Wal-Mart doesn’t use this notion. Neither does the MTA.

Your “business model” only applies to a *narrow* range of (mostly computerized) products, not a full “realm”. — And it’s the full realm that concerns me.

Giving away free samples, is not quite the same things as basing your business model or giving stuff away..

By definition, giving something away, is not a business model, if you think it is, take your plan to a venture capatilist or a bank and with your business plan, try to get a loan… good luck with that.

As for selling your soul, and your ID information, ensuring that you will appear on any number of marketting databases.

For a WEBinar, (not a seminar). no thanks.

Plus the head speakers, are not from ‘responsible’ industries, and make their money out of factilitation what is legally theft.

Sure some people might want to put a paid add on Pirate Bay, but I do not consider that a viable business model.

It’s not a business model that has so far resulted in any good technical innovations, but it has ensured a huge amount of copying or what others do that is good.

There is a very good business model that has worked throughout history.

Its providing products and services that your customers, and continuing to provide those services, and improving your relationship between the supplier and the client.

You create something that people want, that people are willing to pay a fair price for.
You establish a relationship with your client, work on continuous improvment in the products and services you provide.

You have to work out one day, that excess supply does not improve the product quality, functionality, or the DEMAND for that product.

Once supply exceeds demand, you can do no more, if no one wants your stuff, even for free what does it matter how cheaply you can create your ‘thing’ ?

The other concept that is missed here, is that people ARE WILLING AND HAPPY to pay for products and services that MEETS THEIR DESIRES AND NEEDS.

Whats more, people ACTUALLY LIKE TO SPEND MONEY, on things they want, and are willing to spend as much as they can afford, or more to get the quality and functionality they want.

Why do you think a product like MS Office is so popular, its just a word processor, there are alternatives for free, many of them.

Yet, people tend to still pay for product they want, and it would not matter if the alternative has massive over supply or infinite supply, even if the product is free, and does the same thing.

People do not want it, they dont want free, and basically dont trust it.

Sure, there are some things you can give away,, but generally its crap, There is nothing wrong with expecting to pay for a product that took money to create, and that was created to provide you the services or functions you require.

SO really, there is no business model for free, somewhere, somehow, someone will pay.

and someone will be paid, its just a redirection of who gets the money, rather than a system of no money commerce.

So if your happy that the execs of Google make billions of dollars on the back of free software packages, that took programmers many hours to copy and to emulate what went before.

Google love free, they can get stuff for free, and make lots of NON-FREE money off your backs..

I do not, for example see it as a better system, to use volenteer labour, or not pay programmers, and use their programs to make executives very rich with no financial reward for the programmer.

That is not free, that is moving the money up the food chain, and away from the producers.

(like file sharing does, it takes the money from the actual people making the movies or music, and shifting that profit to third parties who had no expenses in creating the content in the first place)..

I would rather, pay programmer to create product that people want to buy, reward them for their work, and provide financial incentives to do more and better and more saleable product.

That is much better, than coning the programmer to work for free, live in poverty, so his efforts can be used by the likes of google, or bit torrent, to get page hits and to make lots of money.

In the classic system the executives were responsible for making the system work, now with ‘free’, they can see they if they do not have to pay for production, or product it makes their job of making lots of money SO much easier.

RED HAT for example,

If you creat a product that you give away, so that you can charge for support services. you are not going to create a product that is trivial to support so that it can easily be self supported.

So the incentive for the programmers in that case is to make their product complex, and flaky, so support is required.

If you paid the programmers, and did not rely on support for your income, the programmers have incentive to create easy to use, and support products.

they also have the incentive to create products that people are willing to pay for, therefore it will more closly meet the requirements and desires of the customer.

That is what has happend, and it can be seen in the difference between “free” software and “commercial” software.

Its just the way it is, just try to write a business plan, loan presentation based on a “free” model.

then give a list of examples of that model working effectively, if you can find a list.