PC World wrote us up a few weeks back, and despite saying that FreshBooks “will handle your billings and collections with aplomb”, I have to say they totally missed the point.
First of all, what makes FreshBooks exciting? We’re serving a previously un-served need by allowing people to send invoices and collect payments without being bound by the tedious requirements of traditional accounting software – or by software that is not designed at all for invoicing (such as Word and Excel). Instead, what does PC World harp on? All the ways FreshBooks is not accounting software.
I took time to explain UnAccounting services and why the thousands of businesses we serve love them, but like I said, PC World just doesn’t get it. They think you *need* accounting software when chances are, if you are a service-based business who wants to take the pain out of collections, you don’t.
I thought PC World was about technology and what’s next, and they of all publications would appreciate how we are serving an unmet need for small businesses who need help with their receivables. I was wrong. Heck, PC World did not even include a hyperlink in the article. What year is this anyway? 1984? The web is about links – leaving links out of online articles is not exactly cutting edge, is it?
And I almost forgot, they have factual inaccuracies in the article. They rated FreshBooks a 74 out of 100. Apparently this qualifies for a “good” rating in their books. The trouble is, the two “cons” (i.e. negatives) they cited for using FreshBooks are that we do not include “accounting features” (um…exactly. That’s the point. Am I missing something here?) and that we don’t handle inventory – which we do! By the way, we asked the author to correct the inventory inaccuracy; it’s been over a week and so far no movement on that.
There’s a lesson in here for anyone being interviewed: sometimes they’re not going to write things the way you said them. This is nothing new.