FoxDen (Discontinued) vs. WorkCast Present+

FoxDen tended to work slightly better for very small video conferences. The audio was typically reliable, so it would be ok to use for audio conferencing. It is definitely not ready for prime time: it cannot handle very large conferences. It didn't seem ready to be used on mobile either. I also think it's better suited for a smaller company.

Incentivized

We will be using Present+ when we have training sessions, show and tells and new product launches.

• Easy to join meetings
• Audio is fairly reliable
• Moderately easy to host meetings

Incentivized

• Embedded webinars - embed your webinars directly into your landing pages!
• Useful features - it's packed full of useful features, focusing on the ones that are going to genuinely be of use (i.e., there's no bloat).
• Well supported - there's a full team at the end of a phone or email if you have any questions at all.

• Horrible video quality. It basically never worked, and we stopped using the video feature.
• Buggy behavior all the time. Dropped calls, loss of screen sharing, rendered unusable most of the time.
• Poor response by the vendor to issues. The answer was basically "we know it's unusable, and we're trying to figure that out. There's nothing we can do right now."

Incentivized

• The Presenter 'Pods' could do with tips to explain that these can be repositioned.
• The questions/polls have room for improvement.

I believe they selected FoxDen because we use ReadyTalk for voice conferencing and FoxDen represented a cost savings compared to our previous Skype for Business investment. However, in the end, most of our company has abandoned ever using FoxDen and, instead, still uses all of the products listed above (Skype for Business, Google Hangouts, Slack) or just plain ReadyTalk voice conferencing.

Incentivized

Products such as GoToWebinar are great, but they never truly met our expectations or requirements. We used them for years, but the lack of audience engagement was poor, both in terms of when actually in the webinar and when promoting it. The most annoying feature was the fact the process was disjointed - to watch the webinar, you had to leave the landing page, which was massively frustrating.

• Increased the length of our meetings due to copious amounts of time spent trying to fix the video and screen sharing.
• Added frustration for everyone who attempted to use it.
• Ultimately resulted in a lot of money lost on video equipment that everyone stopped using in favor of voice-only conferencing due to the faulty video.

Incentivized

• It's difficult to quantify the ROI financial return but we feel it's had a positive impact on our brand perception.