But Front won't be replacing anyone's free web mail at any price point. I can't believe they don't have a free plan.
A lot of people compares us to Front, but we are more focused on the email/chat experience than customer support experience.
Thus our pricing reflects this vision, where we charge ~$8-$12/seat/month.
Front's front page slogan is "The shared inbox for teams." I'm always puzzled when they attack modern email in their PR. They should just stick to "universal team inbox".
When I see missive, I see "team email with chat." Well, we chat on Discord already, so that's not the pain point.
Front's main appeal to me at least was their multi-channel inbox. Customer support these days is not just email but social media and even texting. It can all be done through email, and even that can all be done through gmail, which is what we're doing now, and what I suspect a lot of people are doing.
But removing inefficiencies in this day to day process immediately cuts costs when you're paying people for this work. Hence zendesk and their no free plan position, except, they're not multi-channel, and I was never impressed by them being on the customer end of a zendesk using company. I'd always think "crutch" when I saw an email from a business that didn't bother to re-brand their zendesk (assuming it's possible, if not, I guess they did well for themselves and my impressions were unimportant).
PS. Your logo reminds me of men's underwear. I thought twice about mentioning it, and I know others would too. Not that I'd hold it against you, but (I do logo design, is my excuse for mentioning it).
Pain point here is when you start to have those internal conversations spread across many silos.
There is beauty and simplicity to manage all your conversations whether email, chat or mixed of both in a one convenient place.
> PS. Your logo reminds me of men's underwear.
Firs time I hear that one. :)
No, exactly. But you are always at risk of being just another channel. So you need to beat the rest. Or be above them. Or at least consolidate a few.
Front does a better job of marketing themselves as such (not the outlook argument, their inbox argument).
If you could pull in "channels" or have an open API for adding custom channels where users can participate in helping build your catalog, I think that would help.
The beauty of discord is with webhooks. Slack has "integrations" but they needed 1st party support. And I'd use Zapier to bridge the gaps. But most API sets have webhook support. And Discord allows for postings via webhooks. So I have a simple REST webhook processor page that takes incoming webhooks and posts to discord and everything else.
Not that webhooks are your answer, but just an example of a common chat app setup with a drastically better/easier feature set than their major competition.
> Firs time I hear that one. :)
It's the combination of white and the curves. Reminds me of boxer briefs every time. An easy fix would be to sharpen the rounded corners, but it's none of my business.
Either way, I have nothing but respect for you and your business. I wish you only the best ;)
Read receipts, shared inboxes, team communication on emails, and much more. Definitely worth the money.
Good to see more competition in the space though.
Disclaimer: I work at Zendesk
sales@company.com - shared with sales team normal shared inbox
support@company.com - "add ticket option"
first.last@company.com - private email
@company - twitter account
A shared communication hub is a big win. If they could take over some of the internal chat as well - I'd gladly cut them a big fat check. Our helpdesk bill is not cheap. (not zendesk sadly).
As mostly a b2e we have SLAs and reporting requirements to a lot of our customers and automating that, but still capturing/transferring disparate information is just a royal pain.
I did extensive searching for customer support email solutions. I landed at Front. But, I haven't pulled the trigger yet.
Zen was an easy pass for us, but we arrived at Front because of what they do better than Zen. Consolidation.
But the commonality is that these services always charge more than Todo apps or even chat apps. Even G Suite is cheaper. For some reason Google's team mailbox was a joke. They seem to have every feature of every startup somewhere, but have it suck.
I doubt these guys would be similar in pricing unless they were competing for the same market.
Same with buffer.com. They are a bit pricey too, but they can target businesses that save money with their service. Pockets open immediately when that is part of your value proposition -- cost savings.
Also, Microsoft have gotten stupid and lazy with Office. Each app eats 2 gig disk, all from non-shared Resources/Fonts/crap. Users who just clicked default install ended up with 9g of disk space gone. Why is this a big deal? Apple's extortionate pricing on mbp disks and the inability to upgrade them for less than the price of an entire new computer. There's a hacky way to fix this.
https://aaronweb.net/blog/2016/01/office-2016-mac-decrease-d...
Most of enterprise needs a bit more that Google sheets.
We aren't talking gigabytes of data. I can't wait for these shitty cloud services to be replaced with something a bit more capable than pre 1988, whatever form that takes.