How Can Companies Profit While Giving Code Away? 240
An anonymous reader writes "In an almost philosophical essay replete with references to everyone from Larry Lessig and Tim Bray to to Professor Yochai Benkler, Sun Micrososystems evangelist Simon Phipps explores the metaphor of subscription (well, of course it's not just a metaphor any more from Sun's point of view) as the way that companies will make money off of deploying open source solutions. His distinction between OS developer and OS deployer is useful, but the crux is his contention that, with a "system" such as Sun has put together like the JDS, 'You don't buy the software from Sun - instead you subscribe to the editorial outlook.' It's an alluring analogy - Sun as the editor-in-chief of a 'publication' (JDS) with readers who may or may not choose to subscribe. Worth reading."
interesting (Score:2, Interesting)
its kind of hypocritical to proclaim opensource when misss treating the Licneses of the code tha tyou use..
Re:interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
That's a different thing.
When you cancel a support contract, you lose the support, but you keep the code and get to use it.
When you cancel a software subsciption, you can't use the code anymore.
Re:interesting (Score:5, Informative)
No, that's not how it works. You subscribe to Sun's software, and you get new releases on a quarterly basis. If you cancel you still keep the software, but you don't get anymore updates.
You're confusing subscription with "maintenance" contracts.
Re:interesting (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:interesting (Score:3, Interesting)
Wtf?
Well, I believe you meant to say the code is free, so you always get the releases that way if you want, but without the subscription you don't get the binary releases.
Anyway, without the subscription, apart from the binary relases, you also don't get stuff that aren't open-sourced, like the safe-disc circunvention, and some DirectX/3D stuff, I believe (not sure about that one though).
Re:interesting (Score:2)
Except in reality what happens if there's a vulnerability out in the wild. You can't get updates free, or any other way. Like I said, you gotta keep paying, or you can't use the code.
I do agree with you they don't make it easy necessarily.
Re:interesting (Score:4, Insightful)
its kind of hypocritical to proclaim people are hypocritical whenever they try to make a living.
wtf are companies supposed to do? give away everything under GPL and die? give me a break.
and it is also hypocritical to support GPLization of everything while you work for an entity that either lives off the government budget or makes money selling [whatever product or service].
on a broader note, i dislike Sun and I also (to some extent) compete with their products/services, but i respect them because i know some things they do are cool.
many people here (not necessarily author of the parent post) have the lame attitude of being against everything yet bringing nothing or little to the table themselves.
have you ever heard Red Hat CEO complaining like that about Sun? Or Bill Gates? of course not
yeah, maybe they'll say some generic stuff for the press - customers, value, choice, blah blah blah - but they're essentially interested in going back to whatever they do and doing it better - they are too busy to bitch endlessly about something like some folks on this site.
Re:interesting (Score:3, Insightful)
Um, okay Sun... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Um, okay Sun... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Um, okay Sun... (Score:4, Interesting)
Sounds fun and wonderful...
Re:Um, okay Sun... (Score:4, Funny)
So IE/Windows has been useing this method then? No wonder M$ makes so much money.
Re:Um, okay Sun... (Score:2)
I suggest that you zap yourself back to the nineties and try to make a Profit of it...
Re:Um, okay Sun... (Score:2)
Newspapers (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Um, okay Sun... (Score:2)
An over-simplistic analysis. Apart from free or subscription only papers, they make money from a combination of sales and advertising.
Re:Um, okay Sun... (Score:3, Informative)
Analogy (Score:4, Insightful)
Is this kind of like how Casino's give away complemetary rooms and gifts to their biggest gamblers?
Here at the International Change Bank ... (Score:5, Funny)
Volume
they'll make money (Score:5, Funny)
Free software - costing support (Score:4, Insightful)
The software is free but you pay for the CD it's on and tech support.
Re:Free software - costing support (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Free software - costing support (Score:4, Insightful)
While that may be true for personal use, business use is a whole other story. Are you going to take a bunch of highly paid engineers and waste their time by having them go onto newsgroups instead of just getting support and getting the solution fast? Are you going to tell angry customers that your system is down, and if they could please wait till you google for the solution?
Don't think so. While doing that stuff may be fine for you if your linux box goes down, it doesn't work for businesses who need reliable, easy to maintain systems.
