Investment limit

[aviator]

Mark is suspiciously quiet...

[Mark]

I am paying attention, but don't have anything to add to the conversation... I appreciate hearing the feedback.

[danmcco]

Djobydjoba,

I know your opinion and I personally feel paying too much for stuff you don't need is unwise, but if you are doing so well go ahead and overpay for whatever you like.

I pay the price for FM because the two previous products I used (MS Money and PM Gold) no longer exist. I will tell you again that I would pay to remove the limit but I don't want to pay for more and useless to me functions!

Please don't tell me again what a bargain you are getting. I KNOW your opinion. I would prefer to hear from FM.

[Mark]

Thanks for all the feedback, I do appreciate it. However, I don't anticipate changing the investment limits. I also don't anticipate creating a special version that only has this investment limit increased. Ideally we could sell versions customized to each customer's needs, but that isn't practical, so we have to make a few discrete products you can choose from. The 500 limit is arbitrary, but I believe a reasonable limit for most individual investors. It can however be problematic for option traders... We may revisit this in the future, but for the near term I don't expect it to change.

[Djobydjoba]

Danmcco,

With the Personal version, five years of use, two major updates, you are paying 2,95$ each month for using Fund Manager ((99 + 39*2) /60). I don't want to say it too loud: this is so very low in absolute a relative terms (relative: compare to the competition). If you think Fund Manager doesn't provide you more value than 3$ per month, and that is near the maximum price you want or can pay, I don't really know why you use it, or what you are doing on the financial markets, and perhaps there is greediness that needs medication (I don't think it's poverty...)

I'm sure that if the monthly cost of Fund Manager Personal would have been from the start twice the amount (6$), with a limit size of 5000 investments, you would pay without complaining. (and if you are not willing to pay 6$/month for a good stock program, yes you are still greedy as hell). For 6$/month, it's Fund Manager Pro, with more functions (sorry, more functions is bad news).

With you, greedy guys, who don't want to pay more than 3$/month and are complaining about the limitation of # investments, the thing that could happened is an increase of the # of investments for the Personal version but with a sensible price rise for the Personal and Pro versions. Because the business model here is to upgrade to Pro version after a certain amount of transactions using FM Personal. So because you are apparently not able to understand the business model here, to appreciate the monthly cost you pay for FM, and to upgrade to FM Pro as you should without grouching, we could all pay more for less in the future.

PS:

I will tell you again that I would pay to remove the limit but I don't want to pay for more and useless to me functions!

To help your upgrading process to FM Pro, you should consider the maximum of investments as a function, not as a limitation. So, good news, you will pay for a useful function to you.

[Djobydjoba]

Additional thoughts:

Perhaps I missed the point by thinking that the extra cost to upgrade to the Pro version is the main issue here (for Danmcco & Fundman). In my defense, the cost was the main argument.

The main point is perhaps that FM Pro can be quite intimidating for some people, with more menus and functions and we don't necessary know what to do with all of that. I forget I was intimidated too with FM Pro the first months, as I can be now if I open the Advisor version. For some people accustomed to the Personal version, it can be like changing for a oversized trouser, it doesn't fit well and it may be not very comfortable.

Personally, I think the more functions the better. Even if I don't use all of them, they are here. I know they exist, and maybe one day... I'm very curious, I like to understand why a function has been implemented. Some people needed it, some people use it, so I will try to understand how this can be useful to me. My financial knowledge and investor training are based for a part upon the studies of functions in Fund Manager. Now I couldn't going back to the Personal version (independently of the max investments #), as I have adopted many functions in my investment routines. And I want to continue to develop myself in the financial field, and Fund Manager is so beneficial for structuring this process.

But some users of the Personal version are accustomed and they don't want to have new menus and functions. They are probably not interested to develop new ways for doing things, they want to stick with what they know. Not a criticism. It seems that they really don't want new functions in their menus to a point that they are fighting with the investment limit #, in painful work of dealing with sold investments, rather than to upgrade to the Pro version. Recall: the Pro version is 5$/month more. I don't know how much time they loose to deal with this limitation, but time is money, to save 5$ I wouldn't want to spend more than 10 min/month to deal with this investments limitation. Anyway, So the question is probably much more to stick with what we know, in a limited field, than cost related.

Anyway, some more feedback for Mark.

[aviator]

The 500 limit is arbitrary, but I believe a reasonable limit for most individual investors. It can however be problematic for option traders...

Mark, thank you for acknowledging that the 500 investment limit is indeed arbitrary.

I'd like to point out that the problematic limit extends beyond option traders. In my case, my brokerage firm decided to the best way to invest my money was to create a portfolio of many individual stocks. Each account literally contained hundreds of stocks. In essence, they created their own mutual fund at the account level. I'm sure you can see how this scenario would quickly surpass the 500 limit.

My point is this: We both agree the limit is arbitrary. I'm not an option trader but I was affected by this rule. I'm guessing I'm not alone -- others might have different scenarios that cause them to exceed the 500 investment limit. So why keep an arbitrary limit in place? Why not tier your products based on features alone? Your closest competitor, Quicken, has no such limitations.

[Mark]

Hi aviator,

The idea of having tiered versions is that you can pay for the features/benefits you receive. With software it is difficult to make an a la carte offering, so we have discrete steps in the product line. No one product will always be the perfect match for any customer's needs, but with several offerings we can make it closer.

The theory behind the investment limit is that if you're using Fund Manager to track many investments, you are probably receiving greater benefit. I acknowledge this may not be perfect in all situations, but I believe in large part it is a fair approach. We could eliminate the investment limit, but that may lead to needing to reduce features in lower versions and/or increased prices for all versions. We're trying to strike a balance that is fair to everyone, and also enables us to continue to develop/support the product.

[danmcco]

Ok -- but theoretically there is no limit since you can have unlimited portfolios and load them at different times. So the upgrade to pro is just so we can have closed items still available to us without having to reload. You could just change the limit to 1500 or 1000 and not inconvenience loyal customers.

[aviator]

Mark, you have to admit that danmcco has a point.

I'm not sure what problem you're solving when you limit investments to 500/portfolio but a user can have an unlimited number of portfolios?

[Djobydjoba]

You could just change the limit to 1500 or 1000 and not inconvenience loyal customers.

You are not loyal, you are just greedy. If you were loyal you would upgrade without complaining, as you have already benefited of the Personal version for years:

The theory behind the investment limit is that if you're using Fund Manager to track many investments, you are probably receiving greater benefit.

And you think only about yourself:

We could eliminate the investment limit, but that may lead to needing to reduce features in lower versions and/or increased prices for all versions.

If you have the 1000/1500 investments you want for the Personal version you will complain again in a few years when the limit will be reached again.

[fundman247]

Good points raised by all of you guys. We are still using a 1st class program and I for one intent using it for years to come as I find it fit for my purpose even with the limit of 500.

Well done to Mark and I may add the rapid response when one needs support is just the best I have ever encountered.

Regards.