Skip to main content

On downloadable party kits and the downside of internet selling

On my Organizing A Murder website I have various types of murder mystery party kits. A particular favourite are the downloadable party kits. They have the big advantage of immediacy for a last minute event, and you can print out the instructions, clues and the like as and how you want. You might not have a glossy box or a DVD of third rate actors giving hints, but there's a lot to be said for the medium. What's more you can be much more flexible. Boxed sets pretty well always force you to have an 8 person party - the downloadable kits allow for anything between 6 and 33 players, depending on the game. (Not to mention the Organizing a Murder book of 12 events that can have any number of players.)

But all good things have their downside. Cream cakes bring podginess. Alcohol makes you unhealthy. And selling via the internet puts your business in the hands of an internet hosting company. The people who make most of the downloadable games I sell had their server go down last week. For days there was nothing there. To make matters worse, their email was hosted on the same server, so it wasn't possible to contact them. I didn't have a phone number, so had to resort to writing by snail mail. In all they were unable to do business for about a week.

Not a total disaster, but highly irritating, particularly when you are feeling smug about having a business that isn't put at risk by the snow. If you do have an internet-based business, it's worth making sure that your hosting company is easily contactable for when things go wrong. A colleague of mine always uses US hosting companies on the theory that most of his potential customers are in the US, and the site will be faster there. I think it's more important to have your hosting company relatively close by (and in the same time zone) so you can do something when the inevitable happens.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's 2010 gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some exp...

Murder by Candlelight - Ed. Cecily Gayford ***

Nothing seems to suit Christmas reading better than either ghost stories or Christmas-set novels. For some this means a fluffy romance in the snow, but for those of us with darker preferences, it's hard to beat a good Christmas murder. An annual event for me over the last few years has been getting the excellent series of classic murderous Christmas short stories pulled together by Cecily Gayford, starting with the 2016 Murder under the Christmas Tree . This featured seasonal output from the likes of Margery Allingham, Arthur Conan Doyle, Ellis Peters and Dorothy L. Sayers, laced with a few more modern authors such as Ian Rankin and Val McDermid, in some shiny Christmassy twisty tales. I actually thought while purchasing this year's addition 'Surely she is going to run out of classic stories soon' - and sadly, to a degree, Gayford has. The first half of Murder by Candlelight is up to the usual standard with some good seasonal tales from the likes of Catherine Aird, Car...

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor...