I am not sure I agree with the 'limited resources' theory. But I do take your point with the Parking analogy. However, Google's car park is massive. The biggest car park in the industry that they expand daily. I can't see that 'having access to all functions' would 'degrade' performance...seems like a very strange thing to say. Again, there are ways of doing this that are not charged. Residents parking permits?
> If you don't mind my asking: What kind of merit does your software > have, when its API cost exceeds the price customers want to pay? This explains the misconception. 'Customers' are not paying for this as a product it is part of a more general service. I can't say too much, not many people are doing what we are doing so I can only talk in general terms. The customer will pay the API charge, but this is an extra cost that ends up not being spent on Adwords (to our benefit) but still goes into Googles pocket (as usual). We have applied for and been refused Free Units. We have no idea why, or what the criteria for this would be. Charities? This we are not. On Mar 30, 1:39 pm, Zweitze <zwei...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 26, 7:15 pm, Phil <5000...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > I understand everything that you said, but I am afraid I don't agree. > > I am somewhat astounded that you are defending the API cost based on > > the fact that it prevents irrisponsible coding. > > No, I never said it prevents irresponsible coding. The cost-principle > is just a way of allocating a limited resources to parties that want > to use the API. The allocation scheme is based on economics - you only > purchase the resources that you can afford. > > The last thing that I want is an unlimited access to its functions - I > think it will lead to a massive degradation of performance, to a level > that my customers will not accept. (Note: this argument is derived > from a discussion of paid parking in the city where I live. A lot of > people disagreed with the paid parking spots. The argument was: > imagine what happens when parking became free... no parking spot would > be available at all!) > > > And I resent the implication of your last statement. > > Remember: sometime any cost is too much, no matter the merit. > > We don't all have the luxary of ready cash. > > If you don't mind my asking: What kind of merit does your software > have, when its API cost exceeds the price customers want to pay? > > Note: The developers guide states that certain parties may be eligible > for free quota. > (Seehttp://code.google.com/apis/adwords/docs/developer/index.html#adwords... > , "Although some advertisers ..." > Maybe that's the route you should be taking. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AdWords API Forum" group. To post to this group, send email to adwords-api@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to adwords-api+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/adwords-api?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
