RE: Web Philosophy

[Derek Denny-Brown <derekdb@microsoft.com>]

It sounds like a perfect example of basic economics theory to me.
Supply, Demand, etc..

Companies pay employees to keep them there, keep them coming in to work
each day.  They need to do this because the employee has a plethora of
alternative options which will also provide income. The W3C is a highly
pretegious institution (outside of xml-dev) by virtue of the influence
it has.  Companies profits can be very significantly impacted by
decisions made there, and this carries some serious clout.

Combine that with the fact taht they have no direct income that I know
of.  They need money. Companies profits hinge on the decisions which the
W3C puts forth.  Seems like an obvious solution to me.  They are hardly
the first.

I've been involved from both sides of the fence, little guy and big
corp.   You can pipe-dream all you want, but reality is an ugly beast
when you look at here before the makeup-artists do their magic.

Note: This is very definitely _my_personal_ opionion, and not
neccessarily the opinion of my employer.  

Derek Denny-Brown


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Danny Ayers [mailto:danny@panlanka.net]
>
> Ok, fair enough, that's a lot less - but not insignificant to 
> most mortals.
> How is the figure justified?
> 
> Anyway, so you will only pay me $5,000 to start working for 
> me. Still sounds
> a good deal.
> 
> <- -----Original Message-----
> <- From: Ann Navarro [mailto:ann@webgeek.com]
> <- Sent: 28 March 2001 00:57
> <-
> <- At 12:55 PM 3/27/01, Danny Ayers wrote:
> <- >Doesn't this appear strange - considering that usually when you
> <- do work for
> <- >people you get paid. As to the level of the membership 
> fee - I can only
> <- >think that this is intentionaly high, to block the little 
> fish out. Full
> <- >membership for a years salary? Come on.
> <-
> <- Woah, back up folks.
> <-
> <- $50,000 annual membership is for companies with gross receipts
> <- over $5MM or
> <- something absurd. Otherwise, it's $5,000 annual. There are far
> <- more of the
> <- small guys than the big guys in the consortium.
> <-