The system of billing for the WiFi network is online, and it's not equipment that is the most troublesome thing for schools. The monthly price is simple, fair in real terms, but it really makes thousands of students satisfied and financial problems harder to pick than you think. We have been involved in a number of projects, finding many schools start with months of time, and then end up being accused by students of taking advantage of expensive, less useful and less expensive; instead of just using them, we have to pay them more than we can afford at the end of the month.
Let's get to the point where we can understand how the school is doing with users.
If a school treats the network as a basic benefit, it is more appropriate to have a low monthly or even free-of-charge within-month period, so that students can use it for ease and distraction. If a school uses the network as a market service, it will cover its costs and even its savings by covering its own costs, which is more realistic if it increases its excess costs by volume or by month.
The hole in the moon is at its peak.
The biggest hidden problem with the month is that everyone pays their money, and the late peak bandwidth is just as good. The result is a 11-pm dorm, where video, games, downloads are squeezed together and collective downturns are experienced. We generally suggest that the month cannot be really unlimited, either give a reasonable rate of progress or include some flow within the month, which exceeds the cost of the drop. This saves the month’s simplicity and leaves it with a buffer.
How do you count the money?
The first is to measure the particle size, by omen or hour, and the students look at the bill for a mist; second is to cap, without monthly ceilings, the students may generate hundreds of bills a month, parents complain to the school leadership; third is to warn that traffic is used until 80% of the amount is spent, and then there are conflicts at the end of the month. We suggest that the program must be equipped with monthly caps and quantities to remind students that it is best to make a menu of food packages themselves. It is not impossible to do it, but rather to make it something that the students can understand and control.
The mix is often the most stable.
The most stable model to actually run is a mix of month-based, overweight and supplementary models. Students pay a fixed base fee per month, which includes daily sufficient flow and speed; the formula is used in excess of volume but not capped, and does not give them a daily bill. It balances simple and affordable costs with space for school coverage. We do this for several schools, where student complaints are lower than net monthly and financial recovery is satisfactory.
Prices are set to push with real data.
Either way, pricing is not supposed to be. The average daily flow measured in the previous mapping phase, late peaks and rolls, and long school hours are the basis for pricing. For example, measuring a monthly traffic per capita of about 60 guis, the base package is set at the level of coverage, which exceeds some of it by cost plus a little moori. We've seen the head-tapping price, which is too large to recover; given too small, students buy extra bags and have a bad account.
Give students autonomy.
Finally, the system is designed to enable students to choose their own options. At the beginning of school, two or three sets are offered, and students pick their own way on the Internet, allowing them to move up the slots, and at the end of the month allowing them to adjust their next monthly slots. With autonomy, students’ complaints about costs are much smaller.
Don't set up too many saloons.
The menus are the most suitable for students. Too many slots, students pick their eyes, customers explain their costs; too few slots and do not cover large Internet-based groups. We generally recommend that the base should be kept in order to keep standard and smooth, high-speed care, and clear for three typical groups.
Concessions and promotions need to be controlled.
Schools occasionally want to make new concessions or activities, which are affordable and manageable. We suggest that the benefits be granted in time-limited vouchers or temporary upgrades, with automatic recovery due and no direct change to the base price, otherwise historical bills will not be available. The rules of preferences are reconciled, and financials can see every concession.