> Subject: [JA] Juno to give some money back... > From: George H Lunt <glunt@xxxxxxxx> > The Company currently anticipates that the compensatory payments > will be approximately $800,000 and has accrued a liability for that > amount representing its estimate for the probable loss. One should bear in mind that this million dollars, or probably less, is to be distributed among some of the hundreds of thousands of pay subscribers, not us few million free riders. We who paid no money get none back, alas. GL> Operating costs for the 3.16 (4.0m less 842k) million free riders > in December cost them $10.9 million ($3.45), while the remaining > 2.42 (3.3m less 884k) million free riders only spent $3.95 million > ($1.63 each). Thank you, George, for these numbers. I assume mail-only users only cost a few dimes. For that matter, thank you also for the accompanying analysis. GL> but how many will if they have to pay $9.95 a month for their e-mail? > Of all the numbers that might be a surprise, I think this one may be the > biggest unknown. Surely only a minority would pay; the interesting question is how big a minority. GL> It also indicates to me that many of those who use Juno to > access the web, do so more on a lark, using the service primarily > for e-mail... which is by far, cheaper for Juno. That's me, all right. Of course none of the dozens who read this list are typical of the few millions of Juno users, but this bunch are surely at least a few hundred thousand among the millions. GL> And I also think Juno has irritated > the heck out of many and I don't think they'll respond well to the > "pay up or get the heck out" message coming down the road. Yes. Some of us free riders would like to get personal service, such as an actual person reading our questions rather than a dumb robot. This is not practical, but I do hope the company can smarten up the provision of information, for example so free Web riders can understand why they get disconnected. GL> Might as well throw that this is another reason I think Juno may > continue to supply free e-mail. It's the ONLY way I see them saving these > numbers. If they cut the free e-mail, I see many of the free e-mailers > heading down the road. My hope is that the company will think the boast "We're Number Two!" will be worth preserving. On the other hand, I haven't noticed such a boast in this year's advertising. GL> They're far from the worst ISP in the world... and pretty darn cheap... > they, and Netzero, as United Online, will make a great "also ran". > But #2? Don't make me laugh. I just don't think the hoards are going > to materialize at the new paid subscriber window. Right. The question is, despairing of getting us to pay, will they want to turn away the unprofitable hordes from the free mail window, or will they decide we are or might become profitable? I intend to sign up for Yahoo free mail by Web so I can forward it to Juno, and to elsewhere if Juno quits. But then, replies to my outgoing mail will still go to Juno, unless I use Yahoo Web mail to send. Maybe I'll have to study how to get Eudora or Outlook Express to work with Yahoo mail, via whatever Web connection works. > From: Carolyn Stoffel <carolynstoffel@xxxxxxxx> > In some senses, I look upon both email and Web access as shareware. > Try before you buy. If it doesn't work for you, don't buy. I liked the original theory of Juno. Don't buy Juno; just see the ads. Problem is, the ads did not make a profit for the company, at least after they started paying the much higher cost of free Web access, so that theory didn't work. So, on the shareware theory, I could pay Juno, especially if my Web needs increase. As George points out, there are lots worse pay ISPs in the world for the money. But it's time to get some flexibility by signing up for a forwardable address, in case we Juno free riders get dumped and don't want to pay Juno for the next ride. To unsubscribe, send a message to listar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe juno_accmail" in the body or subject. OR visit http://freelists.dhs.org ~*~