<div dir="ltr"><div>Excellent analysis.<br><br></div><div>I think Sugar could have an impact in the US if it was extremely easy to install and configure (or "connect to and use"), and teachers would get behind it.<br></div><div><br></div>Sean<br><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Tony Anderson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:tony_anderson@usa.net" target="_blank">tony_anderson@usa.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Of course, the question is what is our market? I think Sugar has no
chance to impact the American education market. Chris Doerndorfer
presented that point very effectively at the Malaysia summit noting
that major requests for proposals by UNESCO, USAID, and others
eliminated proposals of Sugar or XOs on technical grounds (e.g.
proposal from non-qualifying origanization, insufficient capital to
make escrow requirements and so on). Rabi Karmacharya noted that OLE
Nepal could not qualify to bid on Nepal's request. <br>
<br>
Many schools in the US are adopting a BYD policy. I suspect that an
XO with Sugar would not qualify as an acceptable device. Obviously,
such a policy is impossible for community schools in the developing
world.<br>
<br>
I believe our opportunity is to convince private philanthropic
individuals and organizations to support specific deployments in
specific countries. To do this <br>
we need a reliable source of hardware, a credible support
organization (e.g. Red Hat, Moodle, ...), a proven track record of
success in similar situations, as well as open software and content.
This needs to be combined into a solid story to present to potential
sponsors. <br>
<br>
I don't think it matters whether we have large numbers of computers
running Sugar in the US or US private schools. We should, of course,
have an ability to demonstrate to sponsors what we are offering.<br>
<br>
So a G1G1 needs to be positioned as primarily benefiting the Give
side. Making half of the package deductible is helpful. Offering a
Give2 option at full deductbility may work. Describing in detail,
how the Give1 or 2 laptops would be used is essential (a point
ignored by OLPC). <br>
<br>
In the second G1G1, OLPC was introduced to basic business
management. The manufacturer, not unreasonably. required payment for
the laptops on delivery (to Amazon). The made all of the available
funds illiquid and so OLPC was forced to riff many very valuable
developers. <br>
<br>
Apparently no one at OLPC was familiar with inventory loans or
managing cash flow. <br>
<br>
Crowd-sourcing makes clear that many Americans will put up cash for
what they consider a worthy cause. This might be a way to mange a
G1G1 or G2 program. Any such program must pay serious attention to
financing. For example, suppose the minimum build order is $2M.
While those 10000 laptops are in inventory, they tie up the funds.
When all of the laptops have been paid for and deployed, a new order
can be placed. Better would be to order 20,000 units at $4M. Then
when 10,000 have been deployed and paid for, a new order can be
placed. However, this means at least $2M will be tied up in
inventory. <br><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<br>
Tony</font></span><div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
<div>On 04/09/2016 10:12 PM, Sean DALY
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 5:57 AM, Dave
Crossland <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dave@lab6.com" target="_blank">dave@lab6.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Finding
ten ritzy private primary schools in the US where the
parents can drop $400 in a hat shouldn't be too hard for a
savvy sales person</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">I'd like to think that's so, but it may
well be more likely that parents would be more impressed with
a tablet-based solution, or with spending that money on home
equipment.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Private schools definitely have more
resources and more leeway in IT buying, but they also need to
fit IT activity into a curriculum.<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">It's possible a charity/social
responsibility oriented approach could work, but it's also
possible that a school's IT buyer would find XOs a tough sell
compared to, say the Dell Latitude 13 education offer. And no
need to pay the salesperson so well - we would need to hire
(lots of) staff for the sales logistics at the same time.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Models exist where a nonprofit org or
foundation controls a business (e.g. Mozilla), which might be
necessary in this scenario. However OLPC (and by extension
Sugar in its ecosystem) happens to have an awful image
problem. What would be the value proposition of our offer over
the commercial offers, for large scale buyers to take the
risk? The charity/solidarity aspect? Wouldn't OLPC rather want
to manage such a project?<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">I encourage big-picture thinking,
perhaps more brainstorming is in order<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Sean<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>