THere will be a market for support(regardless of whehter you paid for the software or not) for the forseeable future.
Re:Free software - costing support (Score:4, Insightful)
People often simply don't want people doing things that aren't their job in business. Smart business owners don't want to do things that aren't the focus of their business because it takes their energy away from the things that are their business.
Re:Free software - costing support (Score:2)
Actually... Google and Google Groups are the very first thing I look at when I run into a snag. Usually someone else has run into
Re:Free software - costing support (Score:3, Insightful)
30 minutes? No offense, but for many enterprises that's already a disaster.
Google - I know, I do the same, but it's about responsibility - the grandparent was right.
Say something goes wrong, you spend an hour on Google (no luck) and have no support contract with the vendor - soon after that you'll start getting calls from your boss, and your boss will start getting calls from his boss.
In the end, the big boss will say "screw everything, here's the budget
Re:Free software - costing support (Score:2)
yes.
I can get PHP answers faster using google than calling tech support at Zend.
it helps quite a bit to have competent highly paid engineers that can actually use a search engine.
In fact that is one of the tests that the department head now uses. all new hires have to find a nanswer to a technical question using the internet... Com
Re:Free software - costing support (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Free software - costing support (Score:3, Interesting)
People use BSD-style lincensing to allow people to see and use their code. People use the GPL to allow other people to see and use their code and not let commercial packages make use of them.
"If someone uses
Re:Free software - costing support (Score:2)
Contrast this with what I would consider "improperly-written" end-user software where it does not function as it is supposed to, it does unexpected things and you absolutely do need a huge amount of documentation to figure out what it did when you thought you knew how
Re:Free software - costing support (Score:5, Insightful)
Hah, let me tell you, no matter how good your software or documentation is, users will ALWAYS find ways to fuck it up.
It has nothing to do with the software - while shitty app will get more support requests, the perfect app will still get many more than a few.
Sometimes it's just a matter of user misreading (correct) documentation and then bothering you to "fix" the application
So it's both - always improving the quality to cut down on bullshit calls (the 80:20 rule), and also adding features...
How Can Companies Profit While Giving Code Away? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:How Can Companies Profit While Giving Code Away (Score:3, Informative)
One way, which my company is doing it is by giving away source code of components that plug in to our services system. What you are really buying from us is infrastructure, management, and time.
We are expecting that many people will build their own systems but that is OK, we dont need to be a monopoly, we just have to offer value to c
Re:How Can Companies Profit While Giving Code Away (Score:2)
There was an article a while back on the different business models around OS and there were some good examples that were not advertising.
That sounds interesting. Got a link to the article?
Re:How Can Companies Profit While Giving Code Away (Score:2)
IT Managers Journal [itmanagersjournal.com]
Re:How Can Companies Profit While Giving Code Away (Score:2, Interesting)
The bottom line is, they often won't. Businesses just don't want to muck around getting a free piece of software and then finding someone to configure it. They want black box solutions as a rule, particularly if the price is quite cheap.
Re:How Can Companies Profit While Giving Code Away (Score:2)
Advertisers pay for exposure... the more exposure, the more money they pay. If you can't guarantee them any exposure, they won't pay.
The type of software being downloaded can help tailor advertising for the downloading demographic. People downloading software for servers may be interested in server hardware or accessories like a UPS or rackmount keyboard or display. People downloading website development software like PHP may be interested in credit card transaction processing services. With that kind o
Simple: nobody reads the license (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact is, nobody reads the license. I include the source and the GPL. The GPL only gives the user more freedom. But nobody reads the GPL! Most don't even know they're allowed to distribute it, or even resell it.
Re:Simple: nobody reads the license (Score:4, Insightful)
However, once the market is large enough, competitors will move in to do exactly what you are doing - charging for GPL software. The price competition will drive the price down to just a hair above the cost of efficient CD duplication and distribution (or on-line distribution if that's the route your competitors take).
You can't charge a premium for free software in a large market. Price competition will guarantee that.
Re:Simple: nobody reads the license (Score:4, Insightful)
Most customers aren't interested in the details of software development, they just want a product that meets their need and someone they can complain to, if they're in trouble. More prudent customers want also some kind of safety net, that they aren't left alone if the provider decides to move on to other things (like bankruptcy).
