Re: Proving Correctness (was Java Portability)

["Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>]

O.K. Let me deal with just this one point.

I need some plug-in for Photoshop that will save me a bunch of money and
plug-ins to photoshop are not my core business (Software in general isn't.
Let's say I'm a graphic arts company) It makes sense for me to outsource the
development of this plug-in because I don't have the expertise in house and
don't want to acquire it either with regular employees or consultants to
whom I've got to provide infrastructure. So your company has expertise in
developing plug-ins for photoshop and you don't really think there is a
market beyond me. You say you'll develop it if I pay cost-plus. I say O.K.,
I'll pay cost-plus, but at the end of the day there is this work product
which I have totally financed. What are we going to do about ownership?

I'm not a software vendor, so I don't want to try to sell it myself.
However, I've paid for it much like I've paid for my plant and equipment and
so on - it is an investment in assets. You propose that *you* retain
ownership, perhaps to sell it elsewhere and perhaps to create a bigger user
base and perhaps I gain some additional benefits from a bigger user base.
However, the whole reason I paid cost-plus was because you didn't think
there was much of a market out there. At this point, it gets down to an
interesting negotiation. I've invested in an asset and I don't want to just
give that away to someone else if it has earning potential. You've got the
infrastructure to actually market it and perhaps generate those earnings. We
both have something the other guy wants. Sooooo......

I propose that we have some sort of joint ownership. I finance the
development because I have the capital. You go out and sell it because you
have the marketing infrastructure. As the money rolls in, we split it in
some manner. Or you give me revenue until it pays for the development and
then keep the rest. Or we agree that if you find another buyer, you'll cut
my price in half. Or any other number of possible scenarios wherein I don't
simply make a gift to you of one of my assets.

You say you don't like the deal and you want me to pay the full cost and you
get to retain ownership? I say "fine!" and go hire myself some geeks to do
it for me and keep it all for myself - forcing my competitors to spend their
own money to develop the tool for themselves if they want to keep up with my
competitive advantage.

If the plug-in doesn't either reduce costs or increase revenue in some way,
then why did I want to buy it in the first place? If it *does* contribute to
the bottom line, then I don't want my competitors to get it free of charge
or at a discount while I had to pay full-boat for the asset. I might agree
to let my competitors buy it because I calculate that the revenue from
selling it will exceed whatever loss I have in competitive advantage. But I
don't *give* it away. See my point?

I guess I just don't see many circumstances where a non-brain-dead
businessman is going to give up an asset to another business venture without
negotiating something in return. I certainly know *I* wouldn't give it up if
I could make some bucks for it. That's why I'm in business - not for my
health. :-)

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/


"Leif Roar Moldskred" <lrm@huldreheim.provida.no> wrote in message
news:1nvc7.5408$e%4.165724@news3.oke.nextra.no...
>
> But you _do_ get something in return - the finished product, which
> would otherwise not exist; and that's what you're really interested
> in, after all. The value of the software-rights might be worth next to
> nothing to the buying company - they might not be in the business of
> selling software.
>
> Also, if the development goes over budget or falls flat on the face in
> some other way, _Company Y bear the costs_. You pay for the finished
> product - you are not hiring consultants to do the work for you; so you
> don't pay for the hours - only the final result.
>
> And you don't have to pay in advance either, although for large
> project there would normally be some sort of incremental
> payment.
>