AN is a very small microcosm when compared to the number of students taking the test daily. Further, this sample is saturated with forums about the NCLEX. Everyone else (which would be the majority of students), certainly are not reading about the PVT in their cafeteria bulletin boards. AN is too small and too saturated a sample to be considered accurate evidence that there is significant loss of quick result fees for PV (20 years accounting here before nursing). There is no basis of fact in the contention that PV fixed a software glitch to increase profits on early release results. That is just conjecture and supposition.
What is known is that the entire website underwent changes, and the website was down for those changes. Periodic upgrades to software, and maintenance on a website, is just normal and expected.
I also believe that they are concerned about incorrect information being disseminated through a glitch, no matter if it is for the NCLEX or OTHER proctored tests. My basis for this are the numerous news stories about some of the problems PV has experienced due to various glitches in testing center software and web software. There are loads of them. That speaks to a need to upgrade software to save their reputation, and thus save money, and is considered routine in e-commerce.
Accuracy and reputation are much more profitable. Especially when you consider the microcosm of students who even know about PVT (my class had 120 students--I never heard anyone else even mention PVT), then deduct those who found out through their BON faster anyway so they didn't need a 2-day fee, then deduct those whose fee was included in their school payment for the test anyway, then deduct those who chose to pay anyway. The number left would be negligible.
As for testing fees, as it was explained to me in school (and I admit this information could be incorrect--just going off what was said to me), NCSBN writes the test and works with PV to proctor the test. Yes, PV collects a test fee, but as it was explained to me, that fee is broken down based on the value of time and resources needed for the test, which is written by NCSBN. PV must follow the protocols for the exam that NCSBN establishes--which includes a rigorous battery of software development for the exam itself, cost of computers, cost of administration, staffing, brick and mortar test centers, and so many other associated costs. Thus, that cost IS established by NCSBN. NCSBN writes the test, they get to make the rules, and those rules cost money. The state fee paid is for the issuance of license and administration from the state board.
Just to be clear, I am not trying to be nasty either. :-) but there is scant evidence to prove PV loses any measurable income from $7 2-day fees by not repairing their software--if that was their reason, they wouldn't have taken loses for over five years. And as they are a testing agency, improving accuracy and fixing glitches is essential to their reputation, and a routine process for any business. There is nothing to see here.
When all things are considered, we pay far less for our tests than many schools charge for one credit hour. I don't think that is a bad deal. And two days is nothing--I've waited longer for my old OB/PEDS teacher to score an in class exam.
Anyway, that's where I stand. Maybe we just agree to disagree :-)