Webervations sold

[YellowSocks]

I would like to point out that the people involved with the Munsenware Guest Tracker decision are no longer with the company. Since I've been running the company we built an entirely new system based on the User Interface of Guest Tracker, with a lot of modern enhancements - the list of which is way too long to include here. That is RezOvation GT. We've also lowered the price on it to below what Munsenware Guest Tracker was a decade ago.
So I understand the frustration some may have with things that went on five or more years ago, but I feel like we have come a long way from that point, and it is ancient history. Munsenware Guest Tracker users thus far have been thrilled with the product.
In any case though, since somewhat brought this up already in an earlier post, what do people think is a "fair" price for Webervations 1.0 is? I'm not talking about new Webervations, but Webervations 1.0? I would certainly like to hear what folks think that should be.
And it seems that no matter what the price is - the impression I am getting is that people are leaving the product they have used for years, just because it is part of the "giant" company now. Is that really going to be the case if we have a "fair" price on the product - AND improve it?.

And it seems that no matter what the price is - the impression I am getting is that people are leaving the product they have used for years, just because it is part of the "giant" company now. Is that really going to be the case if we have a "fair" price on the product - AND improve it?

Like Copperhead said, I have no intention of switching from Webervations at this point, especially as you've said I won't have to join B&B.com to use it. I have four rooms and, as CH said, cannot significantly grow my income.
I'm ultra-frugal and almost everything comes down to price. Webervations does what I need for less than $100 a year. I've only called Tech Support once and now that it's in place see no reason to fool with something that works.
As far as pricing, I strongly prefer a set fee over a commission, and as low of one as possible. $100 sounds OK (not great, but I know prices go up and things need changed). $500 is definitely way too much.
To put it another way, I have what I need for less than $100. Why should I have to pay way more for extra features that I don't need? And if the other guy could do it for under $100, why should it cost you (with all your resources) significantly more to operate? The key word here is "significantly." A little more, well, prices go up and a little at a time is much better than a 50% increase.
=)
Kk.
.

... And if the other guy could do it for under $100, why should it cost you (with all your resources) significantly more to operate?

I think this is the hard part to see. He really couldn't do it for under $100, it crushed him. He ended up messing with it largely by himself because he couldn't afford to hire help. He wasn't using development techniques that are standard practice for web application developers. The stalled rollout to version 2 was a mess that shouldn't have happened if he could have hired programmers and database developers to do it right. If nobody stepped up to buy it, the whole thing very probably would have folded.
.

... And if the other guy could do it for under $100, why should it cost you (with all your resources) significantly more to operate?

I think this is the hard part to see. He really couldn't do it for under $100, it crushed him. He ended up messing with it largely by himself because he couldn't afford to hire help. He wasn't using development techniques that are standard practice for web application developers. The stalled rollout to version 2 was a mess that shouldn't have happened if he could have hired programmers and database developers to do it right. If nobody stepped up to buy it, the whole thing very probably would have folded.

Wow.