The code itself is of no real use to most customers and handing it to the customer is most ot the time no risk at all.If the customer can do something useful with it, he would have written the thing himself in the first place.
Secret magical algorithms that need to be protected by trade secrets are more of a myth than reality. Most code ist shockingly simple and boring, where the biggest effort goes in to producing the required amount of obvious functions and ironing out the bugs.
The best testament to this are the myriads of programs, doing more or less the same things. Sometime a company comes up with a good set of functions at a reasonable price, which makes developing these functions in-house very unattractive. If combined with good marketing/sales, these products may become nearly a monopole like MS-Office.
People pay for convenience and products are just vehicles to achieve that. And most people people don't care about number of wheels on the vehicle, as long as it transports them well enough.
Raffaello correct, only works w/ no competition (Score:3, Interesting)
Sorry but Raffaello's point, "This model only works if there is no competition in your tiny market niche", is correct. I can take you GPL'd code and offer to maintain and support it for less. And I should always be able to undercut you. I only need to cover my support costs while you need to cover both support and the initial development. Thank you for researching the market, establishing
When I quit my job (Score:2, Funny)
*grin*
Re:Simple: nobody reads the license (Score:2)
Yeah, isn't it great!
Re:Simple: nobody reads the license (Score:2)
Re:Simple: nobody reads the license (Score:2)
what's this source stuff you guys are always ranting about and how do I modify solitare's source to show the cards face up?
[/dumb humor]
-nB
Good Essay, but (Score:3, Interesting)
That's how a "subscription" company makes money, but how is the community sustained through governance? I realize these are rather wide open questions, but encouraging discussion enlightens us all.
Easy answer: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because that's how they get the tools they want.
The company I work for provides specialized web services (intranet sites, etc.) The software we use is GPL'ed. Both my employer and I have contributed code to this software.
It costs nothing to contribute (we would have written the code anyway), and we get back *way* more than we put into it. That's why we do what we do - because we get something back (better software.)
Simple! (Score:4, Funny)
???
After that, profit is inevitable!
But magazines don't stop working... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:But magazines don't stop working... (Score:5, Interesting)
Old newspapers are nearly worthless. It is worth having an archive, but only a few of them, so old newspapers are worth very much less than their cover price.
So... by anology, old software must be worthless. Hmm. 'Old' webservers are useless ('cos they will get r00ted in no time). But old, offline typesetting software? Pfft. 'Old' here really means 'unmaintained'. I think that an analogy with rusty machinery is a better one for unmaintained open source software:
at any point you can take it to a mechanic to get an estimate on repairs;
old models continue to be useful, in certain applications, as long as they are adequately maintained.
Re:But magazines don't stop working... (Score:5, Funny)
Shit, but ask me about 386 notebooks, and I'm all yours.
Re:But magazines don't stop working... (Score:2)
With free software, you're free to remove the time-bomb code, so this argument doesn't apply.
Sun forgets the smaller apps (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Suhttp://slashdot.orgn forgets the smaller apps (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course, when a group of university students in Sweden or Germany or (God Forbid!) China decide that they want to work together and editor-in-chief Sun's freeware applications, for free just 'cuz, and make some great admin tools, then Sun is going to have a cattle drive (instead of just a cow).
> The process doesn't work the way the Sun statement implies.
Exactly. If I were Sun, I would give money to fledg
Service Providers (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Service Providers (Score:2)
We hope anyways as we just got started.
The one thing I struggle with when dealing with other CEO's and business types is their mentality of a business has to have
Sun's not the only one (Score:3, Informative)
Vast wasteland (Score:5, Interesting)
Journalist recommends subscriptions (Score:4, Insightful)
Commercial vs. Consumer Markets (Score:5, Insightful)
But the consumer market is very different. The consumer market has very low retail prices that can't support the high cost of labor - a $49.95 price point product can go from profit to loss on a single tech support call. This consumer market consists of two segments -- geeks who don't need support and the clueless who needs lots of expensive support. Currently, proprietary software makers can earn a profit, in aggregate, because they capture money from both the geek and clueless segments. They may lose money on the clueless, but that make up for it on the geeks who don't need support.
