A tragic catch-22. You design and build the app-enabled internet rocker crib, but cannot justify supporting the app or the internet support without a subscription fee.
Reminds me of the "Someone Who Is Good At The Economy Please Help Me" memes.
Reminds me of the "Someone Who Is Good At The Economy Please Help Me" memes.
> The company's founder, Harvey Karp, said the pricing change was necessary to "bring in revenue," noting that the company was not underwritten by a university or the government, and must survive on its sales alone. He said his ultimate goal would be to see the Snoo paid for by the government or by insurance companies, but it's unclear if there has been any substantive movement toward achieving that end.
They want the government/insurance to buy them in bulk and then rent seek for everyone using them. There's zero reason why for the price this couldn't be done completely local and not cost Snoo a cent to run. They just don't want to because the long term strategy is to collect revenue forever.
Hell, the fact alone that they have a $1700 bassinet probably makes them a valuable target
Company made choices, they were bad choices. Bad business deserves zero sympathy.
Doesn't mean I am willing to subsidize them, but I get it.
This is not a bad decision, but an intentionally insidious design pattern intended to separate owners from the functionality they paid for and own. The people that greenlit this design deserve to be held criminally liable. The business in this instance deserves no empathy.
IMO people need to grow a pair and stop buying crappy products. business policy would turn around over night if they did.
Nobody is holding a gun to consumers head and making them buy a $1700 bassinet with an additional subscription.
My preference is to keep the government out of consensual agreements between adults unless it is a matter of life or death.
In my mind, making sure that yuppies get a slightly cheaper $1700 bassinet is completely outside the scope of the roles and responsibility of government.