<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Vincent,<br>
<br>
Please see my inline comments.<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/11/12 23:01, Vincent wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJan_WD2+JNxeVjerhVW8MEcmN_Ga2noxem8HxGaL_kh==d1mw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">Hi,<br>
<br>
About monetization, just wanted to highlight the fact that, in my
opinion, there is still a lot to do.<br>
<br>
The <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://www.nextsend.com">NextSend</a>
case is a good example : we have a French hosting service provider
which claim that he would like to do a partnership in order to be
integrated in Thunderbird. The only answer that is given to him
his: first do an add-on, and then we may consider to do
something... In my opinion, Mozilla should have taken more
attention to this demand,try to contact him directly by phone or
something like this. Maybe it is not possible with the current
organization, but it is a pity because some commercials
opportunity may be lost (although it is not too late for
NextSend, it seems to me that a lot of time has been waste).<br>
</blockquote>
This is not fair: NextSend has come at the eleventh hour, too late
to be integrated in Thunderbird 17. Next train will be Thunderbird
24, unless, we, as a community, decide to do an intermediate
release. I think we all will be happy to bring NextSend in and
negociate their service distribution through Thunderbird. I have
personally answered NextSend and explained this in details, as you
very well know. <br>
Also, please consider that when it comes to making the choice
between <br>
1) forcing a revenue generating opportunity to the Thunderbird core
by breaching TB QA policies, to the risk of destabilizing the
product, <br>
vs. <br>
2) providing _users_ with the same benefits through an addon and not
making money immediately,<br>
I hope we can all agree that we recommend doing an addon. At least,
it's my position and has been my decision.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJan_WD2+JNxeVjerhVW8MEcmN_Ga2noxem8HxGaL_kh==d1mw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
Developing local partnership with hosting services dedicated to
enterprise is in my opinion something good for Thunderbird's
future (which could be more famous in the enterprise market) and
users (which like to use localize services in Thunderbird, and
not only US hosting services).<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
Re: Enterprise partners, YSI & Box are first and foremost
Enterprise service providers. I which we had similar choices for
email (But it's not too late: email providers are added online and
can therefore be proposed at any time).<br>
I cannot agree more on the need to have local partners. For
Filelink, we have looked at many local providers, including in
France and Germany: None considered it worthy enough at that time.
Gandi, on the other hand, decided they wanted to take the bet, and
they're in.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJan_WD2+JNxeVjerhVW8MEcmN_Ga2noxem8HxGaL_kh==d1mw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<br>
However, I must admit that I have no idea of the amounts of
these partnerships, maybe it is very little and shouldn't worth
discussing it?<br>
<br>
Kindest regards,<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
tb-planning mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tb-planning@mozilla.org">tb-planning@mozilla.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning">https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>