Sorry Eric but I cannot agree with your claim that the beta period had not
ended.  Read your own email...
 
And please respond privately next time...  Thanks
 
Date:         Fri, 27 Jan 1995 19:45:54 +0100
Reply-To: LISTSERV for Windows NT - beta test programme
              <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: LISTSERV for Windows NT - beta test programme
              <[log in to unmask]>
From: Eric Thomas <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      End of beta
                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
To: Multiple recipients of list LSTSRV-W <[log in to unmask]>
 
With the  end of  the month  (and LAK period)  here is  an update  on the
current status of the beta test and  release of the Windows NT version of
LISTSERV.
 
About a  week ago, development (my  group) declared the beta  to be over.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------
>On Mon, 20 Feb 1995 18:00:55 -0600 "Laurence A. Bates"
><[log in to unmask]> said:
>
>>It appears to  me that you have incorrectly stated  your case. You claim
>>that "The prices you got are not public and are not being offered to the
>>general public" but as the  following email message indicates the prices
>>that I  quoted were prices that  were sent to  me as John Q.  Public and
>>represented the  prices of  a shipping product.  As the  following email
>>extract indicates,  they had nothing to  do with the Beta  agreement and
>>clearly were not covered by any agreement explicit or otherwise.
>
>Laurence,
>
>I'm afraid I  stand by my original claim. Our  salesmen have instructions
>not to  issue quotes  for anything  but the  graduated licenses  when the
>requests come  from John Q.  Public. In  fact, they have  instructions to
>first tell John Q. Public that the software is still in beta, and provide
>the [log in to unmask] address  as a point of contact  for further information.
>If the  customer asks for  pricing they forward a  copy of the  VMS price
>list for graduated licenses with an  indication that this is the expected
>pricing for the NT version. We  could find dozens of customers to confirm
>that this is what happens. Now, Elena should probably have clarified that
>all the prices she gave you were for beta sites, and that the product was
>not shipping  to John Q. Public.  But she probably figured  that you knew
>this,  being  on  the  beta  list and  having  received  all  appropriate
>information a few days before, to wit:
  continued...