just given your competitors a five year head start on coming up with a competitive product. I don't know what Intuit's board is thinking, but someone needs to have a heart to heart with this idiot.
From: Mr.Jan on 17 Jan 2010 10:13 I suppose Quicken will get hacked someday. I have not heard of Mint, Yodlee, or Geegeo getting hacked and that is the model you are worried about. Still, everything happens if you wait long enough. I think Intuit is looking to go online because there is a huge demand for it plus it will enhance the revenue stream. If they get 50% of what we pay in the store, I would be surprised and the distribution model is dreadful. All those disks. I will be sorry to see them go because I tend to give away my old copies but I can see the subscription model doing nicely. Assuming it is as robust as Quicken offline. They will keep the disks as long as people buy them. When people don't, they will move away. That isn't arrogance, that is commerce.
From: Robert Neville on 17 Jan 2010 11:05 "Mr.Jan" <jan.hertzsch(a)gmail.com> wrote: >They will keep the disks as long as people buy them. When people >don't, they will move away. That isn't arrogance, that is commerce. The issue isn't the distribution method of the software. The issue is the architecture. The current Quicken product manager wants to migrate the Quicken base from an architecture where the data and processing is performed on a local computer to a cloud based solution where data and processing is done at some central location. The cloud model has two huge benefits for Intuit - it eliminates distribution costs and it locks consumers into a monthly/annual subscription model. The arrogance comes from believing that consumers want this kind of architecture and business model when the evidence to date is pretty clear they don't. It also ignores the very real security/reliability issues with cloud based processing for sensitive/critical functions. Intuit could eliminate the majority of their distribution costs by going to 100% electronic distribution. They proved that by the "emergency" release of the QD2009 patch late last year. That wasn't a patch - it was a complete full up version of QD 2009. They also distribute electronically on Amazon if you look hard enough. They apparently feel the benefits of sharing revenues with retailings on CD distribution outweigh the costs. My bet is that we'll be seeing Mint CDs in stores at some point that follow the World of Warcraft model. Essentially a token CD that includes a trial online subscription.
From: Andrew on 17 Jan 2010 11:51 Robert Neville wrote: > ... > The arrogance comes from believing that consumers want this kind of > architecture and business model when the evidence to date is pretty clear > they don't. > ... My letter to Mr. Patzer (and copying CEO and COB Mr's. Smith and Campbell as well) is written. I am also going to quote some of the comments in this thread. But I'd LOVE to have a reference to back up this statement Robert. It certainly is true for me, but is it true as you state for the general consumers? (Facts needed, not opinions or anecdotal evidence--this isn't a criticism, I am on your side, but I'd love to be able to prove it.). -- ------------------------------------------------------------- Regards - - Andrew
From: David Arnstein on 17 Jan 2010 14:00
In article <ZdSdnWzK3N8Ars7WnZ2dnUVZ_oqdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Don <burnettedclothes(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >... I have a feeling Intuit's Quicken generated much >more revenue and was more successful than MS Money, which never could really >take off causing it's demise. >I still think someone else will probably come to the forefront , someone >that is hungry, and fill that eventual void. I hope anyway. It is a reasonable argument, and I hope that you are correct sir! I know of at least two such hungry individuals, they develop products named Money Dance and Ace Money. -- David Arnstein (00) arnstein+usenet(a)pobox.com {{ }} ^^ |