In a FOSS environment, the geeks can go for the free downloads and do-it-themselves when it comes to deployment, customization, and support of FOSS. Geeks have little reason to pay for FOSS-related services. This leaves only the labor-intensive clueless expecting to get a year of support for their $49.95. But because they are clueless, they will use more that $49.95 of support labor (even if that labor is in India).
The trick with these services models is finding people that are both willing to pay for service but that don't actually need to use the service that much. Its a very good model for corporate IT, but I don't see how the numbers can work on the consumer side. Perhaps someone in tech support has numbers for the statistical distribution of the percentages of people that use X-minutes of support.
Re:Commercial vs. Consumer Markets (Score:2, Insightful)
support is the name of the game (Score:5, Interesting)
IBM has realized this, and is building up their services business around this model, and it would be great if companies like Sun join the fray, to keep the competition there.
I also liked the portion of the essay where he talks about being able to pull together all of the components yourself, and support it yourself, or to pay someone else to support it for you. The first part of that is why I used OSS, and the 2nd part is what is currently lacking to make OSS more generally accepted. While there are people that will need support, there are some of us that just want the choice, freedom and flexibility, and OSS seems to be the best way to provide both right now.
This is not an original idea (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft for many years has already sold countless subscriptions to their MSDN.
Of course the OS is, itself, a subscription with 'issues' every 2-3 years..
95, 98, 2000, etc..
Support And Development (Score:5, Insightful)
Charge for support.
(You want me to tell you how to use the software, then pay me).
Charge to become a member of the stearing group. (you want development to go this way then pay me).
Charge for features, and non critical bug fixes. (you want that, then pay me)
I think support should be by Open FAQ's, you have to pay to get someone to look at your problem, but as soon as the solutions posted everyone can view it.
Re:Support And Development (Score:2, Insightful)
Version 1 and that's it. (Score:2)
Maybe someone would pay you to do some more development because they like the
app?
And unless the help is blinding, your always going to need support, 'I tried to install it on my pokamon but it didn't work'.
Re:Support And Development (Score:2, Insightful)
This only works if you are the only player in that niche for the software. As soon as someone gets fed up with your cryptic, practically unusable software (after all, you'll have to purposefully make your app hard to use to get folks to pay for this kind of support) and writes their own with good help and easy to use, you're out of business.
Re:Support And Development (Score:2)
Maybe they want translations, maybe they want more detail in and area.
Now at the moment options for that kind of support are limited, your stuck with what the project provides, but if you could put a bounty on support, or pay someone to gaurentee that they will support you.
What if someone wants a how to on using xyz with abc, now I could write that, or the how to on using xyz with 123 that
Re:Support And Development (Score:2)
Your assuming that the companies are more or less identical and use the same products in the same environment and want to target the same cost cutting, profit making inovations.
Even if company A and C want the sameish functionality, company A still wins.
1: The solution isn't going to be exactly what C wants, so Company A still ahead.
2: The feature would never have been developed, so company A wins.
3: Company A has been stearing development, so would be further ahead in the implemen
Re:Support And Development (Score:2)
Heh (Score:5, Insightful)
Really, they're coming around to Apples's position -- given a situation where the open-source world has a lot and one's company has a little, throwing in with the crowd is a sound strategy. When the company has a lot and open-source has a little, best to keep what you have.
Meanwhile, I'd never heard of Benkler until this week, when he wrote an inane essay in Science about how research should be "open-source". If you took the most witless comments here about how if a distributed group can write software, then, logically any subject about which one knows nothing can obviously be done efficiently by a distributed group -- that's basically what it was.
Subscription Model is interesting but... (Score:5, Insightful)
What might be a motivating factor for a company to purchase a product using the subscription model, support perhaps? Well they do give you 60 days of support but the remaining 305 days of the year support will cost extra.
Demand for Support Built In (Score:5, Interesting)
The emphasis here is on incentive.
Just something to ponder. Stephan
Re:Demand for Support Built In (Score:2)
Cute, but providing support is so expensive, even if outsourced to Outer Nowhere, that it wouldn't pay.
Add-ons, support, customization (Score:2)
Companies can also place their products in a way that allows them to provide per-customer consulting, customization, system integration, etc. The company's employees should be THE experts for doing this, so they could easily have the advantage over 'generic' consulting companies.
