I'm sorry I've not gotten back to you yet, Alexis. We are in the final process of beta-testing V6 and I've been focused on this and our Practice Management module development (the current status of which is
here).
Your concern is certainly understandable and warrants a response, especially since it is an example of a good intention gone wrong. Let me explain:
As noted, we are working to move V6 to general release. V6 is ONC-ATCB certified for Meaningful Use, or as it might be described, "government approved as a complete EHR." To get this certification cost us over $40,000 - and that was just to take the test! It doesn't include the actual cost to design, add the many requirements, test, support, and continually improve the program so it continues to meet the ongoing needs of our clients. And just like my home expenses go up (cable bill, phone bill, healthcare insurance premiums), so too do the company's.
Yet unlike other EHRs that continue to charge hundreds to thousands each and every month (or will instead sell your practice information to insurers, advertisers, and whoever else is willing to pay), we charge our clients enough to cover our expenses, plus a bit more. And most of the "bit more" goes back into further improving our software and the company. Not to shareholders or VC-backed playboys flying around in private jets. In other words, Amazing charts philosophy is to treat our customers fairly. No price gouging, surprise fees, or selling your information to others.
Of course part of being fair to our clients (and our own staff), is to not go out of business. In other words, we need to charge enough to cover our expenses, and then make a reasonable profit for further R&D and company growth. This means that our price must go up from time to time. And in our quest to raise prices fairly, we decided that rather than just have our price increase occur with the next bill (as is done by nearly everybody else), we would handle our price increase in a ?kinder? way: we decided that when our price increased, anybody whose credit card automatically rebilled without requiring any intervention would just get charged what they had paid the year before - even if our expenses were higher.
Since all credit cards expire at some point, or get changed, or lost, (or stolen), we decided that no matter the reason, as long as no staff time was required the automatically rebilling price would be allowed to go through without the increase to our current price. This was us trying to be "fair? to our existing clients, but also to our company ? since the price has to increase if expenses increase.
The reality is that so long as that client?s card rebills automatically at the old price, Amazing Charts is technically losing money having them as a client. It's not a lot of money, and based on our company?s philosophy, it seemed like a reasonable "business expense" to be able to provide this extra-ordinary level of fairness - so fair, in fact, that the client wouldn't have to ask for it, or even know it was happening in the first place. Which, I suspect, is why you are frustrated rather than thankful.
Based on this approach, in fact, your practice has actually been paying the same pricing you paid in 2008. At that time our maintenance & support was $500 for the first provider, $100 each additional Provider, and $250 for OffSite Backup which equals $850. (Adding ePrescribing should have cost you an additional $420 per provider but we stopped charging extra for this as it seemed wrong that providers would have to pay for the privilege of ePrescribing). In other words, because your card has automatically rebilled over the last four years, your two provider practice has been paying $850/year instead of the $1250/year you should have paid since 2009, and what those who purchased after December 1, 2010 currently pay: $2045/year for two providers and Offsite Backup.
While this may not seem fair to those who purchased more recently, it was our attempt at showing our gratitude to loyal customers who ?trusted? us with their EHR needs before we were certified or had various features that have since been added ? and are still being added.
Our good intentions and underlying philosophy of always striving to be fair have clearly backfired. So I?m not sure how to proceed at this point. It seems that it is time to change our approach, and avoid the irony that acting in good faith leads to anger and frustration in the very people who?ve benefited from our approach. My sense is that we need to simply get rid of this approach ? or do a better job of explaining it (although we?ve tried on the site where you buy Amazing Charts as well as in our
user agreement (EULA) ? see paragraph 4).
I'm sure we'll discuss this in more detail at our Users Conference, but what do others think?
