mobile apps clarification on pricing, white-label integrity
Can approximate pricing info be provided for the mobil apps? How will it work- based on number of installs? Based on developer licence type? Who'll be prompted to pay- the developers (us), or end users? If end users pay directly (or even just download and read app info), how will the integrity of 'white labeling' be maintained? Would be difficult to opperate & justify costs, when end users look-up app, and trace it back to the fComm pricing: "Hey- why are you charging/we paying X, when you're only paying Y !?@"
It’s probably too early to get a concrete answer, but my guess is it would be similar to the BuddyBoss model. Pure speculation
Clients (website owners) pay a subscription fee and a one-time setup cost to launch a fully branded app under their name, with no visible Fluent branding. The app integrates with the client’s FC-powered website. Clients must maintain developer accounts with Apple and Google to publish and manage their apps, and Fluent handles app hosting and maintenance.
If WPManageNinjas won't be the owner of the app then we should think if the app will be popular at all and if the app will be well supported (meet our expecations)?
I don't think many of us will pay extra for the app (not a Ninjas app) to be honest. It's better to include the app in the LTD and later in the annual pricing than asking for a separate fee. If someone has <500 users community I don't think there will be much sense for white labeling the app at all.
If the end user decide to use multiple communities with the app what will be the white labeling for the app?
Who will release frequent updates, when the web app will be updated (immiediately with the web app) and who will support end users (there will be a separate Support channel for the app vs web based app?). Separate team app owner might not be the best idea to be honest.
It's a long subject and it's better to ask us and/or end users before even MVP mobile app will be created so it won't be a "disaster".
Mat Disagree about "[<500 users community...not much sense in white labeling.]" The members number is only one consideration, the type of community is another. And depending on pricing structures, it's not desirable or maybe even viable to have an organization of 'only 200' (possibly fixed number) that's still charged the same as a group of 2000, be able to view different brands/providers that show lower costs. This confusing will lead to aggrivation. Some won't be swayed/interested in whatever arguments about the hosting/support/services provided, and may be inclined to see everything as markup... a factor that shouldn't have to be disclosed. And then that 'only 200' becomes a very large '200 chances' leading to the expectation of justifying costs after the fact.