Fcc plan cut vrs

diehardbiker said:
Lets look at this plan,

Tier 1 - 5.77 per minute

Tier 2 - 6.03 per minute

Tier 3 - 3.89 per minute

Ok, the decrease from tier 2 to tier 3 is whopping 45% lower

Why this plan will prevent any provider from develop a new product and make imporovement?

Suppose yourelf are an owner of a VRS company, and your VRS company is in tier 2 plan. Would you be willing to spent millions of dollars to do research and develop a new product which would be great for us, and you will have high chance of kicking yourself into Tier 3 plan, meaning you will lose 45% of income, are you willing to do that? I personally will NOT be willing to invest my money expecting losses of 45% in the end so sorry I won't make any improvements. That is why this plan is not effective due to no motivation, and rewarding factor into improvements. This would result no point for ANY VRS provider invest themselves for future improvements.

Secondly, this is easy for Tier 2 to cheat the system that way. How? Easy!

Tier 2 has minutes up to 499,999. And for Tier 3 500,000 minutes and beyond, that is equal to 3.015 million dollars, so say if this provider hit 700,000 minutes which would mean 2.723 million dollars, which one would you think that provider bill to FCC, 499,999 minutes or 700,000 minutes?

499,999 minutes = $3.014993 million
700,000 minutes = $2.723 million

If I were VRS provider, I will bill FCC 499999 minutes not 700000 minutes because it is more money.

Do the math, that proposal is not workable and is not feasible and encourages VRS provider to cheat in between, and kills the motivation to make any improvements!
Click to expand...

If you look closed... Interpreter agency get between $1-2 per minute.

Source? Simple, Interpreter agency are on $40 to $85 per hours depend on certification level.

Therefore... VRS got overpaid.
 
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IUHLYnc1LI]YouTube - VP3D: The videophone of the future?[/ame]

VRS got overpaid?

Wait, wait, ask yourself what happened to Purple MVP? Why they stopped improving it? Simple put, they can't afford research and development as they are VERY VERY VERY expensive

The cost of Terp is not enough, what about rents, Utilities, cost of people support if your VP is not working.

I hope you guys realize the bigger picture of true cost, I am sure you would think it is greedy, but what I witness my friend who tried and fail, he spent over 1/3 million dollars to try to develop a far out product for Deaf people. Unfortunatly it never goes out public, that is because investors thought my friend was greedy, they are dead wrong my friend is already broke and call him greedy? Don't believe me? Go ahead try to develop something and tell me how cheap it is? Yes, you got it right I saw it and it was awesome but too bad that you never saw it. The reason why he failed is because he needed another 1/3 million dollars down payment for manufacturer to start process and no one believe him and refused to invest in that product. Sad!

So back to purple, why they decided to go to software based? That is because it is alot cheaper to write a software which don't require patent, liablity insurance, does not require safety approval, does not require attorney to defend the idea of software itself like hardware does.

Check the Wiki explaining about Research and Development

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_and_development

See, Drug companies can easily spent $200 million to do research on a drug itself!
 
diehardbiker said:
YouTube - VP3D: The videophone of the future?

VRS got overpaid?

Wait, wait, ask yourself what happened to Purple MVP? Why they stopped improving it? Simple put, they can't afford research and development as they are VERY VERY VERY expensive

The cost of Terp is not enough, what about rents, Utilities, cost of people support if your VP is not working.

I hope you guys realize the bigger picture of true cost, I am sure you would think it is greedy, but what I witness my friend who tried and fail, he spent over 1/3 million dollars to try to develop a far out product for Deaf people. Unfortunatly it never goes out public, that is because investors thought my friend was greedy, they are dead wrong my friend is already broke and call him greedy? Don't believe me? Go ahead try to develop something and tell me how cheap it is? Yes, you got it right I saw it and it was awesome but too bad that you never saw it. The reason why he failed is because he needed another 1/3 million dollars down payment for manufacturer to start process and no one believe him and refused to invest in that product. Sad!

So back to purple, why they decided to go to software based? That is because it is alot cheaper to write a software which don't require patent, liablity insurance, does not require safety approval, does not require attorney to defend the idea of software itself like hardware does.
Click to expand...

Had to chuckle at this one. Everyone else who responded has a good grasp how tiered rates work. Clearly, you don't understand how a business operates. And, in fact, anyone who is on Sorenson's payroll will do anything to distort the facts.

Purple MVP is a bad business decision. Simple. It's slow and it has far fewer features compared to netbook. Businesses have to make decisions that will make them succeed or fail.

