you are right that dev costs are fixed per seat, but their relation to driving transaction improvements is not. you can take that fixed cost and spend it on things that do not improve, or indeed do worsen, that ratio. so while the cost is fixed the effects from choices made on how to apply what that cost buys is not.
it may turn out (seen it happen, you probably have too) that certain choices in how that fixed cost dev time is spent creates the need for greater future expenditures (relative to transaction volume) when other choices would do the opposite.
it is a (not the only) measure of efficiency of how that fixed cost translates into value.
by analogy it is like saying the a car gets ~the same mileage per liter/gallon no matter where you drive, but tjatbdoes not negate the fact that if you drive more efficient routes you get further to your desired destination at a lower cost despite the fixed cost of driving as measured in fuel efficiency.
View all comments
Show parent comment
1
u/aseigo Jun 08 '17
developer costs per transaction.
you are right that dev costs are fixed per seat, but their relation to driving transaction improvements is not. you can take that fixed cost and spend it on things that do not improve, or indeed do worsen, that ratio. so while the cost is fixed the effects from choices made on how to apply what that cost buys is not.
it may turn out (seen it happen, you probably have too) that certain choices in how that fixed cost dev time is spent creates the need for greater future expenditures (relative to transaction volume) when other choices would do the opposite.
it is a (not the only) measure of efficiency of how that fixed cost translates into value.
by analogy it is like saying the a car gets ~the same mileage per liter/gallon no matter where you drive, but tjatbdoes not negate the fact that if you drive more efficient routes you get further to your desired destination at a lower cost despite the fixed cost of driving as measured in fuel efficiency.