Businesses would much rather sell a three-year $100/year subscription to their product rather than selling it outright for $150. (If you can’t do the math on that one, SLL probably isn’t for you.) From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:
The WEF’s slogan that we will own nothing and be happy is not a new thing. Bill Gates pioneered the concept decades ago when his Microsoft operation began selling people licenses to use the software, which remained the property of Microsoft.
Previously, you bought a box that contained a CD – some will remember – and the software was on the CD. You got something physical in return for your money. It was yours once purchased. The CD could be passed along to a friend or family member, much the same as any other thing you actually own such as a music CD, for instance.
It was thus something under your control. You didn’t have to keep paying a subscription in order to be allowed (by Microsoft) continued use of the software.
Gates decided it wasn’t enough to make billions selling people software CDs. It would be much more extractive to charge them recurrent fees to use (license) the software. This would also eliminate the problem – from Microsoft’s point-of-view – of friends and family members getting Microsoft software for free via hand-me-down CDs.
I still have a spindle of those new PC software bundles.
Comrade Gavin should charge a subscription for the High Speed Rail already up to billions of dollars per foot.
Meanwhile the black Challenger in Arkansas escapes by going lights out and using raw horsepower.