Weak analogy, does Sun really get it? (Score:2, Informative)
Don't forget about hardware. (Score:5, Interesting)
Not all developers work for software companies (Score:5, Insightful)
Software companies are not the only companies which write software. I defy anyone to show me a company with over 50 employees which doesn't use some kind of home-brewed software somewhere in its operations (and, yes, I mean other than HTML content). This is especially the case in scientific research, where if the budget's tight and a needed tool is either nonexistent or too expensive, the answer is "Write your own." I work for the bioinformatics department of a biotech firm [idtdna.com], where I am paid to write free software.
Up until recently, that's been free as in beer; we have a suite of DNA development apps that we provide as web services, so our clients are doing their research with our cycles instead of shelling out $4000 a seat for a closed-source solution. Lately, however, I've been working on a tool (for site-directed mutagenesis, if anyone really cares) which will be both integrated into the web toolkit and released as a stand-alone GPLed app. The legal department's behind it. I am stoked beyond comprehension.
But does this work? Oh hell yeah, if you go by the bottom line and by the number of calls my boss gets every week from bioinfo startups trying to convince him to provide 45-day free-trial downloads of their software on our site. (Use our bandwidth to promote your closed-source code? I don't think so, bitch.) Obviously, people could visit the site (the tool suite doesn't require registration or anything like that), design a primer, then order it from one of our competitors, and I'm sure some people do; but why bother when there's a convenient, unobtrusive "Order now" button just below your results? I'm sure we could sell our software, but in the long run, the customer goodwill we build up (along with the increased orders) by providing this for free is more important to the CEO than whatever short-term quick bucks we could squeeze out by hawking SciTools. In the end, providing free software is the game-winning solution.
I'm sure this can't be the only example of a situation where this tactic works, though I haven't given a lot of thought to where else it would be appropriate. Hmm, maybe I should post this as an Ask Slashdot.
Go even farther with that thought (Score:3, Insightful)
The VAST VAST majority of software is written by in-house (or contracted) IT staff supporting some other sort of business - banking, manufacturing, transportation etc etc etc. The people writing software for direct sale are far and away the minority.
With the possible exception of games, the whole concept of "software for sale" is an abberation that FOSS is (slowly but inexorably) correc
Common expression... (Score:5, Insightful)
Lacking in this common phrase is a sense that money is being earned. Lacking is a sense of exchange of some tangible goods or valuable service in exchange for the money. Often even an expectation of work performed for or responsibility to customers is absent. Money will simple be made "off of" something... usually intangible intellectual property.
So, dear reader (if you've endured my little rant so far), please keep an eye out for this phrase. Is it usually used in a context devoid of striving to satisfy customers? Or am I just reading to much into it? If so, I'm sure you'll reply to let me know :-)
The Free Software Problem: Possible Solution (Score:2)
This is not the way free/open source software should be approached, IMO. Nobody is going to make much money by trying to sell something that users can get for free. You can sell a service based on the software but that's about it.
The way to approach free software is for
Pennies worth (Score:5, Informative)
Of course support can be expensive, but that's only for corporate customers, and even then many free apps can be "supported" by googling for info. What kind of questions about Firefox are worth $100 a pop?
Let's just accept that most free software is written as a hobby, as an academic project or for personal use. Linus didn't set out to make great riches, and as far as I know he didn't. If you are trying to make money off either free [sun.com] or pay [sco.com] software that other people are willing to write and maintain as a hobby, well you should have known better.
If I had to speculate... (Score:3, Insightful)
Does this essay seem like probing to anyone else?
By that I mean, it's like the essay was written to see exactly how much we're willing to spend on software. Further it seems to want us to answer in what method we prefer the pricing to be structured.
Anyway, for my two cents on profiting while giving the code away:
Toll House Cookie is Open-Source (Score:5, Interesting)
Sometime in the 1940's Nestle approached Mrs. Ruth Wakefield, the inventor of the chocolate chip cookie, and purchased her recipe. After purchasing it, they gave it away by printing it on every bag of chocolate chips.
Why would they do this? They PAID for that recipe! Why would they turn it around and GIVE it away?
