Path: utzoo!attcan!telly!robohack!woods
From: woods@robohack.UUCP (Greg A. Woods)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: Paying for Shareware (Was: Re: v09i070: newsclip 1.1...)
Summary: UseNet's not a good shareware channel
Message-ID: <1990Feb26.132435.19063@robohack.UUCP>
Date: 26 Feb 90 13:24:35 GMT
References: <1235@utoday.UUCP> <17923@rpp386.cactus.org> <15166@bfmny0.UU.NET> <34268@watmath.waterloo.edu> <15179@bfmny0.UU.NET> <1268@utoday.UUCP> <15191@bfmny0.UU.NET> <1288@utoday.UUCP>
Organization: R. H. Lathwell Associates:  Elegant Communications, Inc.
Lines: 26

In article <1288@utoday.UUCP> greenber@.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg) writes:
> In article <15191@bfmny0.UU.NET> tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff) writes:
> > Shareware binaries work exactly as well on the net** as they do on BBS's
> > and commercial timesharing services -- neither better or worse.  You
> > fling your handiwork to the winds and sit back and hope for a decent
> > percentage of registrations.
> 
> Actually, you're wrong.  UseNet is a lousy source of revenue for me. Seems
> it is for most of the shareware people I speak to - I'll go so far as to 
> say that no one I know has made any money off of their shareware through 
> UseNet as a channel.

Hmm... I wonder if UseNet simply doesn't have the group of readers
who need-want-use-buy traditional (i.e. PC/binary) shareware.  I know
well that lots of PC users are on the net (several on my machine
alone).  But perhaps they turn to other channels for shareware.
UseNet certainly won't be the fastest and easiest channel for many of
these people.

Anyway, I don't want you to put down UseNet as a shareware channel
just because....  Perhaps there's a real reason.
-- 
						Greg A. Woods

woods@{robohack,gate,eci386,tmsoft,ontmoh}.UUCP
+1 416 443-1734 [h]   +1 416 595-5425 [w]   VE3-TCP   Toronto, Ontario; CANADA