Hopes this works as I've never used a mailing list before..

1) I'm making the assumption, not having this information, that Collabora 
Office is cheaper than Microsoft Office and other Office Suite software. How 
much cheaper is it? If it's just as functional as competitors but it is less 
expensive, and has other advantages, there is a profit-making market for it:

1) a) This is that it is open source, and can be reviewed and audited for 
security gaps. In Canada, Europe, Russia, and other countries there is a 
significant concern that geopolitics in entering into the realm of technology. 
Governments are becoming more concerned about the USA and China installing 
monitoring software for political and industrial espionage reasons.

Why does Collabora not position itself as a secure/open-source/auditable 
solution to security issues. Isn't this the reason the German federal 
government chose Nextcloud, and the reason the Italian military chose 
Libreoffice?

1) b) To that point, Michael you raised points about the UK and French 
governments not paying for Libreoffice. This is surprising to me and shameful 
IMO. These would be large, relatively sustainable contracts to pursue, and I 
would suggest that working more with the FSFE's Public Money Public Code 
initiative, and presenting it to them from the perspective of; you're using 
things, we're having trouble sustaining it, we're hoping you will purchase, 
will be a potentially successful strategy. That or do they get that Collabora 
is the premiere developer and TDF isn't developing this for free? If they've 
already institutionalized the software it might be worth tugging at the rug 
under them a bit and telling them the project may not be able to continue as a 
going entity because the contractor they used is not providing any 
contributions to the development of the software. But this leads to my later 
point about trustmarks.

1) c) Does Collabora and/or the TDF not have a dedicated government relations 
advocacy employee in Europe/North America/Other market countries? There are 
many discussions that occur at the government relations level that lead to 
contracts and exposure of opportunities to companies.

2) That the TDF is not adequately promoting it's enterprise vendors is a 
failure of the TDF's marketing committee and the contractors that they hired. I 
have followed LO and AOO for years now and I've noticed that the TDF marketing 
committee is unwilling to promote LibreOffice in modern ways. There seems to be 
a lack of focus on communities outside the FOSS environment, which doesn't make 
sense because it's like setting up a booth to advertise bibles at a religious 
convention. Why does Libreoffice focus on attending FOSS conferences instead of 
International Government conferences? The NGOs that use LibreOffice for free 
would be obliged to let Libreoffice attend the WEF, Davos, and other places. Is 
there the potential that the leadership of the Marketing at TDF is not thinking 
out of the box, or too small?

3) SaaS model - recognizing that all the costs you just listed to set up small 
clients is cost prohibitive and that you would need to get 10,000+ clients for 
it to be viable -- I would only suggest that because it's hard and maybe 
expensive doesn't preclude the idea that this may be one of the best options to 
generate sustainable income.

3) a) Personally I was excited at the opportunity to pay for LibreOffice 
support via Collabora as an individual. I couldn't, because I needed to have 
several employees first to justify it. Instead I donate to TDF, but apparently 
this money is holed up in a bureaucratic bunker because of issues of 
distribution. There's a couple problems here: 1) It suggests the TDF needs a 
regulatory review to streamline it's operations. 2) again, the TDF isn't being 
proactive enough - are the people working there the right people to accomplish 
the organizations mission, or are we just being polite because they've been 
loyal for a long time. In that case we might be looking at an old boys club 
situation.

3) b) In some non-profits, there is no ability to donate directly, the 
foundation is supported by the enterprise companies based on the profit they 
make. Could the TDF create a certification body with a Trustmark that says only 
these companies are able to provide enterprise support for Libreoffice. Meaning 
the TDF does not sanction other vendors slapping on Libreoffice to their 
solution and hoping it gets updated to fix bugs by Collabora and CIB, etc. 
These certified companies would then pay for the certification on an ongoing 
basis to remain in good standing, as well as donate to the TDF to maintain its 
operations. This would also have the effect of keeping TDF staff more 
accountable to metrics set by a small group of knowledgeable individuals. 
(Something would have to be done for keeping community representation available 
to unaffiliated citizens such as myself. Haven't thought that far.)

3) c) Just building on this and what others have written; Nextcloud has issues 
as well, but again, the LO website needs to do a better job of featuring 
vendors. I agree with what was written about displaying enterprise supported 
versions on the TDF website with a drop-down or some other format. As stated in 
point 3) b) I think instead of a donate button, saying that Libreoffice is 
free, but if you'd like to contribute to development and support, consider 
signing up for LibreOffice Online, or paying for a monthly or annual support 
license.

3) d) how are these large companies and governments sitting on advisory 
committees of TDF and not providing any funds for its growth?

4) Co-operative model - has the TDF considered setting up a model in which 
LibreOffice is run as a multi-stakeholder co-operative? This would entail 
paying an annual membership fee in order to vote for members of the board of 
directors. These non-corporate board members could then reflect member concerns 
and issues. People will pay for democracy if its a small amount, say $5 USD, a 
year. It creates a democratic institution, increases engagement, and also 
provides sustainable income. There are lots of people looking into the concept 
of platform co-ops to create sustainable software that doesn't sell-out.

5) Eurocentricity - If you read the document foundation planet - throughout the 
year the TDF sometimes features volunteers working in countries like India, 
Indonesia, and other low wealth countries where schools, non-profits, and small 
businesses are using LibreOffice to provide betterment to humanity. I get that 
we're looking for sustainability from rich enterprise countries, but I think 
it's possible that this is another marketing angle - Germany, France, the EU, 
the UK, Quebec/Canada, and other countries are starting to fund software to 
provide licenses to these poor countries. Can Collabora receive grants from the 
government aid organizations to give digital access to poor communities. Can 
this be position in a marketing way to rich people in rich countries that want 
to (at the end of the day, alleviate the guilt of their inequality) help others 
position TDF/Libreoffice as software helping the third world. Because it is 
already and it's not being marketed as such.

5 a) Does the TDF not have a grant writer to get funding from developed 
governments for the work they're already indirectly doing in these 
underdeveloped countries?

Just some thoughts on how Libreoffice could evolve, generate income, and do 
things in a way that doesn't start creating "editions", which is a road to the 
destruction of the project. I also think someone earlier referenced that this 
could be interpreted as being against the TDF bylaws, so those might need to be 
changed anyway.

I would recommend taking maybe 200k of that 1.5 million bucket and hiring a 
strategic consultant (not one from McKinsey, or Deloitte, or any of those 
profit maximizing consultancies) to look hard at the TDF's current management 
structure and operations, and provide recommendations on business model 
solutions. It sounds like there are structural issues and there hasn't been 
action on evolving the organization to look at new markets for things that 
Libreoffice is already really good at: namely - Privacy, Government costs, 
Public Money/Public Code, NGO/Emerging Market Aid grants and contracts.

I'm being critical here but not trying to place blame on any particular person 
at the TDF. I've worked at organizations before where everyone is working too 
much for little pay based on the lack of understanding by sponsors/stakeholders 
at what's being done. And that is a marketing/communications/advocacy issue. I 
love the LO project and what it does for digital accessibility in poor 
countries, churches, community groups, and other places that Microsoft and 
other big-tech firms exploit. I don't want the wrong step to be taken that 
leads to the eventual loss of community of the project. (Which btw I still 
don't get the justification for the lack of a Discourse or NodeBB forum on TDF. 
How outdated is the ask.libreoffice software? 5 years now?)

Cheers,
Kevin

Reply via email to