Nestle was not in the business of selling cookbooks, and they were not a restraunt. They are (among other things) in the business of selling chocolate.
By giving away that recipe, they gave everyone a reason to buy chocolate chips. They couldn't patent the recipe (recipes aren't patentable), but they DID trademark the name "Nestle Tollhouse Cookies". Today, that is a brand that makes a considerable amount of money selling chocolate chips, selling prefab cookie dough, and selling cookies in shopping malls.
Why would someone pay a dollar for a cookie at a store in the mall whenthey could make that same cookie for 20 cents? Convenience.
So, people make money off of open source by providing the goods necessary to USE the open source, by providing services around the open source product, AND by turning it into a recognizable BRAND (ala Red Hat).
This is not a new business model - it is actually very old. People just think of it as new because of the huge impact it has had in recent history in a new market.
Re:Toll House Cookie is Open-Source (Score:2)
Or, if they are like me, due to an absolute lack of talent for cooking. But don't forget the price. It's all about the price ratio. If a ready-made cookie cost $100, I'd be willing to learn how to cook one. Experts say that Gimp does not do everything Adobe Photoshop does. But at the price they charge for a copy, I'm willing to do without some features and use Gimp.
Revenge of the Nerds (Score:4, Funny)
By writting crappy code and charging for support! (Score:2)
1. Write code that nobody will be able to run/fix/maintain on their own, provide very little documentation (ever heard of development and program management specs?)
2. Give the code away for free
3. Profit from the support contracts your customers will inevitably need
How do you make money giving something away? (Score:4, Insightful)
Some of it makes sense (Score:3, Insightful)
Say 100 companies all chip in a percentage of what they would've paid on license fees to improving OpenOffice with features they want. Yes, it costs them some money and yes, some other companies will get the benefit of those improvements for free. But they still save a ton of $$ and don't have to keep paying and paying and paying like you do with Microcrapware.
It costs nothing to give away free code. (Score:3, Funny)
How to profit (Score:4, Interesting)
There are many ways to make money as a GPL using company. You can:
a) Sell the software in a box on a store shelf.
b) Sell the software on CD from an online order form.
c) Sell the software or ask for donations online via PayPal, Visa/MC, etc.
d) Offer commercial customization options online so anyone who uses your software can purchase enhancements.
e) Offer support services so anyone who uses your software can get support.
f) Sell documentation.
g) Sell certification.
h) Sell training.
i) Sell merchandise using the software and your accomplishments as advertisement. A simple contribute/donation option and a url link are much more pleasant than a full screen flashing advertisement from the perspective of the customer.
j) Sell systems designed to run your software.
k) Sell yourselves, offer money in exchange for your time on interviews, presentations, implementation/contracting, analysis/design, review/benchmarking with news and mass media, etc.
l) Ask for donation (politely) from other F/OSS organizations if they are using your software.
m) Be evil and try to make your customers pay by only offering the software for sale on your website, for very high prices, with marketting fluff and very little internal information so your customers can't tell what you do (if anything) to your software behind the scenes, then only give your source code modifications to the people who ask for it and only if it is required because you borrowed your source code from someone else because you were too [slow|stupid|lazy|greedy|cheap] to do it yourself, but unfortunately (for you) they were smart enough to release it with a GPL style license. So now you claim they don't exist and threaten to sue everyone who uses any copies of this software that you didn't authorize, build up your army of lawyers and plan to take over the world.
Re:Trickle Down Theory... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:all software should be free (Score:2)
Re:all software should be free (Score:2)
This is completely off topic but I have to say that you have a good point but your poor English ruins your text.
Re:all software should be free (Score:2)
You make lots of big claims and back those up only with other big claims. How does any of this hold up?
Re:all software should be free (Score:4, Insightful)
And so on.
Re:Symbiosis (Score:2)
Re:Crazy Idea (Score:2)
Re:Don't forget nmap (Score:3, Insightful)
-Insecure gives out program to scan networks with multiple methods.
-Hacker types either trying to secure, or breaking security, use the tool
-When tool breaks, they report bugs
-Bigger companies realise that this tool would save X thousand hours of work and debugging
-Big company pays insecure to use said tool in closed project. Insecure gets paid big bucks
-Because Insecure now has income, they ca