FCC is making sure VRS providers are reimbursed fairly. They will get a profit and it is up to each provider to allocate funds. I don't advocate executives taking most of the revenues. Since FCC has proposed rate cut, Sorenson executives started to clucking about it because Sorenson sold bonds earlier this year and promised investors they will see significant return.

Hopefully Sorenson will cut back on some areas especially sending its drones to pester customers. In last nine months, I've had 4 visits and each time I turned the trainer away. I know they are being paid for their time and it's not good use of money. Cut that down, they'd see more money and they can put it to good use (R&D and such). What a concept.
 
diehardbiker said:
Go ahead laugh first, the good guys will laugh last.
Click to expand...

Remember nobody understand HOW their money works. I know it is costs them alot of money to spend on features and go on.

all they are thinking GREED GREED.

Lets say this.. Wal-mart made about 20.7 billions PER DAY. Thats alot of money so is Wal-Mart greed or what?
 
Since FCC doesn't reimburse for VP technology, Sorenson should require all who have VP200 to pay $250.
 
lilbugsb3 said:
Remember nobody understand HOW their money works. I know it is costs them alot of money to spend on features and go on.

all they are thinking GREED GREED.

Lets say this.. Wal-mart made about 20.7 billions PER DAY. Thats alot of money so is Wal-Mart greed or what?
Click to expand...

You surely realize that Walmart's profit margin is only 3.5%?
 
diehardbiker said:
Go ahead laugh first, the good guys will laugh last.
Click to expand...

Most absurd response. Who are the good guys? Sorenson? It has abused the privilege of serving the deaf community by pushing a video clip full of lies about the outcome of the rate cut. Unfortunately, most people will probably believe it.
 
Why do Sorenson refuse to sell VP 200s to hearing people? Almost of them know ASL and won't use VRS to communicate with deaf people. They are too bad to buy it. They hate public IP addresses in using DLink i2eye VPs.
 
I sure did, I mentioned a story of friend of mine where I worked with him trying to develop and market a new product. After seeing expenses and true cost, my jaw dropped. 1/3 million dollars forever lost, just because of crab theory and those investors thought my friend were greedy, they were DEAD WRONG and they lost alot money and blamed on my friend for cheating them. Really sad!

anonymous user said:
And you do? I don't think so.
Click to expand...
 
Have you thought or ask yourself this question, why in the history VRS companies except Sorenson have failed to develop new product from stratch that would result success? I am speaking of making their OWN equipment not buying from other companies that tried in the past. Here is another example VPAD, which Viable developed which lead them trying to cheat the system to revamp the losses? BUSTED!

Hey, don't you forget what happened to World Gate that designed Ojo, don't you remember they cut off the service? That is because SnapVRS is so broke they can't pay for the product (OjO) until the point where World Gate realize there is no profit in there decided to sell Ojo to smaller company at loss.

WAKE UP!, if snooze you lose!
 
Most deaf have lack of sense to understand. That's why Sorenson make much easy to give the misled to them and help them to fight. So, they could keep bigger profit.

Yet, I feel like that Sorenson is like AT&T in their early year.
 
diehardbiker said:
Have you thought or ask yourself this question, why in the history VRS companies except Sorenson have failed to develop new product from stratch that would result success? I am speaking of making their OWN equipment not buying from other companies that tried in the past. Here is another example VPAD, which Viable developed which lead them trying to cheat the system to revamp the losses? BUSTED!

Hey, don't you forget what happened to World Gate that designed Ojo, don't you remember they cut off the service? That is because SnapVRS is so broke they can't pay for the product (OjO) until the point where World Gate realize there is no profit in there decided to sell Ojo to smaller company at loss.

WAKE UP!, if snooze you lose!
Click to expand...

YES, many customers never use Vpads, ojos and MVPs. too bad. I think that they need mobile vp. I wish iPad with internal webcam to use VP.
 
diehardbiker said:
I sure did, I mentioned a story of friend of mine where I worked with him trying to develop and market a new product. After seeing expenses and true cost, my jaw dropped. 1/3 million dollars forever lost, just because of crab theory and those investors thought my friend were greedy, they were DEAD WRONG and they lost alot money and blamed on my friend for cheating them. Really sad!
Click to expand...

You could be making this up for all I know. Sure, startups require significant amount of money and they have to convince investors that the "product" will yield returns. A number of reasons for the failure - poor decisions, poor money management, product isn't succeeding the way he had hoped, etc. Didn't you know that probably 90% businesses fail in first year?
 
Back
Top